The recent diplomatic confrontation between US President Donald Trump and President Cyril Ramaphosa has exposed the precarious balance between domestic imperatives and international legal activism.
Ramaphosa’s goal was to reset the strained trade relations with the United States. Trump went into the meeting in a choreographed ambush, accusing South Africa of perpetrating a white genocide and painting a picture of unverified claims about targeting white Afrikaners through systemic persecution. It derailed the meeting, turning it into a spectacle of misinformation and propaganda-led information.
This magnifies a critical South African reality, the supposed pursuit of moral authority on the global stage. Cases such as the International Court of Justice case against Israel risk pushing the country into diplomatic isolation and exacerbating its economic fragility. Violent crime is crippling communities, unemployment is soaring, and gender-based violence (GBV) has arguably reached epidemic levels.
It is important for the country to recalibrate its priorities and redirect attention to addressing internal crises before the country spirals out of control and loses its democratic gains.
The ICJ case against Israel has been heavily debated and has seen many opinions drawn from different spheres of society. This did not mean that South Africa should actively pursue a case of genocide against the state of Israel. Pursuing this case drew a fierce backlash from the US. The US is South Africa’s second-biggest trading partner, and most importantly, a key trade partner and staunch Israel ally.
Influence
The Trump administration has rightfully used its influence to question the case. It has gone further and retaliated by imposing punitive tariffs, suspending aid, and threatening to exclude South Africa from the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA): a vital trade agreement worth $147 billion in annual exports to the US. These measures continue to compound the existing societal economic pressures that plague the country. South Africa’s unemployment rate hovers around 35%, with youth unemployment exceeding 60%. The World Bank estimates that crime in the country costs the economy 10% of GDP yearly: this is equivalent to R700 billion lost in investor flight, lost productivity and security expenditures.
Ramaphosa’s visit to Washington was aimed at salvaging a deteriorating relationship with an important trade partner. The relationship emphasises mutual trade benefits and US investment in energy and agriculture. Trump was strategic and focused on race-based laws and the inflammatory white genocide rhetoric.
Race-based laws have proven to be a challenge for Elon Musk’s Starlink to operate in South Africa. Musk has called these laws “racist ownership requirements”. This spectacle has embarrassed South Africa. The harsh truth is that global advocacy, however principled, is going to be a liability in bilateral negotiations, because our domestic politics and economics are a mess. The prioritization of the ICJ case has put Pretoria at risk of alienating important Western allies. This isolates an economy that is already buckling under stagnation and structural inequality.
Geopolitical quagmires
South Africa does not need a government that is focused in navigating geopolitical quagmires. The domestic landscape is on the verge of collapse and needs a proactive government at the helm. The World Bank’s 2023 report highlights how crime – notably truck hijacking, organized illegal mining, and murder – has surged to high levels, with 6 945 murders recorded between July and September 2023.
The black and poor communities are the ones that are disproportionately affected by violent crime. Trump’s fixation on white farmers obscures this reality and shows his unhappiness with South Africa’s global political choices. Seventy-five South Africans are killed daily, with the majority being black. This is the crisis the government should be focusing on.
It deters foreign investment, as it requires businesses to allocate R700 billion annually to security and loss prevention. This hinders the fight against unemployment and perpetuates a cycle of poverty and desperation.
The agricultural sector, which is a key pillar of rural employment, is also vulnerable. White farmers own 72% of private land, but small-scale black farmers face rampant extortion and violence: the same problems that are faced by white farmers. Agriculture Minister, John Steenhuisen, a white South African, conceded that crime affects everyone. The logical solution requires economic revitalization, not racial targeting and propaganda.
Yet the government continues to struggle with addressing these issues. Diversion of resources towards international legal battles is proving to be a bad move by the government. The ICJ case undoubtedly demands significant financial and diplomatic capital. These resources are better spent on bolstering law enforcement and job creation programmes at home.
Our house is burning
Data from 2023 show that a woman is murdered every three hours in South Africa. These numbers are five times the global (average) femicide rate. The geopolitical noise the country is making is unwarranted. Our house is burning, and we cannot afford to save our neighbours while angering the other helpful neighbours. There is a gender-based violence crisis in South Africa.
This traumatizes communities, strains healthcare systems, and undermines workforce participation, yet the attention received in high-level diplomacy is non-existent. The government delegation that represented the country in Washington did not mention the GBV epidemic; it was Zingiswa Losi, a labour leader, who highlighted the fact that crime affects everyone and the people who feel it most are the vulnerable women in the country. This has a direct link to unemployment and social instability. Instead of funding shelters, improving policing and persecuting perpetrators, the government decided to direct resources to an ICJ case informed by public opinion and no substantive information.
The South African moral debates and actions against any possible genocide are commendable, but the country is unfortunately not a strong world player, due to our domestic material conditions. Pragmatism demands the withdrawing of the ICJ case. Withdrawing this case would not constitute surrender, it would rather be the acknowledgement of pressing domestic issues such as the crippling 35% unemployment rate, which indicates that key trade partners cannot be alienated.
South African foreign policy should advocate for trusting multilateral advocacy forums such as the African Union and UN General Assembly. Bilateral deals should be prioritized to secure investment and technology transfers.
Urgency
The government should confront unemployment and crime with the urgency they demand. Public and private partnerships could modernize policing. Land reform could accelerate and address historical inequalities without scaring off investors. Programmes that actively link vocational training with relevant industries like renewable energy and mining would reduce youth unemployment. This would leverage South Africa’s natural resources and the US’s demand for critical minerals.
It is time to choose pragmatism over symbolism, and survival over solidarity. The Trump-Ramaphosa meeting was an inevitable wake-up call: our internal collapse is not in unison with international ambitions that are outpacing the country’s capacity. South African society is fractured.
Relinquishing the ICJ case can mean a refocus on healing the society, securing trade lifelines and rebuilding a nation where safety and opportunity are rights and not privileges. The alternative is persisting as a moral giant on clay feet, and risks consigning millions to perpetual despair. As President Ramaphosa himself noted, we need allies and we need economic investment.
The views of the writer are not necessarily the views of the Daily Friend or the IRR.
If you like what you have just read, support the Daily Friend
Image: Grok