The return of Donald Trump to the White House has resulted in a new phase of hostility toward South Africa, exposing once again the deep contradictions in Washington’s claims to uphold democracy and international law. His administration has escalated its punitive measures against countries that refuse to submit to U.S. dominance, targeting South Africa with diplomatic and economic retaliation for its independent foreign policy. The recent expulsion of South African Ambassador Ebrahim Rasool from Washington was a clear signal of this aggression—an attempt to isolate South Africa for its role in holding Israel accountable at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Trump’s attacks on South Africa are not isolated acts of aggression but part of a broader strategy of coercion against Global South nations. His administration has cut funding for HIV treatment and research in South Africa and reinforced far-right narratives by offering refugee status to white South Africans, legitimising the widely debunked “white genocide” conspiracy theory. These measures mirror his open hostility to other countries that have defied U.S. interests, such as Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, and left-led governments in Colombia and Mexico.
Cuba faces renewed sanctions and has been re-designated as a “state sponsor of terrorism,” further restricting its access to international markets. Venezuela has been hit with a 25% tariff on all trade with any country that purchases its oil, a move intended to cripple its economy and pressure it into neoliberal economic realignment. Colombia, now under the left-wing government of Gustavo Petro, has faced economic and diplomatic pressure from the U.S. for its independent stance on Latin American integration and peace negotiations with armed groups. Bolivia, which successfully resisted a U.S.-backed coup in 2019, has also been met with diplomatic hostility, particularly due to its deepening relations with China and BRICS.
Trump’s hostility toward South Africa is not just an external matter; it is reinforced by local elites aligned with U.S. and Western interests. The Brenthurst Foundation, backed by South African mining capital, plays a key role in shaping pro-Western policy discourse and undermining independent foreign policy. Funded by the Oppenheimer family, it has openly lobbied against South Africa’s ties with BRICS and African regionalism, while pushing for austerity and neoliberal restructuring. Its influence extends into mainstream media, which has been instrumental in portraying South Africa’s ICJ case against Israel as reckless and self-destructive. This internal alignment with U.S. imperial policy creates a second front against South African sovereignty, where political pressure from Washington is reinforced by local capital and media interests.
Beyond direct sanctions and financial coercion, the U.S. has also deployed trade and investment as tools of economic warfare against South Africa. The review of South Africa’s eligibility for the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) began under pressure from U.S. lawmakers and corporate interests during Biden’s presidency, particularly in response to South Africa’s non-aligned position on the Russia-Ukraine war. The United States Trade Representative (USTR), in consultation with Congress, conducted the review process, with figures like Senator Chris Coons advocating for South Africa’s suspension. Under Trump’s return to office, this pressure has escalated into an outright threat of expulsion. AGOA has long been framed as a goodwill trade initiative, but its true function is to enforce economic dependence on the U.S. by selectively granting market access to African economies that align with Washington’s strategic interests. South Africa’s removal from AGOA would not only disrupt key industries, such as automotive exports, but would also serve as a warning to other African nations that dare to assert an independent foreign policy.
Mexico, under President Claudia Sheinbaum, has also found itself at odds with Trump’s administration. Sheinbaum has continued the policies of her predecessor, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, in resisting U.S. pressure on migration and economic policy. Her administration has opposed Trump’s harsh anti-migrant measures and has maintained Mexico’s commitment to economic development in Central America as a long-term solution to forced migration. In response, Trump has escalated threats of tariffs on Mexican exports and intensified criticism of Mexico’s nationalisation of lithium reserves, a key resource in the global energy transition.
Trump’s aggression extends beyond Latin America and Africa. His administration has intensified economic warfare against Iran, imposing further sanctions that target its ability to trade in global markets. His hostility toward Nicaragua—a long-time U.S. target for regime change—has included efforts to isolate it diplomatically and further restrict economic access. These actions fit a well-established pattern: economic strangulation, political pressure, and diplomatic isolation for any state that refuses to comply with Washington’s directives. South Africa, due to its independent foreign policy and its challenge to Israel at the ICJ, is the latest target.
One of the most significant yet underreported tools of U.S. aggression against South Africa is financial warfare. The dominance of the U.S. dollar in global transactions allows Washington to cut off access to banking systems, restrict trade, and pressure international financial institutions into compliance. This was seen in 2023 when South Africa faced threats of secondary sanctions due to its non-aligned position on the Russia-Ukraine war, and again in 2025 with heightened scrutiny over its trade with Iran. Washington does not need to impose outright sanctions; it can simply create enough uncertainty to scare off investors and financial institutions. This economic pressure is a direct attack on South Africa’s ability to determine its own future and reinforces the need for alternatives such as the BRICS-led de-dollarisation strategy.
The withdrawal of HIV and TB research funding in South Africa is part of a broader strategy of using aid as a weapon. For years, the Global South has been told that Western aid is essential for development. However, aid from the U.S. and its allies is never neutral; it is an instrument of political control. This weaponisation of aid reflects what Nontobeko Hlela and Varsha Gandikota Nellutla call “subjugation by design” in their recent Mail & Guardian analysis. They point out that South Africa still relies on PEPFAR for 17% of its HIV response, making it vulnerable to sudden funding cuts like Trump’s 83% reduction in USAid funding. Under Trump’s second term, the use of aid as leverage has intensified, with funding cuts and economic pressure increasingly deployed as punitive measures against nations that challenge U.S. hegemony.
The role of Western media in shaping narratives that justify these punitive measures cannot be overlooked. This is reinforced by a growing alliance between sections of the white right in South Africa and conservative forces in the United States, which has amplified disinformation campaigns about land reform and governance in South Africa. Much of white-dominated media in South Africa is hysterically pro-West, and some has received U.S. funding, further entrenching its alignment with Washington’s geopolitical interests. In 2022, it was revealed that a number of editors were attending regular briefings at the U.S. consulate in Cape Town known as ‘On the Rocks and Off the Record’.
South Africa’s current standoff with Washington is not just about foreign policy—it is about defending the very principles of the anti-apartheid struggle. The U.S. government, which supported apartheid for decades and only removed the ANC from its terrorist list in 2008, has no moral standing to lecture South Africa on democracy or human rights. The attempt to isolate and punish South Africa today mirrors the Reagan administration’s support for the apartheid regime in the 1980s. Just as it resisted the economic and diplomatic attacks of the apartheid era, South Africa must reclaim its tradition of principled resistance against imperialism, aligning with the Global South to build a new international order rooted in justice, not coercion.
By strengthening its ties across the Global South, prioritising cooperation with democratic progressive governments, South Africa can resist the coercive tactics of Washington and its allies. The shift towards multipolarity is inevitable, and South Africa must take bold steps to shape the future rather than being dictated to by Washington.
