As the world’s most influential economies prepare to gather in Johannesburg for the Group of 20 (G20) summit on November 22-23, a diplomatic storm has erupted between the United States and South Africa, casting a long shadow over the historic event. U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to boycott the summit has drawn sharp criticism from South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, who called the move “their loss” and questioned whether such boycott politics ever truly work.
“The United States needs to think again whether boycott politics actually works, because in my experience it doesn’t work,” Ramaphosa remarked to reporters outside the South African Parliament on November 12, 2025, according to the Associated Press. His words echoed a growing sense of frustration in Pretoria over what officials see as an unnecessarily antagonistic stance from Washington—one that threatens to undermine decades of diplomatic progress and economic cooperation.
The tensions began simmering last week, when President Trump announced on his Truth Social platform that no U.S. government official would attend the G20 summit in Johannesburg. He cited what he called a “total disgrace that the G20 will be held in South Africa,” referencing his claims—widely dismissed as baseless by both South African authorities and international observers—that white Afrikaner farmers are being violently persecuted and having their land confiscated on racial grounds. Trump wrote, “Afrikaners are being killed and slaughtered, and their land and farms are being illegally confiscated.”
These claims have been consistently rejected by the South African government and prominent Afrikaner leaders, who characterize them as the product of misinformation and a lack of understanding about the country’s complex post-apartheid policies. Ramaphosa’s administration has repeatedly insisted that allegations of a so-called “white genocide” are unfounded, and that land reform measures are aimed at correcting historical injustices rather than targeting any particular group.
“It is unfortunate that the United States decided not to attend the G20,” Ramaphosa said, according to Al Jazeera. “The United States by not being at the G20, one must never think that we are not going to go on with the G20. The G20 will go on, all other heads of state will be here. In the end we will take fundamental decisions and their absence is their loss.”
The G20 summit in Johannesburg marks the first time the event will be held on African soil—a milestone Ramaphosa had personally lobbied for during a meeting with Trump at the White House in May 2025. At that meeting, Ramaphosa urged the U.S. president to attend, highlighting the significance of Africa’s inclusion in global economic decision-making. Instead, the U.S. will be conspicuously absent, a move that many see as a missed opportunity for engagement at a critical moment.
“The U.S. is giving up the very important role that they should be playing as the biggest economy in the world,” Ramaphosa added. The U.S. is set to take over the rotating presidency of the G20 from South Africa at the end of this year, making its absence at the summit even more striking.
Relations between the U.S. and South Africa have been deteriorating for months, reaching their lowest point since the end of apartheid in 1994. In March 2025, Washington expelled the South African ambassador over comments related to Trump. Earlier in the year, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio skipped a G20 foreign ministers meeting in South Africa, criticizing the host’s policies as “anti-Americanism” and dismissing its focus on climate change and global inequality.
Trump’s rhetoric regarding South Africa has mirrored that of conservative media commentators in the U.S. since at least 2018. Alongside figures like South African-born tech billionaire Elon Musk, Trump has accused South Africa’s government of being racist against whites due to its affirmative action laws—measures designed to advance opportunities for the Black majority, long oppressed under apartheid. These accusations have found little traction among mainstream international observers, but they have nonetheless fueled political tensions and complicated bilateral relations.
The current diplomatic rift is further complicated by South Africa’s high-profile legal case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), where it has accused Israel of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. The U.S. has criticized Pretoria’s push for Israeli accountability, viewing it as a challenge to a key American ally. In October 2024, South Africa submitted 500 pages of evidence to the ICJ; Israel’s counterarguments are expected by January 2026, with oral hearings anticipated in 2027 and a final judgment likely in late 2027 or early 2028. The ICJ has issued three provisional measures ordering Israel to prevent genocidal acts and allow humanitarian aid into Gaza, but compliance has reportedly been limited.
Ramaphosa has made clear that the ongoing ceasefire in Gaza, which he claims Israel is violating daily, will not deter South Africa from pursuing its case. “We are determined to pursue justice,” he has said, underscoring Pretoria’s commitment to international law and human rights, even at the risk of further alienating Washington.
The G20 itself, formed in 1999, brings together the world’s richest and most influential developing economies—including the U.S., China, Russia, India, Japan, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the European Union—to address pressing issues affecting the global economy and international development. This year’s summit in Johannesburg was seen as a chance to spotlight African perspectives and priorities on the world stage. With the U.S. absent, many fear that critical discussions on economic recovery, climate change, and global inequality may proceed without the input of the world’s largest economy.
Some observers note that the U.S. boycott could have unintended consequences, potentially strengthening the resolve of other G20 members to forge ahead with or without American participation. “The G20 will go on,” Ramaphosa insisted, “all other heads of state will be here. In the end, we will take fundamental decisions and their absence is their loss.”
Trump’s decision has also prompted debate within the U.S. and abroad about the wisdom and effectiveness of boycotting major international forums. While some conservative commentators have applauded the move as a principled stand against perceived injustices, others warn that it risks marginalizing the U.S. and ceding influence to rivals at a time of global uncertainty.
For South Africa, the summit will proceed as planned, with leaders from across the globe expected to attend. Despite the diplomatic chill, Ramaphosa remains adamant that the G20’s core mission—to foster dialogue and cooperation among the world’s leading economies—will not be derailed. “The G20 will go on,” he repeated, “and the absence of the United States is their loss.”
As Johannesburg prepares to welcome the world, the absence of the U.S. delegation serves as a stark reminder of the challenges facing international cooperation in an era of rising geopolitical tensions and competing narratives. Whether the G20 can bridge these divides remains to be seen, but for now, the summit stands as a testament to both the promise and the perils of global engagement.
