Risch Calls ANC Foreign Policy Hostile to US Interests as Pretoria’s Protestations of Non-Alignment Collapse

“South Africa’s @MYANC-led government’s foreign policy hides behind a claim of non-alignment, yet its military hosts drills with America’s chief adversaries. Any promise or deal this government offers Washington is meaningless when its actions signal open hostility toward the United States. President Trump is right to treat South Africa’s government for what it is: an adversary of America. That is why the US should take stronger action against the South African government. The time for envoys, bureaucratic reviews, or business deals bridging the gap has passed.”

That statement, issued by Jim Risch, chair of the United States (US) Senate Foreign Relations Committee, matters because it is not a social media squall from the fringes of Washington. It is the plain language of a senior lawmaker describing South Africa as an adversary, and it arrives at the precise moment Pretoria is trying to sell the world on a doctrine of non-alignment while aligning ever more firmly with the West’s strategic rivals.

Risch’s central point is that Pretoria’s non-alignment claim is a cover story, not a strategy. When a government says it wants constructive relations with the US while its military hosts drills alongside states Washington treats as core threats, the gap between words and deeds becomes too stark to overlook. In that gap, credibility dies. The costs of this loss of credibility do not land first on Cabinet ministers or party officials. They land on exporters, investors, and households who need capital inflows, stable market access, and a government that can lower the risk premium on the economy.

The warning is the latest reminder to South Africa’s government that American politics is moving away from patient diplomacy toward consequence. Risch’s line that “any promise or deal this government offers Washington is meaningless” is a direct attack on trust, and trust is the currency of trade preferences, security co-operation, and investment decisions. When trust collapses, the default setting becomes scrutiny, conditionality, and punishment, not partnership.

South Africa’s foreign policy is strategically misguided because it confuses posture with power. The African National Congress treats symbolic defiance of the US as proof of sovereignty, but sovereignty is not a speech or a naval photo opportunity. Sovereignty is the ability to secure prosperity, defend institutions, and widen opportunity for citizens. A foreign policy that raises borrowing costs, chills investment, and risks market access is not anti-imperialism. It is self-harm dressed up as virtue.

Risch’s final line about the time for envoys and reviews having passed should be read as a signal to Pretoria that the window for ambiguity is closing. When Washington decides you are an adversary, your room to manoeuvre shrinks fast. South Africa can still choose national interest over ideological theatre, but that requires a basic discipline that has been missing for years. Align actions with stated interests, stop treating hostility as principle, and stop gambling with the country’s economic future for the sake of corruption and ideology.