Diplomatic tensions between South Africa and the United States have reached a boiling point as President Cyril Ramaphosa announced that his country would not lobby other G20 nations to boycott the United States’ 2026 G20 presidency meetings, despite South Africa’s exclusion from the upcoming summit. Speaking in Pretoria on December 4, 2025, Ramaphosa made it clear: “We will not be lobbying anyone, countries must take their own decisions.” His remarks, reported by Central News and echoed by other outlets, signal a deliberate step back from confrontation, even as the rift between the two nations deepens.
The controversy erupted after the US, under President Donald Trump, unveiled a rebranded “New G20” for its 2026 hosting year—explicitly excluding South Africa from all participation. This move follows a year marked by diplomatic frostiness, culminating in the US’s near-total boycott of the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Johannesburg last month. That summit was historic in itself: it was the first time the G20 had convened on African soil, and the glaring absence of the US delegation was impossible to ignore.
The roots of the dispute can be traced to the chaotic close of South Africa’s G20 tenure in November. According to France 24, President Ramaphosa presided over the summit at the Sandton Convention Centre, facing an empty seat where the US delegation should have been. President Trump had pulled out at the last minute, citing “widely discredited” claims of a “white genocide” in South Africa—allegations centered on farm murders and land expropriation policies that experts and courts have repeatedly debunked as exaggerated or false.
In a symbolic gesture that captured the mood, Ramaphosa ended the session by passing the presidency baton to an “empty chair” rather than to a US official. South African officials had offered a protocol workaround—a handover via junior diplomats—but Washington dismissed it as insufficient. The US boycott extended to preparatory meetings, including the crucial Sherpa tracks on trade and climate, and the US even pressured Pretoria against issuing a joint declaration, a core G20 tradition. Undeterred, the other 18 members pressed on, adopting a communique that highlighted global south priorities like debt relief and equitable vaccine access, using language the US had opposed as “anti-consensus.”
Tensions only escalated in December. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a scathing blog post titled “America Welcomes a New G20,” lambasted South Africa’s presidency as one defined by the “politics of grievance.” He announced that the 2026 summit in Miami—timed to coincide with America’s 250th anniversary—would proceed without South Africa. Rubio accused Ramaphosa’s administration of “weaponising” the presidency to push progressive agendas, echoing Trump’s earlier claims about Afrikaner farmers facing “large-scale killings and land grabs.”
Ramaphosa responded in a national address on December 2, calling the exclusion “regrettable” and pinning it on “baseless, false allegations” spread by disinformation campaigns. “Despite our efforts to reset relations through dialogue and partnership, punitive measures persist based on distortions about our country,” he said, reiterating South Africa’s commitment to multilateralism but making it clear there would be no begging for inclusion. As he put it, South Africa would pause its active G20 involvement until the United Kingdom assumes the presidency in 2027, describing the hiatus as a “commercial break” to let tempers cool.
The immediate flashpoint is the G20 Sherpa process, the behind-the-scenes negotiations led by senior diplomats that shape each year’s agenda on everything from economic stability to climate change. Under the US presidency, the first Sherpa and Finance Track meetings are scheduled for December 15-16 in Washington. South Africa’s exclusion means its diplomats won’t have a seat at the table, potentially sidelining African perspectives on issues like climate finance and global institutional reform. Critics argue this “New G20” risks turning the bloc into a Western echo chamber, diluting its traditional role as a bridge between rich and poor nations.
Ramaphosa’s decision not to lobby for a boycott is calculated restraint, avoiding accusations of hypocrisy after dismissing Trump’s own boycott tactics as ineffective. “Boycott politics never work,” he quipped earlier, noting that the Johannesburg summit succeeded without Washington and even drew in non-G20 guests like UN Secretary-General António Guterres.
Yet, concerns linger at home. The Democratic Alliance, South Africa’s main opposition party, has warned that Pretoria’s stance could further isolate the country. Civil society groups, such as the Institute for Global Dialogue, are urging quiet diplomacy to rally EU allies like Germany and France—nations that attended Johannesburg in force—for behind-the-scenes pressure on the Trump administration. According to Central News, Ramaphosa’s broader strategy is to sit out 2026 and regroup for the UK presidency in 2027, where he hopes for a warmer reception and a renewed push for inclusive reforms.
Domestically, the saga has bolstered Ramaphosa’s image as a defender of sovereignty. In his address, he highlighted the more than 200 ministerial meetings hosted during South Africa’s G20 presidency and pointedly noted, “All members attended every meeting except one.” But the diplomatic rift carries tangible risks: US-South Africa ties, once anchored by trade agreements worth billions, now teeter. The Trump administration has hinted at visa curbs and possible aid cuts for vital HIV programs—support that benefits eight million South Africans. Economists warn that the chill could shave 0.5% off GDP growth if it spills over into investment flows.
Not all voices in South Africa are as measured as Ramaphosa’s. Fikile Mbalula, secretary-general of the African National Congress (ANC), accused the Trump administration of attempting to isolate South Africa for “imperialist reasons” rooted in misinformation. “South Africans, black and white, have been telling the American administration there is nothing called genocide in South Africa,” Mbalula said, as reported by IOL Politics. He emphasized the country’s strong democratic record, noting, “No dictatorship, flourishing democracy.” Mbalula also criticized a local “fringe” that had traveled to the US to make damaging claims, and he warned that the US boycott and pressure on human rights issues were attempts at economic and diplomatic isolation. “These are the consequences we are reaping today as a result of their actions,” he said, affirming the ANC’s commitment to defending South Africa’s sovereignty. Mbalula expressed confidence that the current tensions would not last, saying, “Trump will be there for two years. This madness will go.”
Internationally, the response has been cautious. Brazil, next in line after the UK, has stayed neutral, while India called the US move “unhelpful” but stopped short of endorsing a boycott. The European Union’s Ursula von der Leyen, who attended the Johannesburg summit, stressed the G20’s “irreplaceable” role, hinting at the need for dialogue and inclusivity. According to Al Jazeera, the G20 remains a powerhouse, representing 85% of global GDP and two-thirds of the world’s population—a forum too significant for any one nation to dominate or fracture easily.
As the dust settles, South Africa’s decision to take a step back—rather than escalate—may prove to be the wisest course. The world will be watching closely to see whether the G20 can weather this storm and return to the business of global cooperation when the UK takes the helm in 2027.