Did South Africa ‘seize the earth’, targeting some groups that Trump claims? | News about politics

Johannesburg, South Africa – The President of the United States Donald Trump has threatened to reduce all funding in South Africa this week because of what he claims to be in Precetoria of illegal land.

Trump’s claim It is based on the myth that white South Africans are the target of illegal seizure of land, which has been fiercely denied by the government of South Africa.

“South Africa seized Earth and treats certain classes of people very poorly,” Trump wrote in the social place of truth on Sunday. “The United States will not advocate for this, we will act. Also, I will reduce all future funds for South Africa until the complete investigation of this situation is completed!”

In response, South African President Cyril Ramaphos quickly denied any seizures of the land who told the government, saying on X: “The South African government did not seize any country.”

Last month, South Africa adopted the Law on Expropriation, a law that helps the state to take the land in public interest, with an agreement, to engage in inequalities owned by the decades of racist rule of Aparthey.

Ramaphos defended the law, explaining that it served to facilitate public access to the land, not action as a “deprivation instrument”.

“South Africa, such as the United States and other countries, has always had expropriation laws that balance the need for public use of land and the protection of property owners’ rights,” Ramaphos elaborated in a statement after Trump’s comments.

South Africa is a constitutional democracy that is deeply rooted in the rule of law, justice and equality. The South African government did not seize any land.

The recently adopted Law on Expropriation is not an instrument of deprivation, but a constitutional mandate of legal …

– Cyril Ramaphosa 🇿🇦 (@cyrilramaphosa) 3. February 2025

In the midst of a discussion, a billionaire born in South Africa and Trump’s close advisor Elon Musk also weighed, accusing Vlad Ramaphos of “Open Racist Laws”, while Minister for Mineral Resources in South Africa said that if Trump breaks funding, South Africa should consider denying mineral exports to the US.

So, what is behind southern Africa’s land policy, are certain groups really targeted in the country and why Trump has now made these comments? Here’s what to know:

What is land expropriation and why is this happening?

The Ramaphos Expropriation Act signed a law in January. The state would facilitate expropriation of a country with the aim of resolving racial inequality owned after Apartheid in 1994.

The Government of South Africa says that the law does not allow him to arbitrarily apologize for the property and that the landowner must reach an agreement.

The government claims that the law enables “constitutional mandate legal procedure” and that it enables expropriation without compensation in circumstances considered “righteous and righteous and public interest”.

Commenting on the implementation of the Law on Expropriation, Land Expert and South African lawyer of Tembek NGCUKAITOBI, he said that this legislative proceedings were intended to simplify access to the Government access to land for public interest.

“The hysteria on the expropriation law is naughty,” he said, emphasizing that the law does not allow the land to capture as supposedly.

Ngcukaitobi explained that the law allows a “zero fee” for the land considered necessary for the public good, which may include property that is not used or pose to the public.

“The misconception was a wrong presentation, as if [to say] Expropriation has never happened, and what Anc wants to do is catching the land of Zimbabva’s style, which is obviously not the case, “he said, referring to the Ramaphosa party, the African national congress.

Does the government unfairly target white South Africans?

Trump’s comments on Sunday that South Africa “treated certain classes of people” very badly without giving any evidence. His words returned to his first administration when he repeated unanimous claims that they existed “Large -scale killings” of white South African farmers who take place; At the time, Pretoria said Trump was disinformed.

Afiforum, a right -wing lobby group that represents the interests of white South Africans who speak African, lobbied Trump and the US Congress, claiming that the property rights to threat after the adoption of the Expropriation Act.

Years before that, the group persistently sought the right support in the US, promoting the narrative that white land owners face unfair racial laws that could lead to the seizure of the property and that there is a widespread, politically motivated campaign against white farmers.

This has also been inserted into myths that have been appearing on social media in recent years to take place “white genocide” in South Africa – claims that have been repeatedly rejected.

Researchers and academics have debuted claims that attacks and robberies on farms are politically motivated, claiming that they are part of a wider violent crime in South Africa, which is one of the most dangerous countries in the world.

Criminologist Professor Rudolph Zinn emphasized: “South Africa obviously has a problem with violent crime,” noting that violent incidents are not limited to white -owned farms.

In the light of Trump’s statements this week, Afiforum announced that he was planning to lobby the US government for sanctions against the Anc politicians, claiming that the inhabitants of South Africa should not bear the consequences of Trump’s remarks. However, many claim that Afiforum is the spread of misinformation on this issue partly responsible for framing the narrative that Trump now believes.

What is the history of land release in South Africa?

The liberation of people from their countries – especially black and indigenous people – was the main feature of South Africa’s history, deeply intertwined with the brutal regime of Apartheid in the country and in the previous years of colonialism.

The main law, the Law on the Land of the Natives of 1913, limited the Black South Africa from the purchase or rental of land in the marked “white South Africa”, which resulted in the forced removal of the indigenous population.

According to the Freedom Charter, the cornerstone, composed during the fight against Apartheid and the foundation for the current Constitution, the country should belong to all who live in it. “But 30 years after the end of Apartheid, the inequality of the land remains great and most blacks and further worst.

The Government of South Africa struggled with issues of land ownership since the appearance of democracy in 1994, and discussions on land reform have become increasingly relevant in political discourse.

White South Africans make up just over 7 percent of the population, according to the latest census. But they have more than 70 percent of all agricultural land in private ownership in the country, according to government data from 2017.

The constant differences in land owned by land, which were still tilted in favor of the minority, brought the need for reform and expropriation, experts say.

This long -standing context complicates the narrative presented by Trump and his supporters, as he reflects a constant struggle for the fairer distribution of the country among the diverse population of South Africa.

Why is South Africa’s land policy now a matter of Trump?

The political analyst of Mtimka said that Trump comments could be motivated by misinformation, but were also part of a wider forced foreign policy program.

“Trump is either poorly informed, but he is well aware of what it means, but he manipulates feelings that Anc has fallen in order to choose foreign policy. It is part of Trump’s coercive policy strategy,” he said.

Trump’s threat to reduce help in South Africa comes because in the next three months he imposed criminal sanctions on countries such as Canada and Mexico and suspended funding to the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

Mtimka said that the attitude of South Africa in the Censure of Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) was also motivated by Trump’s attitude because of his genocide in Gaza. “It definitely has something to do with it,” he said.

This is not the first time Trump has raised the issue of alleged attacks on white South African. When he was president in 2018, he said on Twitter that he directed his Secretary -General at the time, Mike Pompea, that he was viewed in “seized land and farms” and the “big killing of farmers” in South Africa.

Mtimka said he would not be surprised if his close advisor was influenced by the comments on Trump’s comments, Musk, who has long criticized the politics of the transformation of South Africa.

In 2023, Musk accused the Ramaphos government of allowing “genocide” to happen against white farmers.

Following Trump’s new comments, Musk added that thing on Monday Responding to the post of official account of Ramaphos to X with the question: “Why do you have open racist ownership laws?”

Since then, the Ramaphos Office has announced that the couple has conversation “About the issues of misinformation and distortion” about South Africa.

“In this process, the President reiterated the constitutional values ​​of the built -in value of South Africa’s respect for the rule of law, justice, honesty and equality,” the South African Presidency states.

What do Trump statements mean for South Africa’s relationships?

The South African government has announced that she wants to diplomatically engage with the US because of the policy of land land and that the country is dedicated to its constitutional democracy.

Ramaphosa further noted that he would hire Trump.

“We are sure that we will share a better and common understanding of these things from these engagement,” he said.

While Ramaphosa is a measured approach to Trump’s threat, the South African Minister of mineral and oil resources Reply Gwed Mantashe He was more prominent.

Speaking at a mining conference on Monday, he suggested that South Africa should consider the deduction of mineral exports to the US if the interruption of funds takes place. This is significant, because South Africa exports various minerals to the US, including platinum, iron and manganese.

According to Reuters report, South Africa has received about $ 440 million from USA from the US 2023. However, South Africa has reduced the consequences of Trump’s offense to reduce assistance, saying that the United States does not provide other significant funds, except for the Emergency Case Plan for US President AIDS Relief (Pepfar), which Ramaphosa said only 17 percent of South Africa program for the fight against HIV/AIDS.

Mtimka said that until South Africa should not tolerate disrespect, she cannot believe that he does not need now because it is the second biggest export partner in South Africa. “Stupid radicalism won’t make us much,” he said.

South Africa benefits from the African Law on Growth and Opportunities (Agoa), which allows for the Bescarin approach to the US market for a significant part of South Africa goods. Agoa will expire in September 2025.

On Monday, after Trump’s threat, all South African rand, shares and state bonds, collapsed, as comments caused the discomfort of investors regarding the diplomatic and economic ties of the two countries.