Amid Land Reform and Gaza Tensions, Ramaphosa Sends Jonas to Mend US Relations

On Monday, 14th April 2025, President Cyril Ramaphosa appointed former deputy finance minister Mcebisi Jonas as a special envoy to the United States after South Africa’s last ambassador was expelled last month by the Trump administration. It is the President’s hope that the new special envoy’s appointment will help South Africa rebuild its relationship with the U.S., which has deteriorated swiftly since President Donald Trump took office. 

The US has carried out a series of administrative moves targeting South Africa, culminating in the expulsion of her former ambassador. 

Mcebisi Jonas is a member of the African National Congress (ANC) – the black majority party which has governed South Africa since 1994, previously served as an investment envoy for South Africa, appointed to encourage foreign investments into the country. He served as deputy finance minister between May 2014 and March 2017 and currently serves as an independent non-executive chairman of multinational telecommunication company MTN Group, a position which he will maintain while acting as special envoy.

He is one of a handful of envoys dispatched by South Africa to several countries, including the US, with the task of explaining South Africa’s position on key policy issues. To effectively carry out this task, it is essential that the host countries have no gripes with any of the envoys.

Previous US ambassador, Rasool was a vocal critic ofTrump’s policies and  their impact on Africa, and in a webinar stated that Trump was “mobilising supremacism” and trying to “project white victimhood as a dog whistle.” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio then responded to this via a  X post stating that Rasool was no longer welcome in the country because he was a “race baiting politician who hates America” and Trump, effectively making him persona non grata and expelling him from the country.

South Africa’s key policies have irked the US in two areas.  Its  expropriation law which reflects its commitment to remedying the effects of years of racial inequality and its genocide case against Israel before the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

In 1950, South Africa saw the introduction of the Group Areas Act, a law which allowed the apartheid government to choose certain areas to be used by a single race and although the newly democratic 1990s constitution allowed land taken from black farmers to be returned to them, progress on land reform has been too slow for many in the country. The pressure on the South African government to deliver significant strides in this area prompted the signing of the Expropriation bill into law in January 2025. This law allows the state (in some circumstances) to seize land without compensation. Opponents of the law,  especially President Donald Trump, have bemoaned the new law as promoting “hateful rhetoric” towards “racially disfavoured landowners” (white people) and Trump has vowed to pause all aid (about $320 million) to South Africa, including potentially cutting the country out of a trade deal estimated to be worth $14.7 billion.

While some see the new law as a risk to private property rights, others insist that the law is a careful attempt at addressing long-standing injustice, it will not be a vulgar land grab, but a constitutionally managed process of land reform for the public good, to say black and white people in South Africa must share the land.

In addition to the land law, President Trump has also stated that South Africa is “taking an aggressive position towards the US and its allies,” including accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza at the ICJ and strengthening its ties with Iran. In response to this, South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola has insisted  that there was no chance of South Africa withdrawing its case against Israel. “Standing by our principles sometimes has consequences, but we remain firm that this is important for the world, and the rule of law,” Lamola told the Financial Times.

Freezing aid is evidently not enough retribution for the Trump administration, which has also offered to grant Afrikaners refugee status in the US should they wish to flee South Africa. This plays right into the hands of conservative groups such as AfriForum and Solidarity who want the US to repeal “race based laws” like affirmative action. Trump and Rubin have also announced that they will boycott this year’s G20 summit hosted by South Africa over this alleged “anti-Americanism.”

Donald MacKay, CEO of Johannesburg based trade consulting firm XA Global Trade Advisors has argued that while the US is one of South Africa’s biggest trading partners, it is not its only partner and so South Africa is not at the mercy of the US, as much as the Trump administration would like to believe this is the case. President Ramaphosa has also stated that South Africa will not be bullied.

If the US aims to punish South Africa further, the most obvious way to do so would be through the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). Every year, the US president revises which African countries can partake in the scheme,  allowing  selected countries to export goods to the US duty free. According to Professor Ruth Hall from the University of the Western Cape, doing so would not cause the damage hoped for, instead, it would disproportionately affect the white farmers President Trump is seeking to protect, as they own the majority of the agricultural land and companies producing the goods for export. Additionally, South Africa is a member of BRICS, an alliance of developing countries (including Brazil, Russia, India and China) attempting to challenge the political and economic power of the wealthier global West. If relations with the US become too difficult to maintain under “the most unpredictable politician in the world”, South Africa could increasingly see BRICS as a more appealing partner.

Importantly, the EU (one of South Africa’s biggest trading partners) has reaffirmed its support of the country through Antonia Costa, the President of the European Council which sets the general political direction and priorities of the EU. He stated that he had spoken to Ramaphosa by phone to highlight the “EU’s commitment to deepen ties with South Africa”.

Should South Africa’s charm offensive featuring Mr Jonas fail, then hard negotiation using its trading network and the minerals it supplies to the US (platinum, iron & manganese) as a bargaining chip is likely to follow. Every move must, however, be strategic as it is going to take quite the balancing act for South Africa to soften the current hostility coming from the US without compromising on its national priorities.