The Government Went Out of Its Way to Sabotage Another Opportunity with America

Earlier this week, the new United States (US) Ambassador, Leo Brent Bozell III, extended what can only be described as a most generous olive branch to South Africa’s government, calling for a reset of relations between the two countries. Pretoria’s response was hostile, issuing a demarche and accusing the ambassador of seeking to undermine the stability of the country. The response was a fraud perpetrated against the public and country – one committed with the cooperation of the media.

South Africans reading the local press would be forgiven for thinking the country had come under withering attack from the new American ambassador, so quickly did the country’s established media companies move to echo the government’s talking points. A Johannesburg radio station called remarks made by the ambassador “undiplomatic and arrogant”, demanding that he apologise and, the smoking gun, demanding that he be demarched. A national newspaper called the ambassador’s comments an “attack” on the government. Almost every legacy media group did the same – the same lines, the same talking points, at the same time.

So what was this arrogant and undiplomatic attack that prompted such a united front?

Well, as it turns out, it was all a pack of lies designed to deceive the public and run cover for South Africa’s foreign policy.

The ambassador, speaking at the BizNews Conference in Hermanus, did exactly the opposite of what the media reported. Here he is in his own words — clear and positive:

"South Africa matters to Washington."

“He [President Trump] values the relationship with South Africa and considers it among the top 10 countries in terms of importance.”

"The United States stands ready to be a partner in that work. We believe the US-South Africa relationship has great untapped potential."

"South Africa is a nation of immense potential, immense complexity, and immense importance, not only on this continent, but around the globe."

"Though I've only recently arrived, I've already begun to experience the richness and complexity of this remarkable country."

"I have been struck by something equally powerful, the dynamism of this country, its entrepreneurs, its innovators, its young people, its deep reservoir of talent, ambition, and confidence."

“When I came here, I was not looking to have a fight. I came here to find ways that our countries can come back to the table and proceed.”

"We want partners who also dream great dreams. And that's South Africa's signature. Let us do all in our power to make our relationship prosper and thrive."

"I visited the Apartheid Museum and the District 6 Museum. A word about those. Those are not mere tourist stops. They are places that remind you that South Africa's history is lived memory, sacrifice, struggle, resilience, and unfinished work."

"This year alone has been filled with milestones that demonstrate the depth and momentum of the US-South African commercial relationship. Visa launched its first-ever data centre in Johannesburg, a R1 billion investment over the next three years. That's not symbolic. That's infrastructure. That's long-term commitment to strengthening South Africa's digital payments ecosystem and positioning this country as a leader in financial innovation."

"Google Cloud has opened its first African cloud region in Johannesburg as part of a $16 billion rand investment in South Africa's digital transformation."

"Microsoft is investing an additional R5 billion by 2027 to expand cloud and AI infrastructure here, building on more than R16 billion already invested. And Microsoft is helping to skill one million South Africans, ensuring that local talent is positioned for the digital economy of the future."

"Amazon is another great American tech company that is not only expanding its presence in South Africa with thousands of jobs and new facilities but also providing much-needed skills at training centres like the AWS Skills Centre in Cape Town, the first international facility of its kind outside of the United States of America."

"These are not isolated announcements. They're proof that American companies bring capital, high standards, cutting-edge technology, workforce development, and long-term commitment."

He was frank, too, about the obstacles hindering greater progress saying, “When businesses believe their property rights may be uncertain, when policy frameworks create unpredictability instead of clarity … common ground becomes harder to sustain. … When those policies are structured in ways that introduce challenges to ownership or create complex compliance requirements or are clouded in charges of corruption, investors begin to reassess risk. Fewer factories are built. Fewer smaller businesses are integrated into supply chains. Fewer young South Africans gain access to the skills and jobs that large-scale investment can create.”

Those are remarks that any of one hundred past South African Cabinet ministers might themselves have made.

So on what grounds did the South African government, led by Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola, go on the attack?

It is all a bit incoherent but the government’s stated reason for the demarche was Bozell’s answer to an audience question on the "Kill the Boer" chant and specifically that he had said the chant amounted to hate speech regardless of what South Africa’s courts might hold. Was he supposed to say it isn’t? Diplomacy has its place but there are limits when rationality and reason would be inverted. And he was right to say that it is hate speech – the very definition of it, in fact. The government may dispute that, but it is something the great majority of South Africans agree with, as does every civilised human being.

But it would further stretch the bounds of reason and rationality to believe that was the actual reason for the demarche. It was simply a pretext, and if it had not been that issue, then something else would have been contrived. This newspaper knows that ahead of the speech the small circle that controls South Africa’s foreign policy had decided they needed to go on the offensive and hit the ambassador as hard as they could early in his term to discredit him in the public mind in order to limit his prospects for success in rebuilding ties with the country.

South Africa remains one of very few countries in the world that has not struck a trade or investment pact with America. As more and more questions are asked about why that is so (even America’s sworn adversaries are doing deals, as has almost all of Africa that matters) the small circle that controls foreign policy has had to cultivate the idea more aggressively that the problem lies on the American side, that the Americans are hostile. If they are not, in fact, hostile – then the questions about why no trade or investment pact had been struck would lead to some very uncomfortable places. That the ambassador was therefore so positive on a reset with the US was viewed as a very grave risk.

The whole demarche justification, together with the media around it, was all fake, false, a fraud committed against the South African public and the country as a whole. The US has repeatedly offered the opportunity for a new trade and investment pact with South Africa and South Africa has repeatedly sought to sabotage that – as it has done here again.

Why is that?

Corruption is one reason. South Africa has a 30-year track record of accepting cash for foreign policy favours. It is naïve to think that state capture and cash parcels are something that infected only certain government departments.

A second is leverage. If many senior government leaders and politicians are corrupt, you can be certain foreign powers know of that and can apply a squeeze. And America’s global rivals in South Africa are not averse to that and highly motivated because the country, and its naval base at Simonstown, has great geostrategic importance far beyond what a lot of South Africans understand.

A third is ideology, which exists in its own right but is also employed as a fig leaf to conceal corruption.

A fourth is ignorance. This newspaper continues to maintain that the bulk of the African National Congress (ANC) leadership are not invested in the project to sabotage relations with America. Many seem truly worried as to why some party strongholds continue to do this. They see the clear upsides for the country but also for the ANC itself to restoring relations and drawing new investment. But the management structure of the ANC gives them little say over changing that.

Some politicians can always be counted on to behave in a manner at odds with the national interest. That is baked in. But when the media plays up their hype, hate, and hysteria without concern for the national interest the damage that is caused is even greater because public opinion is so powerful a shaper of public policy. That damage occurs not in an esoteric sense but directly in the lives of people – who do not get jobs, do not earn incomes, cannot care properly for their children and families. And that is to a very great extent why this newspaper was established: to counter that sort of thing and bring balance, perspective, and, frankly, common sense into the frame.

It is plainly in South Africa’s national interest to reset relations with America. It is plainly America’s desire to do so. It was plainly the new American ambassador’s intent to start that process this week. The many people who sought to sabotage that are an immoral and shameful collective who hold the country and its people back.