Washington: A high-stakes meeting at the White House between U.S. President Donald Trump and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, intended to ease tensions between the two nations, took a sharp turn when Trump made controversial claims regarding the alleged "persecution" of white farmers in South Africa.
The meeting followed a week after the U.S. granted asylum to 59 white South Africans, mostly Afrikaners, citing concerns over their safety—a move that sparked outrage and unease in South Africa.
President Ramaphosa, seeking to restore diplomatic ties, traveled to Washington to de-escalate the situation. However, what began as a cordial Oval Office meeting soon spiraled into discomfort and confrontation.
During a joint press conference, Trump stunned Ramaphosa by alleging there was ongoing "white genocide" in South Africa. These claims have been widely debunked and dismissed by South African authorities and international observers. Trump played a video presentation showing thousands of white crosses near a roadside protest, claiming they marked the graves of murdered white farmers. However, he admitted the footage's origin was unclear and that it had not been verified.
The South African leader attempted to counter Trump's narrative by emphasizing that South Africa's democracy includes multiple voices, including opposition parties whose views do not reflect official government policy. He pointed out that the inflammatory rhetoric in the video belonged to Julius Malema, a fringe opposition figure, and not the ruling party.
“We have a democracy made up of many voices,” Ramaphosa explained. “Our government does not support these statements. That party is a small minority.”
Trying to impress Donald Trump, Ramaphosa brought along two famed South African golfers—Ernie Els and Retief Goosen—as well as a photobook of South African golf courses to appeal to Trump’s known interest in the sport. He also referenced prominent white South African businessman Johann Rupert to reinforce his point: “If there was a genocide, these three would not be here.”
However, Trump interjected sharply: “But you let them buy land, and when they do, they get killed—and no one does anything about it.”
Ramaphosa calmly refuted the accusation: “No.”
Trump referred to a controversial South African law passed earlier in the year that allows the government to expropriate land, in some cases without compensation. Though the law remains on the books, Ramaphosa clarified that no land has yet been seized under it.
Ramaphosa further stressed that South Africa’s high crime rate affects all communities, not just white farmers: “Most victims of crime are Black South Africans, not white.”
Pointing out the double standards of foreign policy and frustrated with Trump's behavior, while trying to change the mood of the conversation, Ramaphosa sarcastically joked, “I’m sorry, but I can’t give you a plane as a gift,” satirizing the news that Trump had accepted a luxury Boeing 747 from Qatar to be retrofitted as a new Air Force One, which had sparked significant criticism in the U.S.
Journalists at the meeting noted that while Trump continued pressing Ramaphosa on the issue, the South African president remained composed, avoiding the kind of tense exchange Trump previously had with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
South African opposition leader Julius Malema later mocked the meeting on X (formerly Twitter), stating: “It was a gathering of old men in Washington talking about me. Not much intelligence was provided on so-called white genocide.”
Former U.S. ambassador to South Africa, Helena Humphrey, who served under President Obama, described the meeting as "genuinely embarrassing," saying it was clear Trump had staged the encounter to publicly humiliate Ramaphosa.
Social media reactions were mixed. One user, Owais Hameed, noted, “The African President’s joke may have triggered laughter, but it was also a lament for the unjust global order.”
Another wrote, “Trump sees ‘genocide’ in South Africa but not in Gaza.”
As hostile attitudes and inappropriate behavior toward international leaders are becoming a norm at the White House, it is becoming increasingly difficult for foreign heads of state to engage in dialogue there. This raises the question: Will White House ever be able to restore it's reputation ?
