[Opinion] A view from Washington, DC

In places such as Washington, a narrative that doing business in South Africa is just that much more difficult has over time firmed up under the impact of a flailing electricity supply, logistics bottlenecks, a high crime rate, labyrinthine racial preferencing, and persistent municipal service delivery problems. That sentiment will take time to shift.

The formation of the Government of National Unity (GNU) in 2024 has helped to shift the negative narrative, at least on the surface. My interlocutors focused on questions such as: ‘Is the GNU going to hold? Is it working? Is the ANC willing to compromise?’ The most pressing question was, ‘Will Parliament manage to pass the Budget?’ 

Amongst business contacts especially, there is a desire to be positive towards South Africa, perhaps driven by a realisation that despite the myriad governance and policy impediments, the country has serious growth potential. But they cannot bet on potential; they need to see an actual change.

South Africa’s weak economic situation, driven by the government’s policy choices, has left it especially exposed at this moment of increased geopolitical volatility. With a more transactional administration in the White House, South Africa’s desire to be held as a moral superpower is not carrying much weight – at least not in Washington. 

The South African government should not assume that a possible future change in US administration will ‘cure’ SA-US relations. 

America First

US President Donald Trump has identified a desire amongst many Americans for their country to be “put first” in dealings with other countries. To gain some momentum heading into the midterm elections in 2026, Democrats need to shift their messaging on various issues, including foreign policy. Should Democrats take cognizance of this fact and try to adapt their own domestic political messaging (it is clear that this has not happened as yet), the consequence will be that party will also become more transactional in foreign policy and geopolitical dealings. 

This then is the assumption from which South Africa should work: that ‘transactionality’ is a feature not just of the Trump administration, but will be a feature of future US administrations too, whether they are Democrat or Republican. South Africa should therefore not bet all its chips on a change in administration solving the disagreements between the two countries.

As to where next for South Africa in its diplomatic relationship with the US, it must now go back to the very basics of diplomatic work. Regardless of who is picked to succeed Ebrahim Rasool, and whenever that may be, the embassy in Washington must function optimally. Engagements with the US diplomatic corps and government should be pursued at every opportunity. It is not terribly exciting work, but respect is earned. South Africa should not take the importance of such work for granted.

On the broader engagement side, when President Cyril Ramaphosa sends a delegation to Washington, if their aim is to discuss foreign aid and South Africa’s Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) participation, they will be swiftly rebuffed. What should be presented to the US administration is a bilateral trade agreement, strategic trade, and investment opportunities for the US, and South Africa’s strength as part of the Southern African Development Community (and that entity’s economic growth opportunities), or some combination of all of the above. 

Additionally, intelligence-sharing and other forms of military and security capacity-building can be proposed. South Africa must talk and, more importantly, act like an active, responsible player in its region. 

Most analysis of US policy has termed the new administration ‘isolationist’. This is simplistic. While focusing more on its sphere of influence (seen by rhetoric and plans regarding Mexico, Canada, and Greenland), the US will continue pursuing its various interests in regions across the globe. But it will be more selective regarding the complexity of engagement and will be more predisposed to working with countries that are serious about spurring growth and investment in their respective regions.

Losing out

‘America First’ does not necessarily mean America alone. Governments that focus exclusively on the former formulation risk losing out on long-term benefits and partnerships with an America that will continue to offer numerous trade and investment opportunities, along with large consumer and financial markets, regardless of the make-up of future administrations.

A quick aside, and it is trite to say, but power respects power. In some quarters (some even unexpected and surprising) South Africa is respected for not looking panicked and trying to quickly react to every executive order and move from Washington. But of course, eventually, the government needs to take action. And had South Africa’s domestic and regional house been in order, with a growing economy and adequate military and intelligence capacities, it would be able to wield various forms of leverage much more effectively.

At this point South Africa’s relationship with the US can develop according to one of three scenarios. In the first, Do Nothing, neither government rhetoric nor action towards the US changes. We continue to stumble along, battered by development after development, subject to global headwinds and always reactive. In the second scenario, Double Down, South Africa leans into American perceptions and some of its previous actions, and moves closer towards China. (For the time being, Washington is not that concerned should South Africa work more closely with Russia, at least in some respects.)

In the third scenario, Boxing Smart, South Africa acknowledges its weaknesses and works on addressing them in action, not just rhetoric. It leans into strengths such as its geostrategic positioning, well-developed ties with its region, mineral resources, and young population, and engages more nimbly and in developed, nuanced ways with various larger global players, including the US, China, and the European Union. Former president Nelson Mandela is said to have had one regret in life; he never became world heavyweight boxing champion. It does not help in the boxing ring when you pretend your abilities and strength are greater than they are in reality.

Best served

Regardless of how matters develop between the South African and US governments, South Africa’s own national interest is best served by pursuing reforms to policy and legislation that drive economic growth and attract fixed investment. The longer the country’s economic fundamentals remain weak and brittle, the more it will be exposed to global volatility and headwinds. 

Despite the intense gaze on South Africa in the first few months of the new administration, domestic US matters will inevitably divert some of that attention. South Africa will have limited opportunities for engagement. Wherever possible, it should engage positively and constructively, instead of using any opening to assail US interests and values.

Hiding behind buzzwords and vibes isn’t going to bring real change to the South African economy. The government should use the free PR it has been afforded by the US administration, change its belief that things can just continue as they did before, and engage much more energetically and proactively with one of its biggest and most important trading partners.

Article originally appeared here.