FDD Action’s Issue Toolkit: Holding South Africa Accountable

South Africa’s ruling African National Congress (ANC) is no longer a neutral partner.  It has increasingly embraced a foreign policy agenda that aligns with U.S. adversaries and lends legitimacy and support to U.S.-designated terrorist groups.

Dive deeper: In a recent New York Post op-ed, FDD’s Elaine Dezenski and Max Meizlish lay out how South Africa’s foreign policy shift toward authoritarian regimes poses a growing threat to U.S. interests. Read more here.

South Africa’s current foreign policy trajectory is incompatible with a productive partnership with the United States. Under the ANC, Pretoria has aligned itself with America’s top adversaries and embraced actions that directly challenge U.S. interests and values. If South Africa wants to maintain a privileged relationship with Washington, a fundamental strategic realignment is urgently needed.

1. The ANC’s ties to terror: South Africa’s ruling ANC has developed increasingly public and supportive ties with U.S.-designated terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah. The country has hosted senior Hamas officials, elevated Hamas’s unjust legal claims against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and promotes anti-Israel narratives in its foreign policy messaging. South Africa’s government has adopted a posture indistinguishable from pro-Hamas advocacy. Its actions are not just symbolic, as they provide international legitimacy to terrorist groups that pose a direct challenge to U.S. interests and personnel.

2. The ANC’s military and diplomatic cooperation with America’s adversaries: Pretoria has taken major steps to deepen military and strategic cooperation with America’s chief adversaries, including China, Russia, and Iran. South Africa conducted joint naval exercises with Russia and China in early 2023, a move that coincided with the anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It has positioned itself as a leading voice within BRICS, an economic and diplomatic bloc increasingly used to counter U.S. influence and promote alternative authoritarian models. The ANC has also expressed an openness to nuclear cooperation agreements with Iran and Russia, despite clear U.S. warnings about the risks of proliferation and alignment with sanctioned regimes.

3. The ANC’s lack of financial transparency: South Africa remains on the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey list due to its failure to address key deficiencies in combating money laundering, terrorism financing, and systemic corruption. The ANC has not demonstrated the political will to hold enablers of illicit finance accountable, particularly when such networks intersect with politically connected elites or foreign adversaries like Iran. This creates a permissive environment for malign actors to exploit South Africa’s financial system to evade sanctions or funnel resources to terrorist proxies. FATF cited insufficient risk-based supervision, weak enforcement actions, and vulnerabilities in the non-profit and legal sectors. Until there is demonstrable progress, continued U.S. engagement risks legitimizing a financial system that enables America’s enemies.

4. The ANC’s anti-Israel bias and lawfare: The ANC has made antagonizing Israel a central pillar of its international diplomacy, often echoing the propaganda of terrorist groups while dismissing Israel’s right to self-defense. South Africa’s legal case at the ICJ accusing Israel of genocide, while ignoring the October 7 Hamas massacre, is a gross distortion of international law and a betrayal of the norms that underpin the rules-based order. South African-supported NGOs consistently hijack international forums, such as the UN and ICC, to delegitimize Israel and shield terror groups from accountability. These efforts do not reflect concern for human rights. Rather, they represent a strategic campaign of lawfare intended to isolate America’s closest Middle Eastern ally. Left unchallenged, this behavior risks normalizing anti-Israel extremism in multilateral institutions.

—

President Cyril Ramaphosa addresses the nation on South Africa’s Foreign Policy and upcoming BRICS Summit (Photo by the Government of South Africa)

5 Ways South Africa Undermines U.S. Interests – and What Must Change

NEW: FDD’s latest insight outlines five critical ways South Africa is undermining U.S. interests, from deepening ties with authoritarian regimes to enabling illicit finance, and calls for a strategic U.S. response. Read more here.

—

The United States Must Push for Accountability

Faced with South Africa’s deepening alignment with authoritarian regimes and terrorist organizations, U.S. policymakers have begun to reassess the bilateral relationship. Both Congress and the Trump administration have taken concrete steps to hold the ANC-led government accountable and impose consequences. 

• Congress has increasingly scrutinized South Africa’s foreign policy posture. In 2024, the U.S. House passed an amendment to the FY25 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) requiring a full review of the U.S.–South Africa relationship, specifically focusing on the country’s growing military ties with China, Russia, and Iran. While the amendment was not included in the final NDAA, the conference report included language that mandates a formal briefing to Congress that must assess South Africa’s defense cooperation with adversarial states and determine whether its military activities align with U.S. strategic interests.

• Additionally, congressional leaders have raised concerns regarding South Africa’s eligibility for the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). Senator Jim Risch, now Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, criticized the Biden administration’s decision to host the AGOA Forum in South Africa, citing the country’s deepening ties with Russia, Iran, and Hamas. Risch argued that South Africa’s actions undermine necessary eligibility safeguards in the AGOA statute and called for robust oversight of AGOA’s eligibility criteria. Other members of Congress should raise these concerns publicly as well.

• The Trump administration has also made clear that business as usual with South Africa is no longer acceptable. In February 2025, President Trump signed a sweeping executive order targeting South Africa for its “egregious” actions against U.S. interests and values, including its case against Israel at the ICJ, deepening ties with Iran, and government-sponsored racial discrimination. The order halted all U.S. foreign assistance to South Africa, citing concerns over land expropriation without compensation and systemic bias against white South Africans. It also directed a full review of immigration policies to facilitate refugee resettlement for Afrikaners facing persecution. The EO marked a sharp turn in U.S. policy, coupling diplomatic pressure with tangible consequences.

• In a rare diplomatic rebuke, the Trump administration also expelled South Africa’s Ambassador to the United States, Ebrahim Rasool, in March 2025. Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared Rasool persona non grata, accusing him of being a “race-baiting politician” who harbors animosity towards America. Rasool was given 72 hours to leave the United States. Rasool had a long history of embracing terror groups like Hamas, previously hosting senior Hamas operatives and even praising the group’s founder. The action underscored the administration’s commitment to holding South Africa accountable for actions hostile to U.S. interests.

—

Where We Go from Here: Increasing U.S. Pressure

If South Africa wishes to preserve access to U.S. markets, investment, and diplomatic engagement, its leaders must make deliberate and measurable changes. 

President Ramaphosa cannot use this visit to Washington to paper over South Africa’s growing list of malign activities or defend its foreign policy alignment with America’s enemies.

• Symbolic gestures or vague promises are not enough. The ANC’s track record, to include welcoming Hamas officials, deepening ties with the IRGC and Kremlin, and weaponizing international law against U.S. allies, requires a direct and sustained U.S. response.

The United States should make clear that the health of the bilateral relationship depends on South Africa’s actions, not its rhetoric.

• If Pretoria wants to preserve trade preferences, attract investment, and remain a credible partner, it must dismantle its terror ties, end its lawfare on Israel, and reverse its strategic drift toward adversarial powers. This visit should be an opportunity for a course correction, not a photo-op.

Congress should press for full enforcement of the executive order and condition all future engagement with South Africa on real progress.

• This includes launching hearings on South Africa’s actions at the International Court of Justice, publicly evaluating its AGOA eligibility, and introducing legislation that links trade preferences to foreign policy alignment. Congress should also push for stronger Treasury enforcement on terror finance networks operating within or through South Africa.

• Congress should ensure it receives the FY25 NDAA-mandated defense cooperation briefing. It should be treated as a baseline, not a conclusion—follow-up measures, including regular mandatory reporting on South Africa’s military partnerships with Russia, Iran, and China, are essential.

The Trump administration should continue leveraging every diplomatic and economic tool available to confront South Africa’s malign posture.

• This includes expanding targeted sanctions against officials complicit in hosting Hamas or aiding Iran’s nuclear and military networks, suspending defense cooperation agreements, and urging allies to take coordinated action within the UN and international financial institutions.

• AGOA benefits could even remain frozen until South Africa meets clear benchmarks: cutting ties with Hamas and Hezbollah, ending nuclear cooperation with Iran, withdrawing its ICJ case, and recommitting to transparent governance and financial oversight.

• The administration could also deepen engagement with democratic opposition voices and civil society leaders in South Africa as a long-term investment in values-based diplomacy.

—

Additional Resources

• Pressure and Accountability: “South Africa Needs the Trump Treatment,” Mark Dubowitz, Elaine Dezenski | The Wall Street Journal, January 10, 2025

• Investigative Analysis: “Friends in Low Places? Behind South Africa’s New Genocide Case Against Israel,” Toby Dershowitz, Max Friedman | RealClearInvestigations, March 18, 2024

• Financial Oversight: “5 Reasons Why South Africa Must Remain on FATF’s Financial Crime Watchlist,” Max Meizlish | FDD Analysis, February 12, 2025

• Counterterrorism Policy: “South Africa Must Change Course on Hamas,” Toby Dershowitz, David May, Connor Pfeiffer | FDD Analysis, July 24, 2024

• Geopolitical Alignments: “South Africa’s Ties with U.S. Adversaries Continue Unabated,” David May, Connor Pfeiffer | FDD Policy Brief, September 11, 2024

• International Lawfare: “Hamas Praises New Anti-Israel Lawfare Coalition of Nations” | FDD Flash Brief, February 7, 2025

• Diplomatic Controversy: “Hamas-Supporting Grandson of Mandela Unable to Enter UK,” David May, Toby Dershowitz | FDD Policy Brief, October 11, 2024

• Iran Relations: “Embracing Iran, South Africa’s ANC Claims ‘We Can’t Hide Our Friends’,” David May | FDD Policy Brief, March 7, 2025

• Nuclear Cooperation: “Risking Sanctions, South Africa Welcomes Nuclear Cooperation with Russia and Iran,” Max Meizlish, Alexander St. Leger | FDD Policy Brief, February 24, 2025