Trump vs. SA’s land expropriation bill: What’s really behind his threat?

3 mins read
SA Land bill donald trump ramaphosa land expropriation bill

South Africa’s land expropriation bill is making headlines again, but this time, it’s not local opposition causing the stir, it’s US President Donald Trump.

On Sunday (1:29 am SAST) Trump announced that he would cut all future funding to South Africa until a “full investigation” is conducted into the country’s land expropriation policies.

In a Truth Social post, Trump claimed (without citing evidence) that South Africa was “confiscating land and treating certain classes of people VERY BADLY.”

He called it a “massive human rights violation” and vowed that the United States “won’t stand for it.”

This is not the first time Trump has weighed in on South Africa’s land policies.

But why now? And what are the broader implications?

What’s the land expropriation bill about?

Last month, President Cyril Ramaphosa signed a bill allowing land expropriation with nil compensation in certain circumstances.

The South African government argues that the law is necessary to address racial disparities in land ownership, a deeply rooted legacy of apartheid.

As per the documentation, the law:

  • Does not allow for arbitrary land seizures.
  • Requires negotiation with landowners before expropriation.
  • Aligns with land redistribution policies seen in many other countries.

Critics, however, fear that South Africa could be headed toward a situation like Zimbabwe’s land seizures in the early 2000s.

Trump’s funding threat: What’s at stake?

Trump’s declaration isn’t just rhetoric. If he follows through, South Africa stands to lose $440 million in annual US aid.

According to the US-based South African Chamber of Commerce, cutting off funding could:

  • Jeopardise SA’s status under AGOA, which provides preferential access to US markets.
  • Impact trade. SA exported $6.5 billion worth of goods to the US under AGOA in 2024.
  • Strain diplomatic ties just as SA holds the G20 presidency ahead of the US taking over.

South Africa’s foreign ministry tells Reuters they trust his advisers would use the investigative period to gain a “thorough understanding” of SA’s policies.

Translation? They don’t seem too worried. Yet.

Is this about land—or something else?

Let’s be honest: Trump’s timing is interesting.

As reported by Faizel Patel, South Africa has recently taken a leading role in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) case against Israel, accusing it of genocide in Gaza.

South Africa and eight other nations have formed the Hague Group to hold Israel accountable for alleged international law violations.

The group aims to disrupt systems enabling these violations and enforce legal and diplomatic measures.

Of course, Trump’s threat to South Africa’s funding has nothing to do with that. Just a pure coincidence. [This is sarcasm.]

But Trump isn’t the only high-profile figure taking aim at South Africa’s land policies.

Enter Elon Musk, but of course

His close ally Elon Musk, who was born in Pretoria, has long warned about what he calls the persecution of white farmers in South Africa.

In 2023, Musk responded to a video of EFF members singing ‘Kill the Boer’ by tweeting:

“They are openly pushing for genocide of white people in South Africa. @CyrilRamaphosa, why do you say nothing?”

Musk has met with Ramaphosa before, most recently in September 2024 to discuss investments in South Africa.

But that hasn’t stopped him from publicly criticising the government’s land policies.

AfriForum’s response: Punish the ANC, not the people

AfriForum urged Trump to target ANC leaders directly rather than punishing ordinary South Africans.

They argue that the expropriation law, along with racial policies, will hurt investor confidence in South Africa.

AfriForum’s CEO Kallie Kriel warned that Trump’s funding cuts would worsen economic pressure on South Africans, saying:

“The foolish government and president should be punished for their destructive policies, rather than the country’s citizens.” (Translated from Afrikaans.)

They’ve also called on the South African government to introduce amendments to strengthen property rights and avoid potential economic fallout.

The bigger picture: A test for South Africa’s economy

Beyond political grandstanding, South Africa’s land reform policies will likely have real consequences, whether through US sanctions, a decline in foreign investment, or an AGOA fallout.

That said, I’ve held the belief for years that if Africa as a continent cut off trade with the rest of the world, we’d probably thrive.

Think about it… Africa produces everything we need:

  • Agriculture for food security.
  • Gemstones, oil, and gold for industry.
  • Livestock, fisheries, and fertile land for self-sufficiency.

If we truly closed ranks, we’d be untouchable. But that’s just my two cents. Smarter people than me probably have different takes.

What happens next?

Trump has a track record of making big declarations without following through.

But if the US does cut funding, it could mark a major shift in how South Africa navigates its international alliances.

Regardless of whether Trump’s threats materialise, this situation highlights the complex and often tense dynamics between South Africa and global powers.

If the US does follow through, it could force South Africa to strengthen ties with alternative allies, particularly within BRICS.

But if history is anything to go by, Trump’s words may remain just that… Words.

Either way, South Africa’s response signals that it won’t be dictated to, especially on matters of national policy.

author avatar
Cheryl Kahla Founder and Editor
Cheryl Kahla explores the intersections of tech and society. She covers emerging tech trends, AI, science, and gaming. Outside of writing, Cheryl indulges in martial arts and debating the merits of AI with her cat, Gotham. He is indifferent to the subject.

Latest from SA News