The U.S. government has begun imposing coercive economic measures, or sanctions, on South Africa in retaliation for its government taking Israel to the ICJ, the passing of the BELA Act and Land Expropriation Act. This initial round of sanctions follows an executive order by Trump instructing all U.S. government departments to block $440 million in aid to South Africa, which may include PEPFAR funding.
We anticipate that the U.S. Congress will wait to see President Ramaphosa’s response before finalizing the still-pending U.S.-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act, introduced in 2024 as a means to prevent a Government of National Unity (GNU) with leftist parties. If enacted, this act would give the U.S. president 90 days to determine whether South Africa poses a threat to U.S. national interests.
Based on the wording of the executive order signed by Trump to suspend aid to South Africa, as well as his speech last week, it appears the Trump administration has concluded that South Africa—due to its case against Israel at the ICJ, its relationships with Russia and Iran, and the passing of the BELA Act and Land Expropriation Act—poses a threat to U.S. interests and human rights.
This rhetoric is designed to pave the way for the passage of the U.S.-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act, which would push Trump to declare a national emergency against South Africa, designating the country and/or its leaders as threats to U.S. national interests. If this happens, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) would be invoked, instructing U.S. companies, financial institutions, investors, and even non-U.S. entities to cease financially or materially assisting a threat to USA.
Such actions could force the South African government to realize that U.S. sanctions will be imposed regardless of any diplomatic efforts, as the ultimate goal is ensuring regime change in 2026 and 2029. In response, this could radicalize the South African government to accelerate land expropriation to correct historical black land dispossession and counter growing voter apathy toward the ANC, while also addressing increasing support for the MK party.
We urge the South African government and citizens to begin organizing legal teams and civil society organizations to challenge these illegal unilateral sanctions, which lack multilateral UN approval and constitute persecution of innocent civilians by denying them basic rights.
Let’s not forget that Trump also signed an executive order banning birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to non-American or undocumented parents, but Federal Judge Deborah Broadman blocked this unconstitutional order. Similarly, illegal U.S. sanctions can be challenged in court, just as ZASM successfully did with sanctions on Zimbabwe.
It would also help to note that the first sanctions Zimbabwean and US activists like Obi Ebuna first fought successfully in 2006, was the human rights violation of the U.S. government denying vulnerable and ill Zimbabweans PEPFAR and Global Fund aid. In just a few months of pressure, George Bush reinstated both PEPFAR and Global Fund to Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwean civil society organizations like ZASM, which was supported by DIRCO in the ZASM vs. South African Banks, Biden, and Others case, would be willing to offer guidance on how they successfully fought and removed U.S. sanctions on Zimbabwe in May 2024. South Africans now have the opportunity to learn from Zimbabwe’s resistance against sanctions, to deter more punitive persecution of civilians.
More critically, South Africa must counter propaganda and misinformation falsely alleging that the government is abusing human rights and seizing white-owned land. Additionally, South Africa should introduce laws to punish unpatriotic citizens who actively lobby for economic warfare (sanctions) against their own country.
Written By Rutendo Matinyarare, Chairman of ZASM.
