The frontrunner for US Ambassador to South Africa says yesterday’s anti-US article in Foreign Policy deserves a strong response: targeted financial sanctions against its author Cyril Ramaphosa and wealthy ANC cadres. Johannesburg-born Joel Pollak, the senior editor at Breitbart, says publicly exposing the international financial assets of billionaire Ramaphosa and politically connected cadres including those who benefitted from State Capture, will likely make US president Donald Trump a hero among the people of SA. He anticipates something similar to the overwhelmingly positive public response in America to exposures from Elon Musk’s DOGE project. Pollak spoke to BizNews founder Alec Hogg.
Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.
Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.
If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here.
Watch here
Listen here
BizNews Reporter ___STEADY_PAYWALL___
In a move that has sent shockwaves through diplomatic circles, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, alongside three other leaders, has co-authored an article in Foreign Policy magazine, taking a hardline stance against the United States and Israel. This move, viewed by many as a direct provocation of the Trump administration, could have severe economic and political consequences for South Africa, including the potential loss of its participation in the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and even targeted sanctions against the ANC and its leadership.
South Africa’s uncompromising position
Joel Pollak, a senior editor at Breitbart and the current frontrunner for the role of U.S. Ambassador to South Africa, weighed in on the issue in an interview with BizNews founder Alec Hogg. Pollak highlighted that Ramaphosa’s article, written with leaders from Colombia, Malaysia, and the Hague Group, strongly opposed U.S. sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC) while ignoring Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel.
According to Pollak, this omission speaks volumes about South Africa’s current foreign policy. “The words Hamas and terror don’t appear once in the article,” he noted, arguing that it paints the Gaza conflict as an unprovoked assault by Israel while failing to acknowledge the atrocities committed by Hamas. The article also likens Trump’s foreign policy to authoritarianism, a comparison that will not sit well with the current administration.
The high-stakes AGOA gamble
One of the most immediate risks of Ramaphosa’s stance is South Africa’s continued participation in AGOA, a U.S. trade agreement that grants duty-free access to African countries that align with American interests. Pollak warned that Ramaphosa’s latest maneuver may provide Trump with the justification needed to expel South Africa from the agreement, a move that would significantly impact the country’s economy.
“The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act specifies explicitly that countries benefiting from the act cannot operate in a way that is counter to U.S. foreign policy or national security,” Pollak explained. Given that South Africa has now openly positioned itself against the United States on such a critical issue, the likelihood of AGOA’s termination has increased dramatically.
South Africa already faced AGOA-related scrutiny last year when the Biden administration considered expelling it over allegations of supporting Russia in its invasion of Ukraine. The latest developments with Israel and the ICC further erode South Africa’s standing with Washington.
Read more: BN Briefing: Cronjé, Pollak on ANC poking Trump bear (again); DOGE; SA/Israel; Nvidia; Arsenal
Could personal sanctions be imposed on Ramaphosa and the ANC?
Perhaps even more concerning is the possibility of direct sanctions against the ANC and its leadership. Pollak pointed out that U.S. financial sanctions extend beyond individuals—they can target assets held by ruling parties, government institutions, and even high-ranking officials’ foreign investments.
“If the U.S. were to impose sanctions on the ANC or senior officials, it could target their financial transactions, limit access to international banking systems, and seize overseas assets,” Pollak stated. Given that Ramaphosa’s family, including his brother-in-law Patrice Motsepi, controls vast financial empires, such a move would have severe personal and political repercussions.
Pollak suggested that such sanctions could also serve a strategic purpose for Trump. “Exposing the ANC’s overseas assets and financial dealings would likely resonate with the South African public,” he said, pointing to Elon Musk’s recent exposé of government corruption as an example of how financial transparency could be weaponized against political elites.
A losing strategy on the global stage?
Beyond economic repercussions, Pollak argued that South Africa is aligning itself with a losing strategy in the Middle East. While Ramaphosa’s administration has been vocal in its support of the Palestinian cause, Pollak contends that Israel, the U.S., and their allies have gained the upper hand against Iran and its proxies.
“If you look at the results on the ground, Israel has effectively neutralized Hamas, Hezbollah has been forced into a ceasefire, the Syrian regime is in turmoil, and Iran is struggling with internal instability,” he said.
By continuing to champion anti-Israel rhetoric, South Africa risks further isolating itself on the global stage. “Why is South Africa weighing in on the losing side of a war?” Pollak asked. “It raises serious questions about whether this policy is driven by external influences—whether from Iran, China, or another actor looking to challenge Western hegemony.”
What comes next?
With the Trump administration reportedly considering sanctions and reviewing South Africa’s AGOA participation, the stakes could not be higher. While opposition parties such as the Democratic Alliance (DA) and civil society organizations like AfriForum are engaging with Washington to mend relations, Pollak warned that Ramaphosa’s continued defiance may leave the U.S. with no choice but to act.
“South Africa needs to learn that you can’t expect to leverage media and diplomatic rhetoric to force the U.S. into concessions,” he said. “Trump expects negotiations in good faith, and this article does the opposite—it escalates tensions.”
As South Africa moves forward, it faces a stark choice: recalibrate its foreign policy to maintain economic stability and diplomatic relations with the U.S., or continue its antagonistic stance and risk economic and political fallout. If Ramaphosa chooses the latter, the consequences could be dire, both for his administration and for the country at large.
Read also:
