South Africa’s relationship with enemies of the United States has long concerned US officials. This concern has grown since President Joe Biden took office in 2020, and some policymakers in Congress and the Trump administration believe the South African government and the African National Congress (ANC) are corrupt to the level of state capture. Furthermore, some believe South Africa and the ANC have aligned with America’s major adversaries, supported US-designated terrorist organizations and their state sponsors, and violated the human rights of specific groups of South Africans. The US–South Africa relationship has suffered, to the point that the Trump administration cut all aid to South Africa.
Another option for deterring the ANC through targeted action is imposing Global Magnitsky sanctions on South African individuals and entities. This option has gained traction in recent weeks. But US agencies do not give members of Congress the kind of information that policymakers would need to make this decision. To rectify this, Congress should direct the Department of State to augment its country reports on human rights practiceswith actionable actor-level information on human rights violations around the world. In South Africa’s case, that would include human rights violations by South African government and ANC officials.
Areas of Concern
Washington has alleged that South African and ANC officials have (1) failed to “take credible steps to investigate, prosecute, and punish officials who may havecommitted human rights abuses,” (2) liaised with terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah and their state sponsors, particularly Iran, and (3) failed to ensure that South Africa complies with all the requisite anti-money laundering and terrorist financing measures.
For decades the ANC has received funding from a South African incorporated investment holding company known as Chancellor House. In 2023 the company was implicated in corruption that contributed to South Africa’s energy crisis. And in the run-up to the country’s 2024 election, the ANC funneled a large donation from a US-sanctioned Russian oligarch through Chanceller House. Around the same time, South African officials permitted a US-sanctioned cargo ship—which was known to be involved in transporting weapons—to covertly dock at Simon’s Town Naval Base. Following that incident, former US Ambassador to South Africa Reuben Brigety unequivocally condemned the South African government and the ANC, stating that the country was “not not aligned” with Russia.
China was not implicated in those incidents. But the US has serious reservations about the political linkages that have developed between the ANC and the Chinese Community Party. Over the last few decades, the ANC has regularly conducted political training with the CCP, and the South African Navy has twice performed joint drills with China and Russia off the South African coast.
From a human rights perspective, the Trump administration and many members of Congress oppose South Africa’s genocide case against Israel—a major non–North Atlantic Treaty Organization ally of the US—at the International Court of Justice. President Cyril Ramaphosa’s recent signing of a law that allows land seizures by the state without compensation was the trigger for the recent suspension of American aid to South Africa. Additionally, the most recent State Department report on South Africa found credible evidence of severe government corruption, gender-based violence, trafficking in persons, and violence or threats of violence against members of national groups. Despite these accounts, the Department of State noted that Pretoria “did not take credible steps to investigate, prosecute, and punish officials who may have committed human rights abuses. There were numerous reports of impunity.”
Magnitsky Sanctions Requests
In accordance with the Magnitsky Act, the under secretary of state for political affairs prepares an annual report detailing the government’s effort to disrupt corruption and illicit finance networks. The most recent report, from February 23, 2024, states that the US took action against 78 individuals in the most recent reporting period. Many of these people were in the Bureau of African Affairs’ area of responsibility, but none were in South Africa.
The chairs or ranking members of certain congressional committees can, under the Magnitsky Act, issue joint requests that “require that the executive branch determine whether named individuals or entities have engaged in certain sanctionable conduct and report on whether it intends to impose sanctions on them.” To make use of this power, these members of Congress need access to the best possible information on corruption and human rights violations.
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
In accordance with the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor prepares annual country reports on human rights practices. These reports should give Congress sufficient information to make Magnitsky sanctions requests. Right now, they are merely an ecosystem-level summary of open-source reporting of the type members of Congress could get elsewhere. They have little value for appraising potential interventions aimed at improving US–South Africa relations. Members of Congress need to know the names of potential offenders and whether the executive branch believes that these individuals or entities have engaged in sanctionable conduct.
More Precise Reports Will Enable More Precise Measures
Congress is a key player in the deployment of effective sanctions regimes, one of America’s most potent tools for protecting its national interests. Part of these tools’ potency is their precision, which allows the US to confront specific individuals and entities and avoid collateral damage. In the case of South Africa, this precision could help Washington avoid damaging the pro-Western elements of the South African government and society.
Other State Department reports could also surface corruption and human rights violations include investment climate statements, international narcotics control strategy reports, reports to Congress on international religious freedom, and trafficking in persons reports. These reports should not simply be high-level summaries of existing media reporting. They should give Congress granular, actionable information.