Diplomatic sparks are flying after the United States, under President Donald Trump, announced that South Africa would not be allowed to attend the 2026 G20 Summit in Miami. This unprecedented move has triggered a global debate over the future of the G20, the balance of power among major economies, and the place of Africa on the world stage. The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), a prominent South African opposition party, has called for an international boycott of the summit, while China has stepped forward to back South Africa’s continued participation. The situation has become a flashpoint for broader questions about fairness, global cooperation, and the shifting alliances that define today’s geopolitics.
The controversy erupted in the wake of South Africa’s recent presidency of the G20, which culminated in Johannesburg hosting the summit from November 22 to 23, 2025. It was a historic moment—the first time the G20 met on African soil, and a chance for Pretoria to highlight the continent’s needs. Yet, the event was overshadowed by the absence of the United States. President Trump led a boycott, citing what he described as the violent persecution of the white Afrikaner minority in South Africa, including farm attacks and controversial land policies. No U.S. officials attended, and the Trump administration even attempted to block a final declaration from being issued at the summit. According to Central News, Argentina, under Trump ally Javier Milei, followed suit, opposing the declaration and skipping the event entirely.
Despite these dramatic absences, the other G20 members pressed forward, producing a 122-point Johannesburg Declaration that called for global action on conflict, debt relief, and climate change. The document made a single, cautious reference to the war in Ukraine, urging an end to global conflicts without naming names. The summit’s conclusion was awkward: President Cyril Ramaphosa banged the ceremonial gavel to close proceedings, but with no American present to accept the handover, the symbolism was stark. Later, the U.S. sent a lower-level embassy official in a last-minute gesture, but the diplomatic damage was already done.
The fallout continued as the United States assumed the G20 presidency on December 1, 2025. South Africa found itself excluded from the early planning meetings, scheduled for December 15-16 in Washington. The U.S. went so far as to remove all references to South Africa’s presidency and the Johannesburg Declaration from the official G20 website, effectively erasing Pretoria’s recent leadership from the group’s digital history. As Briefly News reported, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio made his government’s position clear: “The United States supports the people of South Africa, but not its radical ANC-led government.” He announced that America would form a “new G20” without South Africa until changes occur, and President Trump plans to invite Poland in Pretoria’s place for the Miami summit.
South Africa has not taken these developments lying down. President Ramaphosa has insisted that his country will not beg the U.S. to reconsider. “We will not be lobbying anyone; countries must take their own decisions,” he told reporters, reaffirming Pretoria’s intention to remain engaged with the G20 on its own terms. The government has indicated it will pursue diplomatic avenues to assert its right as a founding member to participate in future summits. Clayson Monyela, South Africa’s head of public diplomacy, publicly thanked China for its support, calling Beijing a steadfast friend during a turbulent time.
Indeed, China has emerged as South Africa’s most vocal ally in this dispute. On December 12, 2025, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian stated, “China supports South Africa in continuing to engage in G20 cooperation.” He praised Pretoria’s successful hosting of the Johannesburg summit and expressed hopes for continued collaboration in multilateralism, economic growth, and fair global governance. China’s ambassador to South Africa, Wu Peng, echoed these sentiments at a Johannesburg book launch, calling Pretoria “a crucial and constructive member” of the G20. At the summit itself, Premier Li Qiang led China’s delegation, advocating for global solidarity, free trade, and narrowing development gaps—without directly criticizing the U.S., but making clear where Beijing’s sympathies lie.
This backing is not just rhetorical. China has invested heavily in Africa, with solar panel imports to the continent rising 60% in the year leading up to June 2025, according to Central News. Beijing sees the U.S. retreat as an opportunity to expand its influence, especially among the so-called Global South. Other G20 members, including Russia, France, Germany, the UK, Japan, and Canada, also supported the Johannesburg Declaration, underscoring a broad consensus despite the U.S.-led boycott.
At home, the U.S. stance has drawn sharp criticism from South African political figures. EFF leader Julius Malema, speaking at a press briefing in Johannesburg on December 11, 2025, compared President Trump to Adolf Hitler and accused the U.S. of “imperialism and fascism” under Trump’s leadership. Malema called for a global boycott of the Miami summit if South Africa remains excluded, arguing that “excluding South Africa would be an act of authoritarianism.” He also accused the U.S. of war crimes and interference in Latin American elections, and lambasted Trump’s statements about taking control of the Gaza Strip. “Global solidarity is needed,” Malema warned, “and appeasing such actions would only weaken resistance.”
The EFF has a history of clashing with Trump, previously labeling him a “KKK leader” after the U.S. expelled South Africa’s ambassador Ebrahim Rasool and criticizing his comments about land reform and alleged genocide in South Africa. Malema has also claimed that Trump was “scared of him” due to his singing of the controversial “Kill the Boer” song, and denounced the U.S. leader as a liar after meetings with President Cyril Ramaphosa.
While the EFF and some in government advocate for closer ties with China and a pivot away from Washington, others caution that South Africa risks diplomatic isolation and economic harm. The U.S. has already cut aid, revoked visas for key South African officials, and threatened to block future trade perks. Critics warn that Pretoria may not be able to win a direct confrontation with the world’s largest economy, and that the current row could have far-reaching consequences for jobs, growth, and South Africa’s international standing.
For now, the future of the G20—and South Africa’s place within it—remains uncertain. The group’s informal structure gives the host broad leeway to set the agenda and guest list, and the current American administration appears determined to use that power to press its case. Yet, with China and other major economies rallying behind Pretoria, the U.S. risks fracturing the very forum meant to foster global cooperation. As President Ramaphosa put it, South Africa is “ready to rejoin the family of prosperous and free nations” on its own terms. Whether the G20 can survive this test of unity is a question the world will be watching closely in the months ahead.
With alliances shifting and rhetoric heating up, the next moves by Washington, Pretoria, and Beijing will shape not just the fate of the G20, but the broader contours of international order in a rapidly changing world.
