What else could Cyril have done?' South Africans praise calm Ramaphosa after White House ambush
Many South Africans are praising President Cyril Ramaphosa's calm demeanor as President Donald Trump's multimedia ambush unfolded in front of the world's media. He pushed back gently whenever he could, but he didn't raise his voice or show anger, displaying his decades of negotiation experience.
'What else could Cyril have done?' asked veteran journalist Milton Nkosi. 'You're damned if you do, damned if you don't. I think they were caught completely unawares. How on earth could you have planned for that?' Nkosi, who's a senior research fellow at the Africa Asia Dialogues think tank told CNN.
On social media and across South Africa's broadcast outlets, consensus seemed to quickly form that Ramaphosa did the best under the circumstances. He remained 'calm, collected and humble in the face of bigotry and lies,' posted one user on X. 'You were a leader today. Went to build not to fight.'
Ramaphosa brought his own white billionaire to the meeting – luxury goods magnate Johan Rupert who's behind brands like Cartier – who told Trump that violent crime affects all races, but his words fell on deaf ears.
Rupert even threw Elon Musk, who was also in the room, a bone.
'We have too many deaths. But it's across the board. It's not only White farmers. It's across the board. We need technological help. We need Starlink at every little police station. We need drones.'
One white South African called Rupert a traitor to his fellow Afrikaners.
Another prominent white South African, the Agriculture minister John Steenhuisen himself also tried to convince their host that he had been misled.
The most dramatic part of the scene was when Trump called for lights to be dimmed and screened a four-and-a-half minute montage claiming to show evidence of a white genocide. It included far-left opposition leader Julius Malema singing 'Kill the Boer, kill the farmer' as a crowd chanted along.
Officially named 'Dubula iBhunu' in the Xhosa language, the song emerged in the 1980s to fight the unjust system of segregation. South African courts have ruled that it doesn't mean a literal call to kill white farmers.
The Supreme Court of Appeal ruled in 2024 that any 'reasonably well-informed person' would see it as a 'historic struggle song, with the performance gestures that go with it, as a provocative means of advancing his party's political agenda.'
President Trump confronted Ramaphosa on why he had not arrested Malema for it.
Malema, the Economic Freedom Fighters leader, responded in his typical fiery way on X: 'A group of older men meet in Washington to gossip about me,' he said, disputing the claims of a genocide. 'We will not agree to compromise our political principles on land expropriation without compensation for political expediency.'
Malema was expelled from Ramaphosa's African National Congress (ANC) party more than a decade ago and came third in the most recent election.
Most of the information that US President Donald Trump used to try to prove that 'White genocide' is happening in South Africa has repeatedly been disproven.
Some South Africans have said that they believe that the information is 'AfriForum propaganda' – a White Afrikaner lobby group criticized as being a White nationalist group.
Its CEO told CNN they were pleased with how the meeting went.
'It shows that the South African president and the ANC leadership cannot just simply sweep real problems that we have in the country under the carpet and think they will disappear,' Kallie Kriel said in a voice note.
CNN has looked at data from the South African police and has found no evidence of a 'White genocide.' A video played by Trump purported to show thousands of White farmers buried along the side of the road – but Ramaphosa said that he did not recognize the video, and that there was no evidence it showed what Trump claimed it displayed.
It was the toughest public test yet for Ramaphosa, a skilled dealmaker who led negotiations for Nelson Mandela in talks that ended apartheid.
'It is absolutely absurd to sit and watch the president of the most powerful country in the world telling the man who negotiated to end apartheid, who was locked up solitary confinement, that there's White genocide in South Africa which is a lie. That is crazy,' Nkosi told CNN.
It was a good day for South Africa's White nationalists. The president of the United States repeated their talking points from the bully pulpit of the White House, giving them the most high-profile validation they could have ever dreamed of. The South African delegation expected a confrontational meeting, but nothing could have prepared them for the multimedia ambush that awaited them.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's past feuds don't bode well for Elon Musk
WASHINGTON − If history is any guide, and there is a lot of history, the explosive new falling-out between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk is not going to end well for the former White House adviser and world's richest man. The political battlefield is littered with the scorched remains of some of Trump's former allies who picked a fight with him or were on the receiving end of one. Lawyer Michael Cohen. Political adviser Steve Bannon. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. John Bolton, John Kelly and Chris Christie, to name just a few. 'If what happened to me is any indication of how they handle these matters, then Elon is going to get decimated,' said Cohen, the former long-term Trump lawyer and fixer who once said he'd 'take a bullet' for his boss. Musk, he said, "just doesn't understand how to fight this type of political guerrilla warfare." 'They're going to take his money, they're going to shutter his businesses, and they're going to either incarcerate or deport him,' Cohen said. 'He's probably got the White House working overtime already, as we speak, figuring out how to close his whole damn thing down.' Cohen had perhaps the most spectacular blowup, until now, with Trump. He served time in prison after Trump threw him under the bus by denying any knowledge of pre-election payments Cohen made to a porn actress to keep her alleged tryst with Trump quiet before the 2016 election. More: President Trump threatens Elon Musk's billions in government contracts as alliance craters Cohen felt so betrayed by Trump that he titled his memoir 'Disloyal,' but the Trump administration tried to block its publication. Cohen ultimately fought back, becoming a star witness for the government in the state 'hush money' case and helped get Trump convicted by a Manhattan jury. More: Impeachment? Deportation? Crazy? 6 takeaways from the wild feud between Trump and Elon Musk Some suffered similar legal attacks and other slings and arrows, including Trump taunts and his trademark nasty nicknames. Trump vilified others, casting them into the political wilderness with his MAGA base. When Sessions recused himself from the Justice Department's investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 election, Trump savaged him, calling his appointment a 'mistake' and lobbing other epithets. Sessions resigned under pressure in 2018. When he tried to resurrect his political career by running for his old Senate seat in Alabama, Trump endorsed his opponent, who won the GOP primary. After firing Tillerson, Trump called the former ExxonMobil chief lazy and 'dumb as a rock.' Trump still taunts Christie, an early supporter and 2016 transition chief, especially about his weight. Trump also had a falling-out with Bannon, who was instrumental in delivering his presidential victory in 2016 and then joined the White House as special adviser. 'Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my presidency,' Trump said in 2018, a year after Bannon's ouster from the White House. 'When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.' Trump's Justice Department even indicted Bannon in 2020 for fraud, though the president pardoned him before leaving office. One of Trump's biggest feuds was with Bolton, whom he fired as his national security adviser in 2019. Trump used every means possible to prevent Bolton's book, 'The Room Where it Happened,' from being published, Bolton told USA TODAY on June 5. That included having the U.S. government sue his publisher on the false premise that Bolton violated a nondisclosure agreement and was leaking classified information, Bolton said. Bolton said Musk is unlike most others who have crossed swords with Trump in that he has unlimited amounts of money and control of a powerful social media platform in X to help shape the narrative. Musk also has billions in government contracts that even a vindictive Trump would have a hard time killing, as he threatened to do June 5, without significant legal challenges. Even so, Bolton said, "It's going to end up like most mud fights do, with both of them worse off. The question is how much worse the country is going to be off." This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump's past feuds don't bode well for Elon Musk
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Data can be weaponized': Ronan Farrow sounds alarm on DOGE access to private Social Security data
Ronan Farrow, contributing writer to the New Yorker, talks with Jen Psaki about the Supreme Court granting DOGE access to private, personal social security data, and how Elon Musk's agitated behavior, combined with the sensitivity of personal data, makes our new reality particularly perilous. "There is an erratic person who has his own complicated international alliances and business interests who is controlling key functionality that the American people depend on."
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk's feud with Donald Trump is hugely damaging to Tesla but don't expect any action from the board
How should a corporate board respond to a CEO publicly insulting and shaming a sitting president? It's not a question that most need to consider, since few chief executives dare to directly criticize the White House. When CEOs do speak out against a federal directive, their messages are usually delivered behind closed doors, or in a collective open letter. But this week, Elon Musk changed all that and forced the issue in a prolonged public spat with Donald Trump. The pair had a much-anticipated falling out over Trump's budget, also referred to as the 'big beautiful bill,' on Thursday, which quickly got personal. Musk asked his social media followers if it was time to create a new political party, said that Trump's tariffs would cause a recession, and even claimed that Trump's name was in government documents about Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sexual offender. 'That is the real reason they have not been made public,' Musk wrote. The feud has already been costly for Musk and his many businesses, including Tesla. The automaker's shares took a tumble as the back-and-forth took over the news cycle, dropping 14% in on Thursday, and costing shareholders $150 billion. Now analysts warn that feuding with Trump could cost Tesla billions, considering that Trump could repeal electric vehicle tax credits and other measures that have boosted Tesla's earnings. The company could also face increasing regulatory obstacles around its autonomous driving vehicles, the technology that is meant to drive Tesla's future and has been cited by stock watchers as a reason for the stock's sustained eye-popping performance. Tesla bull and Wedbush analyst Dan Ives seemed to speak for investors early on Friday when he wrote in a research note: 'This needs to calm down.' At a regular company, there's a solid chance that the events of the last few days would spur a board to dismiss a CEO. But will the Tesla board fire Musk to protect public shareholders from potential damages? 'They should,' Charles Elson, founding director of the Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware, told Fortune. 'But they won't.' The Trump-Musk spat is just the latest in a series of events that have forced the question of what role Tesla's board actually plays in the company. 'Over the years, Musk's behavior has become more outrageous,' says Elson. 'The board's lack of response makes you wonder, 'Who are these people? Why are they there?'' It has long faced criticisms for being too close to Musk, and therefore willing to overlook numerous management issues. For instance, it famously approved Musk's much-disputed 2018 pay package for $56 billion, and has silently witnessed a year of high-profile divisive behavior from the chief executive that has led to public protests and customers distancing themselves from the company. And recent allegations about Musk's drug use echo reports that have surfaced in the past without putting Musk's role at risk. There are a few contributing factors as to why that is. Musk is a controlling shareholder in Tesla, where he holds 22% of the voting power, making it extra challenging for board members to have the votes needed to force him out. The board is also in a tough position in that firing Musk could tank the stock, considering that his name is so closely associated with the company. Many directors also have particularly close ties to Musk. That includes his brother Kimbal Musk, an entrepreneur and restaurant owner, and Joe Gebbia, a cofounder of Airbnb and a friend of Musk's. There are no car industry or green energy CEOs in the group, as one might expect at a typical EV company. The directors are also paid very well. This year, a Delaware court ordered the board to give back more than $900 billion in pay after finding it had paid itself too handsomely. Robyn Denholm, Tesla board chair since 2018, earned $600 million, far more than people with the same position at other companies. The court found 'the compensation was so significant, it made it really almost impossible for them to be independent directors,' says Elson. 'It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it,' says Nell Minow, a corporate governance expert, quoting Upton Sinclair. 'That's this board.' To be sure, this year, there were signs earlier this year that Tesla's directors were taking more control over the company's governance. Last month, the Wall Street Journal reported last month that the board had begun looking for a successor and selected a search firm to assist them. It also reported that the board had met with Trump weeks before he announced he would be spending less time at the White House. It seemed that between the backlash against Tesla provoked by Musk's focus on Washington, and Tesla's shrinking share price, finally pushed the board to act. But the board denied the report outright, with Denholm calling it 'absolutely false.' Even considering his own predilection for conflict, Elon Musk's latest squabble is in a category of its own. But board experts agree that to expect action from the Tesla board is misguided. 'There have been so many 'Now the board has to do something moments,' and they have failed every time,' says Minow. 'I no longer feel that there is such a thing as 'Now they have to do something.'' There are technically ways that shareholders could move the needle if they wanted Musk out. They could vote directors off the board via shareholder proxy votes, and hope that new directors would fire Musk. Or they could try to sue the board for not kicking Musk to the curb when he put the brand at risk and split his focus between Washington and Tesla. But a shareholder who wanted to do that would need to own up to a 3% stake in the company, points out Ann Lipton, associate dean for faculty research at Tulane University's Law School, and governance laws make it all but impossible to do. 'No shareholder is going to be able to show that this board is acting in bad faith by failing to replace Musk as CEO, which is really the level that they'd have to show,' she said. It's still theoretically possible that a Tesla board director could try to bring about change by suggesting Musk go. But they would have to make peace with potentially losing their roles, says Elson. 'They would say, 'Look, I will vote to move him along. And if I lose, I leave. I can't do this anymore,'' says Elson. Whether they'll do that depends on whether they're people of principle, he added, or 'people of convenience.''We'll have to see,' he said. This story was originally featured on Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data