Skip to content

Trump’s False Narrative: How White Victimhood Is Weaponized Against South Africa’s Land Reform

By Sõzarn Barday

 “South Africa is confiscating land and treating certain classes of people very badly” – whines Donald Trump’s remark, backed by the right-wing, Afrikaner-led group AfriForum, is based on the misleading claim that White South Africans are being unfairly targeted for land seizures.

His comments come in response to South Africa’s recent enactment of land expropriation laws. According to Trump and his allies, these laws discriminate against White farmers, with claims that the South African government is “seizing ethnic minority Afrikaners’ agricultural property without compensation.” This false narrative prompted Trump to issue an executive order freezing aid to South Africa, which totalled $440 million in 2023 alone. He even went as far as offering White Afrikaners resettlement in the U.S. as refugees.

South Africa is often seen as a beacon of hope in the struggle against Apartheid. However, beneath this progress, deep-seated injustices remain unresolved. Under Apartheid, land was systematically taken from the Black majority, depriving them of access to land, resources, and infrastructure. Meanwhile, White South Africans benefited from preferential policies, with the Apartheid National Party allocating 85% of seized land to White ownership.

At the end of Apartheid, the government pledged to redistribute 30% of White-owned farmland to Black farmers. Yet, decades later, White South Africans—who make up just 9% of the population—still control 73% of commercial agricultural land. This stark disparity highlights the ongoing need for land expropriation and reform in the public interest.

Contrary to claims of arbitrary land seizures, the law does not permit indiscriminate expropriation. Instead, it prioritizes negotiation with landowners first, with expropriation without compensation allowed only when deemed “just and equitable” and in the public interest—such as when land is unused or poses a risk to the public. Additionally, land can only be seized for public purposes, such as the construction of hospitals, schools, or highways.

This raises the question: why now? Analysts suggest Trump’s actions are not solely about land reform but rather an attempt to pressure the ANC into aligning with U.S. foreign policy. South Africa’s strong stance against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has reportedly influenced Trump’s crackdown on the country.

Trump’s position has also been shaped by South African-born billionaire Elon Musk, a close advisor who has repeatedly criticized the government’s transformation policies. In 2023, Musk accused President Cyril Ramaphosa’s government of allowing a “genocide” against White farmers. He even took to his X account (formerly Twitter) to confront Ramaphosa directly, asking, “Why do you have openly racist ownership laws?”

In response, South African Minister of Mineral and Petroleum Resources Gwede Mantashe asserted that if the U.S. were to cut funding, South Africa must consider withholding key mineral exports, including iron, platinum, and manganese—resources essential to American industries.

Political analyst Ongama Mtimka condemned Trump’s and his allies’ disrespect toward South Africa, emphasizing that such interference should not be tolerated. However, Ramaphosa has chosen a more diplomatic approach, stating, “We are certain that through these engagements, we will share a better and common understanding over these matters.”

Trump’s actions have had immediate economic repercussions. Investor unease over U.S.-South Africa relations has led to a decline in South African stocks, a weakening rand, and a slump in government bonds.

It is clear that Trump is perpetuating the narrative of White victimhood, using South Africa’s land reform policies as a political tool to rally his base and push his foreign policy agenda. By falsely framing land expropriation as an attack on White farmers, he ignores the historical injustices of Apartheid and undermines South Africa’s ongoing efforts to address land inequality. His actions—freezing aid, amplifying misinformation, and aligning with figures like Elon Musk—demonstrate a broader strategy of economic and diplomatic pressure to force South Africa into compliance with U.S. interests.

Despite these challenges, South Africa remains steadfast in its commitment to land reform and sovereignty over its policies. While Trump’s interference has triggered economic uncertainty, the South African government continues to engage diplomatically, seeking to balance international relations with its domestic priorities. Ultimately, the country’s pursuit of justice and equitable land ownership cannot be dictated by external forces that prioritize political gain over historical redress.

Sõzarn Barday

Sõzarn Barday is an attorney based in South Africa and has a particular interest in human rights within the Middle East

Latest posts by Sõzarn Barday (see all)