The biggest problem America must solve in its relationship with South Africa is arguably not China or Iran, the small circle of hostile foreign policy officials, or some anti-Western corners of the African National Congress (ANC). It is that South Africans think that China and Russia do more to invest in South Africa and create local jobs than does the United States (US). The biggest opportunity is that South Africans believe that the US offers better policies and a better standard of living than China.

In both 2023 and 2024 the Social Research Foundation (SRF) surveyed voters on whether they thought China and Russia contributed more investment and jobs to South Africa than did the US and Europe.

In both years just over 50% of voters thought this was the case, whilst under 40% thought it was not (the reality is that US and European investment stock exceeds that of China and Russia by orders of magnitude).

In the 2024 survey, amongst black voters the data split 56% to 37% against the West. For ANC voters it was 62% to 25%.

Yet on other questions views towards the US skewed much more favourably.

For example, when in 2024 the SRF asked whether the Government of National Unity should align its foreign policy with Russia and China and against the West, just over a third of voters agreed, whilst just over 50% did not. Amongst black voters the split was 41% in favour of such hostile alignment against 48% opposed. Amongst ANC voters the split was 45% in favour to 44% opposed.

Also in 2024, when asked whether life is better in the US than in China, a majority of all voters, and of black and ANC voters, agreed.

When in 2023 the SRF asked whether the then ANC government should follow Chinese-type policies or US-type policies, under a third of voters opted for Chinese-type policies, with roughly 55% saying they would prefer US-type policies. Amongst black voters and ANC voters, majorities favoured US-type policies.

Geostrategic importance

From a domestic South African perspective, what its government should do on foreign policy is straightforward, as this newspaper has reported at length; seek to trade South Africa’s geostrategic importance for vast trade and investment concessions from Washington and Beijing alike.

But from abroad the perspective is different. For the Americans, they face the challenge that whilst public opinion on policies and values is still skewed in their favour, the perception of what they have done for the country is skewed against them. For the Chinese, the problem is exactly the opposite, with public opinion on what they do for the country now being skewed in their favour, whilst opinion is skewed against their policies and system of government.

Surely the point of the diplomatic race for South Africa must be to skew both metrics in your favour at the same time.

For America, that objective will not have been helped over the weekend by the announcement from the Trump administration that it would boycott the G20 meeting in South Africa over what it alleged was the persecution of Afrikaners.

This newspaper will be the first to say that the West’s rejection of hard-power politics in the aftermath of the Cold War, in favour of strategies of appeasement and indulgence, was fatal to Western global interests. Likewise, that the Chinese approach to diplomacy is strategically correct, as hard power must be brought forward fast by any power seeking to defend its global interests.

Take issue

There are many sound grounds upon which Washington could take issue with Pretoria, many of which would resonate well with South Africans themselves. In fact, on Christian right-of-centre values, it would be an easy matter for the Americans to resonate with the bulk of black cultural values, because these are in almost all respects indistinguishable from those of the Afrikaners, and vice versa. That great South African divide does not really exist.

The Afrikaners, not withstanding crime, threats to property rights, and discriminatory laws, are doing very well in South Africa. We might argue that this is because they realise the state is sometimes hostile, which can bring out the best in a people.

However, the threat of violence and the consequences of hostile government policy are not unique to them. For the bulk of black society, the very same policies, including crime, the continuing denial of property rights, and empowerment laws hijacked by corrupt politicians, undermine their prospects in the country, and this newspaper might argue to a greater extent than is the case for Afrikaners, who face these threats with the robust advantages that accrue from established middle-class family backgrounds and global ties.

The great win in South African politics has always been the same thing, to see through the old racial and cultural stereotypes and to unite the moderate right-of-centre majority on common values. This applies as much to domestic politics as it does to foreign relations.

And in that most important of regards the manner of the US announcement over the weekend, and the basis of its justification, will have done great damage.

Also, over the weekend China received news coverage for upgrading a South African military facility. To many South Africans, that will be read as China helping South Africa succeed, a strong juxtaposition to what they heard from the Trump administration.