A meeting of the Africa Think-Tank Dialogue

organised by the Inclusive Society Institute

Copyright © 2025

Inclusive Society Institute

PO Box 12609

Mill Street

Cape Town, 8010

South Africa

235-515 NPO

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the permission in writing from the Inclusive Society Institute

DISCLAIMER

Views expressed in this report do not necessarily represent the views of the Inclusive Society Institute or its Board or Council members.

This report has been drafted with the assistance of ChatGpt. Original transcripts of the presentations made during the meeting have been summarised with the use of the AI tool and then edited and amended where necessary by the rapporteur for correctness and context

MAY 2025

Rapporteur: Daryl Swanepoel

CONTENTS

1 AFRICA THINK-TANK DIALOGUE

2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.1 US - Africa relations from an African perspective

2.2 US–Africa relations from a US perspective

2.3 Convergences and Divergences

2.4 Conclusion

3 OPENING SESSION

3.1 Welcoming remarks

Prof Zweli Ndevu, Chairperson of the Inclusive Society Institute (South Africa)

3.2 Setting the Scene - Navigating Africa’s Future: Multilateral Reform, Global Relations, and

Development  Finance

Daryl Swanepoel, Chief Executive Officer, Inclusive Society Institute (South Africa)

3.3 Navigating Geopolitical Currents: South Africa–United States Relations During the 2025

G20 Presidency

Dr Philani Mthembu, Executive Director, Institute for Global  Dialogue (South Africa)

3.4 Navigating Global Shifts: South Africa’s Foreign Policy in a Multipolar World

Hon. Alvin Botes, Deputy Minister of International Relations and Cooperation

(South Africa)

4 SESSION 1: US AFRICA RELATIONS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF AFRICA

4.1 Beyond Rhetoric: Reimagining Africa - U.S. Relations in a Multipolar World

Prof. Efem Ubi, Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (Nigeria)

4.2 United States–Africa Relations — Historical Legacy, Contemporary Challenges, and

Future Perspectives

Ms Aïcha Karafi, President, Tunisian Association of Local Governance (Tunisia)

4.3 The Importance of African Agency in US–Africa Relations

Dr Melha Rout Biel, Executive Director, Institute for Strategic and Policy Studies

(South Sudan)

4.4 Evolving US–West Africa Economic Relations - Implications for Côte d’Ivoire

Prof Assi Kimou, Deputy Director, CIRES Economic Policy Analysis Unit (Cote d’Ivoire)

4.5 Pan-Africanism, African Diplomacy, and Development - A Critical Analysis

Prof. Francis Matambalya, Chief Executive Officer, Kamanda Rajabu Diwani Centre

(Tanzania)

4.6 Africa and the United States - Reimagining a Strategic and Equitable Partnership

Amb Omar Mjenga, President and CEO, Centre for International Policy Africa (Tanzania)

4.7 Reimagining US–Africa Relations - Priorities, Challenges, and Strategic Pathways

Dr Zine Barka, Independent Public Finance Analyst (Algeria)

4.8 US–South Africa Relations in the Era of Trumpism - A Critical Reflection

Dr Sizo Nkala, Senior Researcher, Centre for Africa-China Studies, University of

Johannesburg (South Africa)

4.9 US–Africa Relations in the Era of ‘America First’ - A Kenyan Perspective

Brigadier (Rtd) Dr Robert Kabage, Executive Director, Mashariki Research and Policy

Centre (Kenya)

5 SESSION 2: U.S. – AFRICA RELATIONS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE UNITED

STATES

5.1 Understanding African Fragility Through U.S. National Security Perspectives

Dr Dylan Craig, Associate Professor, Department of Security Studies, U.S. National War

College (United States of America)

5.2 U.S. - Africa Relations in a Time of Geopolitical Transition - Policy, Challenges, and the

South African Case

Ambassador Michelle Gavin, Ralph Bunche Senior Fellow for Africa Policy Studies,

Council on Foreign Relations (United States of America)

5.3 The Changing US-Africa Policy Dynamic - Context, Challenges, and Opportunities

Dr Anne Griffin, Independent US-Africa policy expert associated with the Centre for

American Progress (United States of America)

5.4 Discussion

1 AFRICA THINK-TANK DIALOGUE

The Africa Think-Tank Dialogue (ATD) is an informal collaboration of African think-tanks that have African socio-economic development, governance and a fairer, more inclusive, multilateral order at the heart of their work.

As such, the ATD discusses, amongst others:

• Africa’s governance within the framework of the African Union

• Arica’s relationship with other regional structures such as the European Union, BRICS, the Forum for China Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) and the G20

• Africa’s relationship with world powers such as the United States of America and China

• Reform of the United Nations and other multilateral organisations in order to reposition Africa's role in the global order

• How to improve sustainable development in Africa, including required adaptation resulting from Climate Change

Activities

• The African Consultative Meeting is held annually in Cape Town, South Africa

• Participation in the conferences, seminars, workshops and webinars – both ATD organised and those organised by the participating organisations

• Participation in the programmes of the Global South Perspectives Network

• Research

• Advocacy

• Early warning mechanism on emerging issues for the continent

• Promote African reform for more inclusive governance and economic development

• Act as a catalyst for African reformation and unity

2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The 2025 Africa Consultative Meeting (ACM), held under the auspices of the Africa Think-Tank Dialogue (ATD), convened a diverse range of African policy experts, academics, diplomats, and civil society actors to assess the evolving contours of US - Africa relations in a multipolar world.

Against the backdrop of shifting geopolitical alliances, intensifying global competition, and mounting demands for reform in multilateral governance, the meeting sought to interrogate both historical legacies and contemporary dynamics shaping engagement between the United States and African nations.

This report synthesises the insights and debates that emerged over the two-day event, offering a nuanced and multidimensional account of the challenges, opportunities, and strategic imperatives underpinning this complex relationship.

2.1 US - Africa relations from an African perspective

African scholars and policymakers presented a deeply reflective and, at times, critical account of the trajectory of US - Africa relations. A recurrent theme was the persistence of asymmetry in the partnership—where Africa is often treated as a recipient of aid and influence, rather than as a strategic actor with agency and voice. This imbalance, rooted in colonial legacies and exacerbated by Cold War geopolitics, continues to shape both the form and content of American engagement on the continent.

One of the key critiques raised was the framing of engagement through the lens of “relations” rather than “cooperation.” As Prof. Efem Ubi argued, “relations” imply a hierarchical connection with limited mutuality, while “cooperation” denotes equality and shared purpose. African actors expressed dissatisfaction with rhetorical commitments to democracy and development that are not matched by consistent action or genuine partnership.

Security engagement was another focal point of concern. African leaders noted that while US military aid and counterterrorism support may yield short-term stability, they often fail to address root causes such as poverty, youth unemployment, and poor governance. Moreover, US military presence on African soil - especially in the Sahel - led to governance vacuums and unintended civilian harm, raising questions about long-term effectiveness.

Finally, there was a strong emphasis on African agency. As Dr. Melha Rout Biel noted, African nations must set their own priorities, drive their own development strategies, and assert their voices in multilateral forums. Institutional mechanisms such as the African Union’s Agenda 2063 and the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) offer blueprints for such autonomy, but realising their potential requires external partners, including the US, to support - not supplant - Africa-led initiatives.

2.2 US–Africa relations from a US perspective

From the American perspective, Africa represents both a challenge and an opportunity. The continent’s demographic dynamism, natural resource wealth, and emerging consumer markets make it an area of strategic interest. However, US policy remains heavily influenced by security imperatives, geopolitical rivalries, and concerns about governance.

Recent years have seen a mix of engagement strategies. Under the Biden administration, there has been a renewed emphasis on multilateralism, democracy promotion, and climate finance. Yet, inconsistencies remain. For example, the absence of key US officials at G20 meetings hosted by South Africa was seen by many Africans as a sign of waning American commitment to multilateral dialogue.

The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) has been a cornerstone of US economic policy toward Africa, offering duty-free access to US markets. Yet its uneven implementation, selective eligibility criteria, and limited support for value-added exports have diminished its impact. Moreover, its potential termination looms as a key concern for countries such as Côte d’Ivoire and South Africa.

Investment and trade remain robust in certain sectors. US firms have a significant footprint in mining, manufacturing, and services in South Africa and Nigeria, among others. However, much of this investment is concentrated in resource extraction rather than industrial transformation or skills development. American stakeholders acknowledge that a shift is needed - from short-term interests to long-term partnerships that contribute to Africa’s structural transformation.

Soft power remains a key asset in the US approach. Programmes in education, health, and cultural exchange - along with historic anti-apartheid solidarity and ongoing collaboration among think tanks and civil society - offer a foundation of goodwill. The challenge is to translate these people-to-people ties into a more coherent and strategic policy framework.

2.3  Convergences and Divergences

Despite tensions and asymmetries, there are important areas of convergence between African and American interests. These include:

• Climate resilience and just energy transitions: Both sides recognise the need for urgent climate action, and there is agreement on the importance of increased climate finance. African leaders, however, stress that such finance must come in the form of grants, not loans that exacerbate debt burdens.

• Peace and security: There is mutual interest in stabilising regions such as the Sahel and the Horn of Africa. However, there is disagreement over the methods - Africans favour holistic, locally led peacebuilding, while the US often favours militarised responses.

• Democracy and governance: Both parties support democratic governance, but African actors are wary of what they perceive as moralistic or inconsistent US advocacy - particularly when American strategic interests override democratic principles.

• Digital technology and innovation: Africa’s young population and growing tech sector represent opportunities for collaboration. Programmes that support digital infrastructure, STEM education, and startup ecosystems are potential win-win areas for partnership.

Conversely, several divergences persist:

• Trade and economic policy: Africa seeks more inclusive trade frameworks and diversification, whereas US trade policy remains fragmented and protectionist in certain sectors. Moreover, unilateral mechanisms like AGOA do not always align with continental initiatives such as AfCFTA.

• Multilateralism and global governance reform: African countries are calling for structural changes in the UN Security Council, IMF, and World Bank to better reflect contemporary power dynamics. The US has shown limited support for these reforms, preferring to retain its dominant position.

• Superpower rivalries: African states seek to engage with a variety of global actors—China, Russia, India, the EU - based on national interests. US pressure to “choose sides” undermines Africa’s preference for non-alignment and strategic autonomy.

• Perceptions and narratives: Misperceptions, media stereotypes, and historical grievances continue to complicate relations. For example, African nations resent being summoned to summits in Washington and treated as passive recipients of aid rather than equal partners.

2.4 Conclusion

The ACM’s discussions reveal that US-  Africa relations are at a pivotal juncture. The relationship is evolving, but still constrained by historical baggage, policy inconsistencies, and structural inequalities. For the partnership to be sustainable and mutually beneficial, several principles must guide future engagement:

• Equity and respect: The US must recognise Africa as a co-equal actor in international affairs. This requires a shift from paternalism to partnership, from aid dependency to co-investment.

• African agency: African nations must lead in defining the terms of engagement. US policy must align with continental frameworks such as Agenda 2063 and AfCFTA, not circumvent them.

• Institutional reform: The United States should support Africa’s call for reform of global institutions to ensure fair representation and voice. This includes backing permanent African seats on the UN Security Council.

• People-centred diplomacy: Engagement must go beyond government-to-government interaction. Civil society, academia, youth, and the diaspora have critical roles to play in deepening ties and countering misinformation.

• Strategic vision: Both sides must move beyond transactionalism and embrace a long-term vision grounded in shared prosperity, global justice, and sustainable development.

The ACM reaffirms that Africa’s time is now. With strategic foresight, united leadership, and supportive international partnerships, the continent can rise as a global force. The United States has a vital role to play - but only if it is willing to listen, learn, and evolve alongside a continent that is increasingly shaping its own future.

3 OPENING SESSION

3.1 Welcoming remarks

Prof Zweli Ndevu, Chairperson of the Inclusive Society Institute (South Africa)

 The Inclusive Society Institute (ISI) was honoured to once again host the Africa Think-tank Dialogue (ATD) in Cape Town. We drew together think-tanks from all corners of Africa to deliberate, strategize and develop policy positions that will promote sustainable development on the continent and a fairer and more just international order that aims to advance greater equitability in development cooperation.

The Africa Think-Tank Dialogue (ATD) is an informal collaboration of African think-tanks that have African socio-economic development, governance and a fairer, more inclusive, multilateral order at the heart of their work.

As such, the ATD discusses, amongst others:

• Africa’s governance within the framework of the African Union

• Arica’s relationship with other regional structures such as the European Union, BRICS, the Forum for China Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) and the G20

• Africa’s relationship with world powers such as the United States of America and China

• Reform of the United Nations and other multilateral organisations in order to reposition Africa's role in the global order

• How to improve sustainable development in Africa, including required adaptation resulting from Climate Change

The ATD has in the past discussed weighty issues such a multilateral reform, the superpowers rivalry in relation to influence in Africa. At the last African Consultative Meeting, the ATD deliberated Africa-China relations.

The theme of this year’s Africa Consultative Meeting was US-Africa relations. It came at an opportune time when the US administration is challenging the status quo as it relates to international cooperation and the multilateralism. How Africa responds today will establish the international hierarchy and define the social structure for years to come. It is the responsibility of African think tanks, such as those that were gathered at the African Consultative Meeting, to contemplate a roadmap that will both advance the African cause, whilst retaining good bilateral and multilateral relationships. And then to promote these proposals within their individual spheres of influence.

That said, as Africans we should not fall into the trap of talking to and about ourselves. We also need to understand and talk to our international partners in order to retain and expand mutually beneficial cooperation across the globe. We were therefore blessed to have amongst us influential think-tanks and experts from both the United States and beyond.

We were struck by the frankness of the engagement and the genuine desire from all sides to find a way forward that serves both the American and African people and our shared future. Together we are all stronger, divided we are all weak.

3.2  Setting the Scene - Navigating Africa’s Future: Multilateral Reform, Global Relations, and Development  Finance

Daryl Swanepoel, Chief Executive Officer, Inclusive Society Institute (South Africa)

Africa finds itself at a defining historical moment—straddling the challenges of sustainable development, climate resilience, fragile peace, and global inequality. As the world’s youngest continent with vast natural resources and strategic geopolitical importance, Africa must assert itself more forcefully in global decision-making forums. The continent’s leadership, intellectuals, and civil society are increasingly stepping up to make meaningful contributions towards transforming governance systems, both domestically and internationally. In this presentation, Daryl Swanepoel drew from the recent deliberations at the Africa Think-Tank Dialogue (ATD) to set the scene for the two-day dialogue, He examined three critical themes: Africa’s relations with global powers, the need for multilateral reform, and the pursuit of climate justice through equitable finance.

3.2.1  Evolving relations with global powers

Africa's relations with major global actors, particularly the United States, form a cornerstone of its broader foreign policy objectives. These relationships have historically been complex and uneven, shaped by a blend of development aid, security partnerships, and economic dependencies. The legacy of colonialism and Cold War-era interventions left behind a framework that often placed Africa in a reactive rather than proactive position.

Today, there is growing consensus that Africa must recalibrate its relations with global powers toward mutual respect and strategic partnership. Under President Joe Biden, the United States has taken steps toward a more constructive and collaborative approach, emphasising trade, investment, and shared growth. However, this trajectory is neither linear nor guaranteed. The prior Trump administration pursued a more transactional model, centred on short-term security interests and reduced foreign aid - policies that raised legitimate concerns about long-term development sustainability.

The return of such an administration, or similar ideological shifts elsewhere, could again marginalise African interests. Particularly worrying are recent changes to U.S. tariff policies that could jeopardise access to trade preferences under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). As such, Africa must not only engage more proactively but also diversify its partnerships beyond traditional allies. Increasing engagement with emerging powers like China, India, and Brazil provides a broader diplomatic and economic base, but must be balanced carefully to avoid new forms of dependency.

In this regard, Africa’s approach to foreign policy must be guided by clarity of interest, regional cohesion, and strategic assertiveness. While external powers will continue to play an important role, the continent's internal unity and capacity to speak with one voice will determine its leverage in global negotiations.

3.2.2  The demand for multilateral reform

Africa’s exclusion from key decision-making bodies, particularly at the United Nations, has long been a source of frustration and activism. The UN Security Council, arguably the most powerful body in global governance, still reflects the post-World War II power structure. Despite comprising more than 50 countries and 1.4 billion people, Africa has no permanent representation on the Council. This lack of representation undermines Africa’s ability to influence international peace and security policies that directly impact its own stability.

African leaders, through platforms like the African Union (AU), are pushing for structural reforms to address this disparity. The AU’s Common African Position on UN Security Council reform is one such initiative aimed at achieving a fairer distribution of power within the international system. This demand is not merely symbolic; it is about institutional equity and the right to co-determine global norms.

Multilateral reform also extends to economic and financial institutions. Africa remains underrepresented in the decision-making bodies of the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and World Trade Organization (WTO). These institutions have significant influence over African economies through loan terms, trade rules, and macroeconomic policy prescriptions. Reforming their governance structures is essential to ensure that African voices shape policies rather than merely respond to them.

Strengthening regional mechanisms is also critical to Africa’s multilateral strategy. The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) is a landmark achievement, aiming to unify African markets, enhance competitiveness, and foster regional value chains. By leveraging such platforms, Africa can present a united front in global trade and investment negotiations, enabling the continent to drive rather than follow international economic trends.

3.2.3  Climate Finance and the Pursuit of Justice

Climate change presents one of the most existential threats to Africa’s future. The continent is experiencing rising temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, droughts, and flooding—disrupting agriculture, livelihoods, and ecosystems. Yet, Africa contributes less than 4% to global greenhouse gas emissions. This stark imbalance has become central to Africa’s advocacy for climate justice.

At COP29 and other climate summits, wealthier nations pledged financial support to help developing countries transition to clean energy. While these commitments appear promising, their implementation reveals deeper issues. Much of the financial support is being offered in the form of concessional loans rather than grants. This shifts the financial burden to the very countries least responsible for the climate crisis.

As discussed in the ATD, there are two key concerns with this model. First, concessional loans add to Africa’s debt burden. Many African countries are already struggling to meet existing debt obligations. Asking them to borrow more – under the guise of climate support - essentially forces them to pay for the damage caused by others. This is not only unjust; it is economically unsustainable.

Second, most concessional loans are issued in strong currencies like the U.S. dollar or the euro. Because African countries must repay in these currencies, they face significant currency risk.

A compelling example cited was the effect of a €100 million loan to South Africa’s. Due to exchange rate fluctuations between 2015 and 2024, the total repayment costs increased by nearly 23%, even though the loan carried a low interest rate. These risks often go unacknowledged in global policy circles, yet they have devastating effects on African economies.

To address these challenges, the ATD should propose three policy recommendations:

• Shift from loans to grants: Wealthy nations must offer more grant-based finance to ensure climate transitions do not trap developing countries in unsustainable debt cycles.

• Currency risk management: Financial instruments should be structured to allow African countries to borrow and repay in local currencies. Lenders, who are better equipped to manage currency volatility, should absorb this risk as a form of developmental aid.

• Reform Bretton Woods Institutions: The IMF and World Bank must adopt more flexible, inclusive, and climate-sensitive lending policies. This includes reducing interest rates, extending grace periods, and factoring in vulnerability to climate risks.

In short, without just climate finance, Africa’s development aspirations will be continually undermined. The world cannot claim to fight climate change while perpetuating financial mechanisms that disadvantage the most vulnerable.

3.2.4  Governance, peace, and security: A continental challenge

Africa’s aspirations for development are also contingent on peace and political stability. While there have been notable improvements in certain regions, persistent conflicts, civil unrest, and extremist violence continue to undermine progress. From terrorist activities in the Sahel and Somalia, to conflicts in Ethiopia’s Tigray region and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), insecurity remains a widespread challenge.

Governance failures, corruption, and weak institutions exacerbate these security threats. Poor governance often erodes public trust, increases inequality, and provides fertile ground for extremist ideologies. At the same time, conflicts consume public resources that could otherwise be used for social services and infrastructure development.

Yet, African nations are increasingly recognising the importance of addressing these root causes. The AU and regional economic communities like ECOWAS are becoming more proactive in conflict mediation and peacekeeping. The AU’s Peace and Security Council has deployed missions to conflict zones and facilitated diplomatic negotiations. ECOWAS has shown leadership in addressing military coups and political crises in West Africa.

One of the more promising developments is the establishment of the African Standby Force, designed to enable rapid and coordinated responses to crises. It reflects a growing commitment to African-led solutions, grounded in the continent’s specific realities. However, implementation remains uneven due to resource and capacity constraints.

Funding remains a significant hurdle. Security operations are expensive, and most African states operate under tight budgets. Competing needs - such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure often take precedence, leaving security underfunded. This shortfall has made African nations reliant on foreign assistance, creating a paradox: the continent needs external support to manage security but also seeks sovereignty and ownership over these very issues.

The influence of external powers, while helpful in the short term, can also realign local priorities in ways that do not serve Africa’s long-term interests. This calls for a delicate balancing act - leveraging global support without surrendering agency.

3.2.5  Toward African agency and strategic sovereignty

The Africa Think-Tank Dialogue and other consultative forums are vital in nurturing a new generation of African thought leaders and policy-makers. These platforms serve as incubators for ideas, strategies, and early warning systems that feed directly into national and regional policy-making. They also create opportunities for cross-border knowledge exchange, allowing for more coherent and context-sensitive strategies.

The goal is to build resilient institutions that can withstand external shocks, adapt to changing global dynamics, and promote African-led solutions. From multilateral diplomacy to climate finance, and from peacekeeping to economic integration, the journey toward self-determination is multifaceted and ongoing.

3.2.6  Conclusion

Africa stands at a crucial juncture in its development trajectory. The choices made today will shape the continent’s ability to address climate change, secure peace, and assert its rightful place in global governance. This report has highlighted the urgent need for more equitable global partnerships, reforms in multilateral institutions, and just climate finance mechanisms.

Africa’s challenges are significant - but so are its opportunities. With bold leadership, strategic unity, and sustained investment in governance and institutions, Africa can redefine its future.

The international community must also ensure that it plays its part by acknowledging the historical responsibilities, honouring financial commitments, and reforming global systems to reflect the realities of the 21st century.

Only through mutual respect, fairness, and solidarity can we build a future that is not only greener and safer but also more just and inclusive for all.

3.3  Navigating Geopolitical Currents: South Africa–United States Relations During the 2025 G20 Presidency

Dr Philani Mthembu, Executive Director, Institute for Global  Dialogue (South Africa) 

As South Africa assumes the presidency of the G20 in 2025, it does so amid a complex and evolving geopolitical climate. Its leadership is under the global microscope, tasked not only with setting a compelling agenda for inclusive economic growth and sustainability, but also with navigating intricate diplomatic relationships, particularly with the United States. In this presentation Dr Philani Mthembu explored the evolving dynamics between South Africa and the US, focusing on the G20 context, historical diplomatic trends, current tensions, economic interdependence, and the role of non-state actors and misinformation.

3.3.1  South Africa’s G20 presidency and US participation

The year 2025 is a pivotal one for South Africa, as it undertakes the responsibilities of G20 presidency. Under the banner of solidarity, equality, and sustainability, South Africa aims to influence global discourse and policy. The G20 foreign ministers and finance meetings held in Johannesburg earlier this year endorsed these themes, reinforcing South Africa’s capacity to steer international attention.

However, the absence of US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio and US Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, from these early high-level G20 meetings signalled ambivalence. While officials from the US were present, the lack of high-level participation raised concerns about the US's commitment to multilateralism, particularly in the wake of a renewed "America First" approach and scepticism toward international commitments. This absence, while not a formal boycott, hinted at the de-prioritisation of the G20 within US foreign policy calculations.

South Africa must therefore calibrate its diplomatic strategies to manage both high-level government relations and second-track diplomacy involving think tanks, civil society, and business. These parallel channels of engagement are not only essential for bridging diplomatic gaps but also for ensuring continuity of cooperation amid shifting political leadership in Washington.

3.3.2  Managing a strategic but tense relationship

Despite the visible friction, South Africa has made strides in engaging key international stakeholders, notably receiving support from the European Union and China. The EU-South Africa Summit demonstrated strong solidarity and resulted in key agreements, further reinforcing South Africa’s leadership role within the Global South and the broader G20 context.

The bilateral relationship between South Africa and the US remains strategic but marked by inherent tensions. Over the past 30 years, despite common values such as democratic governance, their international policy postures have often diverged. South Africa’s reformist stance toward global governance structures contrasts with the US’s defence of the existing international order.

This divergence has historical roots.

In 1990, Nelson Mandela's remarks during a US town hall, in response to criticism of his engagements with leaders such as Fidel Castro and Yasser Arafat, underscored South Africa's independent foreign policy tradition. Mandela reminded audiences that during the apartheid struggle, the US government was largely absent, whereas other nations, now often labelled as adversaries by the US, offered concrete support. This ethos of foreign policy independence continues to shape South Africa's global outlook.

3.3.3  Historical and current points of friction

Past frictions between the US and South Africa have been sharpened during both Trump administrations. During the first Trump presidency, South Africa resisted pressures to align with the US in its geopolitical confrontation with China. This included continued engagement with Chinese firms such as Huawei, despite US objections. South Africa also opposed the US’s pro-Israel policies, including moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem and recognising Israeli settlements in Palestine.

In addition, US recognition of Morocco’s claim over Western Sahara contradicted South Africa’s longstanding support for Sahrawi self-determination. These policy differences were exacerbated by the imposition of tariffs on South African steel and aluminium—measures perceived by some as indirect responses to South Africa’s foreign policy stances.

Significantly, these tensions are not solely tied to one administration. Under President Biden, the US House of Representatives passed the South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act in 2024, which questioned whether South Africa’s foreign policy undermined US interests. This bipartisan scepticism reveals deep-seated differences in global outlook between the two nations.

3.3.4  The economic dimension: Trade and investment

Despite political friction, the economic relationship between South Africa and the US remains robust and mutually beneficial. South Africa is the United States’ largest trading partner in Africa. In 2023, the US exported goods worth $7.1 billion to South Africa, while importing $13.98 billion—primarily composed of critical metals and minerals like platinum, chrome, manganese, and gold. These resources are essential for US national security, particularly in high-tech manufacturing and defence.

The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) has facilitated duty-free access for specific South African goods into the US market since 2000. AGOA was instrumental in boosting South Africa’s automotive exports from $195 million in 2000 to $1.8 billion in 2013. However, the future of AGOA is uncertain. Discontent among US lawmakers about the agreement’s scope and utility could lead to its reconfiguration or dissolution.

If AGOA is terminated, the economic repercussions for South Africa would be relatively modest but still noteworthy. The Brookings Institution estimates a 2.7% decline in total exports to the US and a 0.06% decrease in GDP. Sectors like automotive manufacturing and food and beverages would be disproportionately affected. However, South Africa’s exports have diversified significantly, especially toward the European Union. By 2022, only 10% of automotive exports went to the US, down from 25% in 2013.

Moreover, many of South Africa’s exports—particularly metals and minerals—do not rely on AGOA preferences, limiting the impact of a potential withdrawal. Most of these goods face tariffs between 3% and 5%, and South African exporters are already accustomed to these non-preferential trading conditions.

3.3.5  Investment and employment interlinkages

Beyond trade, the investment landscape underscores the mutual benefits of the bilateral relationship. Approximately 600 US companies operate in South Africa, employing around 148,000 South Africans. Meanwhile, 22 South African firms have operations in the US, employing about 7,000 American citizens. These cross-border economic linkages create a web of interdependence that makes full-scale disengagement unlikely.

These figures also emphasise that South Africa is not a passive recipient of aid or trade favours. It is an active investor, a producer of globally essential resources, and a regional economic leader. As such, its relations with the US should be understood within a framework of mutual strategic interest rather than aid dependency.

3.3.6  Role of non-state Actors and multi-track diplomacy

A defining feature of US–South Africa relations has been the strength of non-state actor engagement. South African think tanks, civil society groups, and research institutions continue to collaborate with US-based counterparts, especially within the G20’s Think-tank 20 (T20) framework. This networked diplomacy fosters continuity and mitigates the effect of short-term political turbulence.

Indeed, the legacy of anti-apartheid solidarity in the US remains a powerful reservoir of goodwill. South African actors can—and must—engage with diverse US audiences, including those who do not share their worldviews. The country must broaden its reach beyond historical allies, engaging business groups, faith communities, and academic networks that can serve as conduits for diplomatic dialogue.

3.3.7  Countering misinformation and reframing the narrative

Another significant challenge is the proliferation of misinformation. This has manifested in public statements and even executive orders from the US accusing South Africa of human rights violations, land grabs, and anti-minority policies. These claims, largely unfounded, have had real diplomatic consequences, including the expulsion of ambassadors and legislative investigations.

South Africa must adopt a multi-pronged strategy to counteract such narratives. This includes direct engagement with critics, proactive public diplomacy, and mobilising its diaspora and international allies. Domestic outreach is equally important. Speaking with groups like AfriForum, Solidarity, and other Afrikaner organisations—not just to defend policies, but to listen and explain—is crucial for defusing disinformation.

Moreover, South Africa should work with figures who maintain influence in both societies, such as renowned sportspeople, business leaders, and cultural icons. These individuals can serve as informal ambassadors, reshaping perceptions and building trust.

3.3.8  Ambassadorial vacuums and strategic appointments

Currently, neither South Africa nor the US has an ambassador in the other’s capital. While this reflects diplomatic strain, it also presents an opportunity. South Africa must carefully consider the profile of its next ambassador—someone capable of engaging not only with policymakers but also with the business community, media, and civil society.

This is not a moment for panic but for strategic planning. The ambassadorial appointment should reflect South Africa’s long-term vision for the relationship and its evolving role in global affairs.

3.3.9  Conclusion

The relationship between South Africa and the United States is layered and multifaceted, marked by both cooperation and contestation. In 2025, as South Africa holds the G20 presidency, it must manage this relationship with strategic foresight and diplomatic agility. While the US may not prioritise the G20 or multilateralism in the current geopolitical climate, this should not deter South Africa from pursuing its broader goals of reforming global governance and promoting inclusive development.

Despite policy differences, the mutual economic dependency, robust civil society links, and shared democratic values offer a foundation for continued engagement. South Africa must maintain a multi-pronged strategy—combining diplomacy, economic partnerships, and public engagement—to assert its sovereignty, defend its interests, and shape a new geopolitical landscape.

This moment represents not only a challenge but also an opportunity for South Africa to reaffirm its role as a pivotal middle power in a changing world order. Through strategic engagement, pragmatic diplomacy, and diversified alliances, South Africa can turn this complex geopolitical moment into a defining one for its international standing.

3.4  Navigating Global Shifts: South Africa’s Foreign Policy in a Multipolar World

Hon. Alvin Botes, Deputy Minister of International Relations and Cooperation (South Africa)

South Africa’s foreign policy is currently being tested by a range of internal and external pressures—from domestic socio-economic challenges to major transformations in the global geopolitical order. In his address Deputy Minister Botes laid out the foundations of the country’s evolving foreign policy stance. The speech emphasised themes such as Pan-Africanism, the shift towards a multipolar world, the significance of trade relations, and the critical role of both state and non-state actors in advancing the African developmental agenda.

The speech offered a comprehensive analysis of how South Africa is navigating the increasingly complex global landscape while trying to uphold its developmental objectives and regional commitments.

3.4.1  Pan-Africanism as the ideological anchor

Pan-Africanism remains the ideological foundation of South Africa’s foreign policy, shaping its diplomatic engagements and multilateral alignments.

The speech opened with a tribute to the late Sam Nujoma, founding President of Namibia and a towering figure in Africa’s decolonial struggle. Quoting Nujoma’s call for Africans to support each other and heal the wounds of colonialism themselves, the deputy minister reaffirmed that African unity and agency must underpin any foreign policy discourse.

This ideological commitment manifests through South Africa’s support of the African Union’s Agenda 2063, particularly its emphasis on regional peace, prosperity, and integration. The AU’s “Silencing the Guns” initiative is framed as a vital step toward creating a conducive environment for development. Without security and stability no meaningful progress can be made on economic transformation or social upliftment.

3.4.2  The global order in flux: From Unipolarity to Multipolarity

The deputy minister outlined the erosion of unipolarity and the emergence of a new multipolar world order, in which power is more evenly distributed among various global actors. He traced this development historically, beginning with the Cold War era’s ideological bipolarity—between the capitalist bloc led by the United States and the socialist bloc led by the Soviet Union.

Following the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991, the United States emerged as the singular global hegemon. However, as the U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio noted in a referenced quote, this unipolarity was an anomaly—a product of specific historical conditions. The world is now reverting to a more balanced configuration, featuring multiple centres of power including China, Russia, the European Union, and emerging middle powers like India and South Africa.

This shift has deep implications for global governance and multilateralism. While South Africa supports a rules-based international order, the speaker warned of a "spirited pushback" against multilateralism from some quarters, particularly in the West. He highlighted recent U.S. withdrawals from key multilateral organisations and agreements as a cause for concern.

3.4.3  Multilateralism and global governance reform

South Africa envisions itself as a champion of multilateralism. The country’s diplomatic efforts are increasingly focused on reforming global governance institutions to make them more inclusive and representative of the Global South. The UN, World Trade Organisation (WTO), International Monetary Fund (IMF), and World Bank continue to reflect outdated power structures, often marginalising African voices.

The upcoming 80th anniversary of the United Nations in 2025 is seen as a critical opportunity to renew global commitments to cooperation and justice. South Africa has been vocal at forums like the Summit of the Future and UN General Assembly (UNGA) in advocating for transformation of these institutions.

What should also be stressed is the need for genuine multilateralism that goes beyond rhetoric. Token representation of African countries without meaningful influence must give way to more equitable participation in global decision-making.

3.4.4  The Strategic imperative of BRICS+

South Africa’s participation in BRICS+ — an expanded configuration that now includes Egypt, Ethiopia, the United Arab Emirates and Iran — has elevated its profile but also increased scrutiny. The deputy minister observed that this membership brings both opportunities and challenges. It enhances South Africa’s bargaining power but may also expose it to punitive trade measures from Western powers wary of BRICS' growing influence.

For instance, proposed U.S. tariffs on imports from developing countries—20% for most and up to 60% for China—could indirectly affect BRICS+ partners like South Africa. The country must therefore prepare for a more confrontational global economic environment where alignments carry real economic consequences.

3.4.5  Revisiting AGOA and the AfCFTA Imperative

The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), a key trade instrument enacted by the U.S., is up for review in September. South Africa has historically benefited from AGOA, but Botes suggested a reassessment will be made of its current structure.

As Africa moves toward greater economic integration through the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), unilateral trade arrangements must align with the continent’s collective interests.

The concern is that AGOA, in its current form, may undermine AfCFTA if it encourages bilateralism over multilateralism. Some African states have already begun negotiating separate trade deals with the U.S., bypassing the AfCFTA framework. Such practices, the speaker warned, threaten to fragment Africa’s economic vision and reduce its collective leverage.

3.4.6  The Sahel and non-state actors in African security

Africa’s security landscape is increasingly influenced by both external powers and non-state actors. Deputy Minister Botes cited examples from the Sahel and Djibouti, regions that host multiple foreign military bases—including from the U.S., China, and France. These deployments, while ostensibly aimed at stabilising conflict zones, also reflect a contest for strategic influence.

Non-state actors are also gaining prominence. However, their role is often ambiguous. While some contribute positively to peacebuilding and development, other - like the former Wagner Group, Blackwater, or domestic entities like AfriForum and Solidarity - are accused of distorting national narratives or promoting destabilising agendas. He emphasised that South Africa must redefine the role of such actors, ensuring they support rather than subvert the country's foreign policy objectives.

3.4.7  Economic diplomacy and industrial development

Economic diplomacy is a cornerstone of South Africa’s international engagement. The country’s largest bilateral trading partner is the People’s Republic of China, with trade commitments totalling over R100 billion in recent years. However, the deputy minister stressed that trade volumes alone are insufficient—what matters is their impact on domestic employment, skills development, and local industrialisation.

South Africa must insist on value addition and beneficiation in its trade deals, especially with strategic partners. For instance, the automotive sector’s growth has historically depended on G7 investment, creating a paradox where former colonial powers now play a vital role in industrialisation. The challenge is to convert this dependency into a mutually beneficial relationship that aligns with national interests.

3.4.8  The dilemma of bilateralism within multilateral aspirations

Botes highlighted a critical tension: while Africa champions collective development through the AfCFTA, many countries continue to pursue bilateral trade deals with external powers. This undermines the spirit of Pan-Africanism and weakens the continent’s bargaining position in global forums.

South Africa finds itself in a difficult position, torn between advancing its national interests and preserving continental unity. He argued that true Pan-Africanism must be reflected not just in rhetoric but in economic strategy. Countries must resist the temptation to pursue short-term gains at the expense of long-term regional solidarity.

3.4.9  Ubuntu diplomacy and core foreign policy principles

Ubuntu - a Southern African philosophy centred on human dignity, mutual respect, and solidarity - serves as the moral compass for South African diplomacy. The deputy minister reiterated that the country’s foreign policy must reflect Ubuntu principles, particularly in its treatment of vulnerable populations and engagement with international crises.

This commitment was evident in South Africa’s submission to the International Court of Justice in 2024 regarding allegations of genocide. He called this act a moral high point, reflecting the country's ethical obligations on the global stage.

3.4.10  Domestic realities and international posturing

Domestic conditions continue to influence foreign policy decisions. Deputy Minister Botes pointed to high unemployment, poverty, and inequality as national grievances that foreign policy must address. He criticised groups that promote false narratives - like the claim of a white genocide in South Africa - as distorting public discourse and diverting attention from real challenges.

Official statistics from Stats SA reveal that 73% of white households fall within the top income quintile, contradicting claims of systemic marginalisation. He called for a clear and honest portrayal of South Africa’s socio-economic realities as a foundation for both domestic cohesion and international credibility.

3.4.11  G20 Presidency and global responsibilities

As South Africa chairs the G20, it faces the responsibility of representing African interests on a global platform. Botes welcomed the U.S.'s willingness to participate in the G20 Troika but emphasised the need for sustained engagement and leadership. He noted that U.S. disengagement from global forums has weakened multilateral cooperation and called for a recommitment to shared global responsibilities.

3.4.12  The SDG crisis and Africa’s developmental lag

Only 17% of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have been met globally, with just five years remaining before the 2030 deadline. Africa’s performance, in particular, is hindered by conflict, weak institutions, and underinvestment. The deputy minister  emphasised the need for intensified efforts from both African states and international partners.

South Africa expects the new African Union Commission leadership to play a transformative role in achieving Agenda 2063 and SDG targets. The AU must act as a unifying force and advocate for Africa’s interests in global governance structures.

3.4.13  Conclusion: A foreign policy of balance and vision

South Africa’s foreign policy is defined by its quest for balance - between competing global powers, between multilateralism and national sovereignty, and between ideological commitments and practical realities. The country seeks to leverage its middle-power status to advocate for a more just, equitable, and multipolar world order.

While significant challenges lie ahead - including trade tensions, regional instability, and domestic socio - Africa remains committed to a foreign policy grounded in Pan-Africanism, Ubuntu diplomacy, and strategic autonomy.

Deputy Minister Botes’ speech offered a roadmap for the future, one in which South Africa asserts itself not as a passive participant, but as a principled actor in global affairs, deeply invested in the fate of Africa and the broader international community.