What the United States says about South Africa

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has launched a scathing attack on the South African government, defending Washington’s decision to exclude the country from deliberations for the 2026 G20, which will be hosted by the United States.

Last week, the US sent invitations to all G20 members except South Africa to attend the first sherpas’ meeting of its G20 presidency, scheduled for 15–16 December 2025 in Washington. 

The move cements President Donald Trump’s recent announcement that South Africa will not be invited to the 2026 G20 Leaders’ Summit in Miami.

Rubio said South Africa had squandered the promise it held at the dawn of democracy, arguing that the current government has “chosen grievance over growth”.

“South Africa entered the post-Cold War era with strong institutions, excellent infrastructure, and global goodwill,” Rubio said. 

“Sadly, Mandela’s successors have replaced reconciliation with redistributionist policies that discouraged investment and drove South Africa’s most talented citizens abroad.”

He accused the ANC-led government of crippling the private sector through racial quota policies and allowing corruption to “bankrupt the state”.

“Rather than take responsibility for its failings, the radical ANC-led government has sought to scapegoat its own citizens and the United States,” Rubio said. 

“Its appetite for racism and tolerance for violence against its Afrikaner citizens have become embedded as core domestic policies.”

Rubio further claimed that South Africa’s foreign policy stances — including ties with Iran and what he described as “entertaining Hamas sympathisers” — had shifted Pretoria away from longstanding US partnerships.

Rubio also referenced the United States’ boycott of the recent G20 meetings hosted under South Africa’s presidency, which Washington described as overly politicised.

“The politics of grievance carried over to South Africa’s Presidency of the G20 this month,” Rubio argued. 

“It was an exercise in spite, division, and radical agendas that have nothing to do with economic growth.”

He accused South Africa of ignoring US objections, sidelining Western inputs, and even “doxing US officials working on these negotiations.” “It fundamentally tarnished the G20’s reputation,” Rubio said.

No seat for South Africa — for now

Rubio said the exclusion of South Africa from the 2026 summit was a direct consequence of these developments.

“For these reasons, President Trump and the United States will not be extending an invitation,” he said. “There is a place for good-faith disagreement, but not dishonesty or sabotage.”

Rubio stressed that Washington distinguished between the ANC government and South African citizens.

“The United States supports the people of South Africa, but not its radical ANC-led government,” he said. 

“When South Africa decides it has made the tough decisions needed to fix its broken system, the United States will have a seat for it at our table. Until then, America will be forging ahead with a new G20.”

South Africa responds

South Africa’s International Relations Minister Ronald Lamola noted Rubio’s public criticism of South Africa’s governance, foreign policy positions, and its handling of the 2025 G20 presidency.

While congratulating the US on assuming the G20 chair, he argued that some of Rubio’s assertions required “clarification”.

Lamola rejected the US decision to leave South Africa off the invitation list for the first sherpas’ meeting, saying the G20 is “a forum of equals”.

“No single member of the G20 has a unilateral right to exclude South Africa,” he wrote.

Responding to Rubio’s accusation that South Africa’s G20 presidency was divisive and ignored US input, Lamola said the US had chosen not to attend several meetings and therefore could not accurately assess the proceedings.

“The notion of our ‘sabotaging’ consensus is incorrect,” Lamola stated.

He cited positive feedback from several delegations, including Germany, India and the IMF, to argue that many participants viewed South Africa’s presidency favourably.

However, he did not address Rubio’s specific claims regarding alleged procedural obstruction and the leaking of US officials’ details.

On domestic policy, Lamola disputed Rubio’s claims that the South African government tolerated racism or violence.

He framed South Africa’s redress and land reform policies as constitutionally mandated, but acknowledged that the country continues to face economic and governance challenges.

Lamola also pointed to long-term improvements in access to basic services such as electricity and water, while conceding that “no nation can undo centuries of inequality overnight”.

Despite clear disagreements, Lamola said Pretoria remained willing to maintain diplomatic engagement. “We remain open to dialogue,” he wrote.