The diplomatic relations between the United States and South Africa took a dramatic turn on Friday, as U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared South Africa’s Ambassador to the United States, Ebrahim Rasool, persona non grata. Rubio’s decision came after he labeled Rasool a “race-baiting politician” who harbors strong animosity towards both America and former President Donald Trump.
In a statement posted on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), Rubio announced, “South Africa’s Ambassador to the United States is no longer welcome in our great country. We have nothing to discuss with him and so he is considered PERSONA NON GRATA.”
Rasool, who presented his credentials to President Joe Biden on January 13, 2021, had just started his second term as South Africa’s Ambassador to the U.S. at the time of the announcement. His appointment was seen as part of a broader diplomatic effort between the two countries, yet it appears his tenure has now come to a controversial and abrupt halt.
Rasool had previously served as the South African Ambassador to the U.S. from 2004 to 2008, and his return to Washington was hoped to strengthen the bilateral relationship between the two nations. However, Rubio’s comments suggest a deepening rift that has been growing over the past few years.
The South African embassy in Washington and the U.S. State Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment regarding the diplomatic expulsion. In response, Chrispin Phiri, a spokesperson for South Africa’s Department of International Relations and Cooperation, stated on X that the South African government “will engage through the diplomatic channel,” signaling that the matter would be addressed through formal diplomatic means.
The move to declare Rasool persona non grata is the latest chapter in a series of deteriorating diplomatic relations between the United States and South Africa, particularly following the tenure of President Donald Trump. Under Trump’s leadership, tensions escalated, especially after the former president cut U.S. financial aid to South Africa. Trump’s decision was largely motivated by his opposition to South Africa’s land reform policies and its controversial genocide case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against Israel, a U.S. ally.
In 2018, Trump made headlines when he criticized South Africa’s land reform policies, claiming that “South Africa is confiscating land” and that “certain classes of people” were being “treated very badly.” While these remarks were met with significant backlash and were widely considered to lack factual evidence, they deepened the diplomatic strain between the two nations.
Elon Musk, the South African-born billionaire and close associate of Trump, also weighed in on the matter, claiming that white South Africans were victims of “racist ownership laws.” Musk’s comments added to the already charged atmosphere surrounding the land issue, which has been a contentious topic in South Africa for years.
At the heart of the tension lies South Africa’s land reform program, which was designed to address the historic racial inequalities in land ownership that still affect the Black-majority country. The policy aims to redistribute land from predominantly white owners to Black South Africans, who were historically excluded from land ownership during apartheid.
In January 2023, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa signed a bill into law that seeks to make land expropriation easier for the government, in some cases without compensating the previous owner. This was seen as a bold move to rectify racial imbalances in land ownership, but it has sparked significant criticism both at home and abroad.
While the policy has garnered support among many South Africans, especially Black citizens who feel they have been denied land for decades, it has also been criticized by those who believe it could lead to economic instability and diminished agricultural productivity. Critics, including prominent voices like Elon Musk, have expressed concern about the potential negative impact on white farmers, many of whom fear losing their land without fair compensation.
Despite these concerns, President Ramaphosa has defended the land reform policy, stating that no land has yet been confiscated and that the goal is to correct the historical injustices of apartheid. He has emphasized that the policy is not about taking land from individuals but rather ensuring that land is more equitably distributed among all South Africans.
The clash over land reform is just one aspect of the broader diplomatic tension between the United States and South Africa. Under Trump’s leadership, U.S.-South Africa relations became increasingly strained, with the former president frequently criticizing South Africa’s policies. However, the diplomatic friction predates Trump’s tenure, as the two countries have often disagreed on issues like human rights, trade, and international relations.
South Africa has long pursued an independent foreign policy, often diverging from the interests of Western nations, including the U.S. South Africa’s support for Palestine and its criticism of Israel have further complicated its relationship with the U.S., a country that has historically been a strong ally of Israel. Additionally, South Africa’s position on global trade and its push for African solutions to African problems have often put it at odds with the United States and other Western powers.
The U.S. decision to declare Rasool persona non grata is seen by many as an escalation in this ongoing diplomatic struggle. It signals that the relationship between the two nations is unlikely to improve in the near future, and it raises questions about the future of diplomatic engagement between Washington and Pretoria.
The diplomatic crisis surrounding Rasool’s expulsion is likely to have significant implications for future U.S.-South Africa relations. As both countries grapple with their differences over land reform, human rights, and international relations, it remains to be seen how they will navigate this increasingly contentious diplomatic landscape.
For South Africa, the expulsion of its ambassador marks a new low in its relationship with the U.S., and the country may seek to strengthen its ties with other global powers such as China and Russia. South Africa has long sought to assert its role as a leader of the Global South and a voice for African nations on the world stage. The expulsion of Rasool could further fuel South Africa’s efforts to expand its international influence and chart a path that is more independent of Western powers.
For the U.S., Rubio’s decision to expel Rasool is likely to be viewed as part of a broader foreign policy stance that emphasizes confrontation with nations perceived as hostile to American interests. Whether or not this diplomatic break is permanent remains to be seen, but it underscores the growing divide between the U.S. and countries like South Africa, which have increasingly distanced themselves from Western ideologies.
As both nations continue to grapple with their differences, the fate of their diplomatic ties hangs in the balance, with the expulsion of Rasool serving as a potent symbol of the tensions that now define U.S.-South Africa relations.
