The G20 Summit – the US vs South Africa
The Group of 20 (G20) is a group of 19 countries (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Türkiye, United Kingdom and United States) and two regional bodies: the European Union and the African Union (as of 2023). The G20 members represent around 85% of the global GDP, over 75% of the global trade, and about two-thirds of the world population.
The G20 Summit is held annually, under the leadership of a rotating Presidency. The G20 initially focused largely on broad macroeconomic issues, but it has since expanded its agenda to inter-alia include trade, sustainable development, health, agriculture, energy, environment, climate change, and anti-corruption.
The 2025 G20 Summit will be held in Johannesburg, South Africa (for the first time). It will be the twentieth meeting of the G20, and it will take place from the 22nd to the 23rd of November 2025.
The G20 Theme for 2025
The theme for this year is Solidarity, Equality, Sustainability -
“Through solidarity, we can create an inclusive future centred on people. Solidarity will allow us to develop our societies in a way that reflects our shared humanity. In our interconnected world, the challenges faced by one nation impact all nations.
By promoting equality, we strive to ensure fair treatment and equal opportunities for all individuals and nations, regardless of their economic status, gender, race, geographic location or any other characteristic.
Sustainability involves meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
The United States – on the 6th of February 2025 – through Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that he would not attend the G20 summit in Johannesburg, casting doubts on the ability of South Africa to preside over the G20 Summit come November this year.
His decision to skip the summit has also raised doubts about whether President Donald Trump will attend the G20 in South Africa in November. And with tensions between South Africa and the United States as they are, even more doubt has managed to creep in.
Rubio posted on X on the 5th of February –
“I will NOT attend the G20 summit in Johannesburg. South Africa is doing very bad things. Expropriating private property. Using G20 to promote ‘solidarity, equality, & sustainability’. In other words: DEI and climate change. My job is to advance America’s national interests, not waste taxpayer money or coddle anti-Americanism.”
Solidarity, equality and sustainability” are the themes South Africa has chosen for its presidency and Rubio has now dismissed these as “DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) and climate change”, which are both anathema to the Trump administration.
In response International Relations and Cooperation Minister Ronald Lamola responded calmly but firmly to Rubio’s announcement –
“We are a sovereign and democratic country committed to human dignity, equality, and rights, championing non-racialism and non-sexism while placing our Constitution and the rule of law at the forefront.
There is no arbitrary dispossession of land/private property. This law is similar to the eminent domain laws,” he added, referring to laws of most countries, including the US, which allow the state to expropriate land in some circumstances.
Solidarity/Ubuntu promotes collective problem-solving. Our G20 Presidency is not confined to just climate change but also equitable treatment for nations of the Global South, ensuring an equal global system for all.
These are important principles that we remain open to pursue and engage the United States on.”
South Africa has held the G20 Presidency from 1 December 2024 to 30 November 2025 (only five years before the deadline of the United Nations (UN) 2030 Agenda) and was meant to hand over the reigns to the United States in November.
South Africa and the United States
We have already spoken about some of the issues that the United States has with South Africa, starting with the Expropriation Act as well as the Starlink Saga and the fact that Elon Musk has claimed that he cannot operate Starlink in South Africa because he isn’t Black.
But having an issue with South Africa and actually acting are two very different things. Since the 6th of February, when Rubio stated that he would not be attending the G20 Summit in Johannesburg, Trump signed an Executive Order on South Africa on the 7th of February. This order halts all US Aid to South Africa and proposes prioritising the resettlement of Afrikaner refugees in the US, citing concerns over land expropriation policies and diplomatic tensions.
On the 14th of March, South African ambassador to the United States, Ebrahim Rasool was declared persona non grata by the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and was told that he “is no longer welcome in our great country.” Something that is rarely done, is meant as an insult to the country of the “expelled” ambassador and usually forces the ambassador to leave the country.
In fact, Rubio’s post on X stated –
“South Africa's Ambassador to the United States is no longer welcome in our great country. Ebrahim Rasool is a race-baiting politician who hates America and hates @POTUS
We have nothing to discuss with him and so he is considered PERSONA NON GRATA”.
But what did Rasool actually say?
Rasool had given a talk on a webinar that was organised by a South African think tank. In his talk, Rasool spoke in academic language of the Trump administration’s crackdowns on diversity and equity programs and immigration and mentioned the possibility of a US where white people soon would no longer be in the majority -
“The supremacist assault on incumbency, we see it in the domestic politics of the USA, the MAGA movement, the Make America Great Again movement, as a response not simply to a supremacist instinct, but to very clear data that shows great demographic shifts in the USA in which the voting electorate in the USA is projected to become 48% white”.
Rasool – upon his return to South Africa on the 23rd of March indicated that he stood by his comments, going on further to say that they were merely alerting intellectuals and political leaders in South Africa that the US and its politics had changed. According to CNN -
“It is not the US of Obama, it is not the US of Clinton, it is a different US and therefore our language must change,” Rasool said. “I would stand by my analysis because we were analyzing a political phenomenon, not a personality, not a nation, and not even a government.”
What does this all mean. Now?
As we are already aware the previous US Ambassador to South Africa, Reuben E. Brigety II, announced his resignation to South Africa (as is the usual custom when there’s a change in administration) on November the 18th, becoming effective on the 10th of January 2025.
Now neither country has an ambassador assigned to the other’s capital. And tensions between the two countries are getting worse.
But the thing is, if we look passed everything that’s going wrong in each country – all the while knowing full well that both nations are facing their own hurdles – and focus on what can actually be done (which is quite a bit), both the US and South Africa can perhaps start building a bridge. Not only towards one another but also towards a more helpful, more meaningful and more mutually beneficial partnership. Mutually beneficial being the emphasis.
To start, the two nations can, concurrently, nominate thoughtful, knowledgeable, well-respected, and experienced individuals as their respective diplomatic representatives. These two individuals cannot be angry agent provocateurs, eager to rain fire and brimstone down on their respective postings and the nations’ leaders. They must be, in a word, diplomats – but effective ones who can set a tone of moving forward, rather than rehashing either sides earlier comments.
But appointing diplomats is only half of the grand plan. There are – actually - real issues to deal with. Importantly, the two nations need to create a better framework for trade and commerce. Sadly, it should be accepted that the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) is all but good and gone for South Africa on GDP and per capita income grounds, even if the Act is renewed.
Ø AGOA is a US Trade Act, enacted on 18 May 2000 as Public Law 106 of the 200th Congress. The AGOA legislation has been renewed on different occasions, most recently in 2015, when its period of validity was extended to September 2025. The legislation significantly enhances market access to the US for qualifying Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries. It does that by allocating a special program indicator ('D') to approximately 6,800 tariff lines in the US tariff schedule, which allows US importers to clear such goods - sourced from eligible African countries - duty-free under AGOA.
According to the Daily Maverick, while there will be dislocations because of AGOA coming to an end, some recent studies argue the actual benefits from AGOA eligibility have been relatively minor. If so, their loss may not be the end of the world – if South Africa can find other ways to encourage and increase its exports to the US.
Accordingly, the task of the diplomats would be to negotiate a bilateral trade agreement that includes mechanisms to encourage trade and investment and to pare back impediments to that trade and investment. It wouldn’t be an easy task, that’s for sure, but it should be seen as one that clearly generates reciprocal benefits.
Finally, there must also be ways to rebuild the relationship on joint funding of research in health and medicine, but in ways that point directly to the benefits to US universities and research institutions.
If viewed in this light – of mutual understanding and reciprocal benefits - there is every reason to assume that the two nations can find a better joint footing. But this will require real work and engagement, as opposed to ritual posturing.
But a bilateral agreement of this nature will require some delicacy and skilful diplomacy – certainly more than what we have seen recently – as well as the equal participation of both countries.
South Africa has indicated on more than one occasion that they are willing to discuss ideas and thoughts and the possibility of moving forward (not verbatim) with the US. Let’s see if our great nation is willing to put their money where their mouth is…
As for the G20 summit, no one knows how that will proceed, whether Trump will be one of the attendees. Time will tell. Until then, we can only hope that the relationship between the US and South Africa (the US being the second biggest trading partner with South Africa) doesn’t deteriorate further.
We have taken the utmost care to ensure that this information is correct, but we urge you to consult with a suitably qualified legal practitioner who will be able to answer any questions you may have on the trade relations between South Africa and the United States. In this regard, we would be more than happy to support you. Please feel free to contact us to see how we can best assist.
We are a law firm that considers honesty to be core to our business. We are a law firm that will provide you with clear advice and smart strategies - always keeping your best interests at heart!
(Sources used and to whom we give thanks – Daily Maverick here, here and here; Mail & Guardian; Thomson Reuters; SABC; G20; G20 South Africa; CNN here and here and AGOA).
