
More White Refugees Arriving In America: What to Know
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
More white Afrikaners from South Africa have arrived in America as refugees and Newsweek has broken down what you need to know.
Newsweek has contacted the U.S. Embassy in Pretoria, the State Department and the South Africa's Department of International Relations and Cooperation, via email, for comment.
Why It Matters
A group of 59 people made headlines in May when they arrived on a chartered flight at Dulles International Airport in Virginia as party of the Afrikaner resettlement program.
Donald Trump's administration believes that Afrikaners are being persecuted in South Africa as victims of racially-motivated violence – something vehemently denied by the South African government.
The program came despite Trump's suspension of the State Department's refugee admissions program, which he said at the time was because the U.S. "lacks the ability to absorb large numbers of migrants, and in particular, refugees, into its communities in a manner that does not compromise the availability of resources for Americans, that protects their safety and security, and that ensures the appropriate assimilation of refugees."
Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau, left, greets the first group of Afrikaner refugees from South Africa at Dulles International Airport in Dulles, Virginia, on May 12, 2025.
Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau, left, greets the first group of Afrikaner refugees from South Africa at Dulles International Airport in Dulles, Virginia, on May 12, 2025.
AP
What To Know
A small group of Afrikaners, including children, quietly arrived in Atlanta on a commercial flight on Friday, said Jaco Kleynhans, head of Public Relations for the trade union Solidarity, which has helped some applicants with parts of the Afrikaner refugee process.
"They are settling in states across the USA, but particularly southern states such as Texas, North and South Carolina, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska," Kleynhans told the South African media outlet Independent Online (IOL).
This group consisted of nine people, according to the Associated Press which also cited Kleynhans.
Several more groups are expected to fly to the U.S. over the next few weeks with the U.S. Embassy in Pretoria and the State Department in Washington, D.C., currently processing 8,000 applications, according to Kleynhans.
A spokesperson for the U.S. Embassy said: "Refugees continue to arrive in the United States from South Africa on commercial flights as part of the Afrikaner resettlement program's ongoing operations."
The U.S. is "reaching out to eligible individuals for refugee interviews and processing," a spokesperson from the U.S. Mission to South Africa told local outlet News24.
Nearly 50,000 South Africans have inquired about the resettlement program, the U.S. State Department told The New York Times.
What People Are Saying
Kleynhans said: "The American refugee programs are paid for by American taxpayers and it is outrageous that international organizations and foreign groups think they can dictate to the Trump administration who should be eligible for refugee status. If Americans disagree with Trump on this, they can elect a different president in three years."
South Africa's Ministry of International Relations and Cooperation has previously said in a statement about the issue: "It is most regrettable that it appears that the resettlement of South Africans to the United States under the guise of being 'refugees' is entirely politically motivated and designed to question South Africa's constitutional democracy; a country which has in fact suffered true persecution under Apartheid rule and has worked tirelessly to prevent such levels of discrimination from ever occurring again."
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa told reporters on May 17: "There's no genocide in South Africa. That is a fact that's borne out of a lot of evidence."
White House deputy chief of staff and Homeland Security adviser Stephen Miller defended the program to reporters, saying: "What's happening in South Africa fits the textbook definition of why the refugee program was created. This is race-based persecution. The refugee program is not intended as a solution for global poverty, and historically, it has been used that way."
What Happens Next
More Afrikaners are expected to arrive in the United States, depending on the outcome of their refugee status applications.
Applicants "must be able to articulate a past experience of persecution or fear of future persecution," a guide to the program says.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
We're worrying about the wrong thing. Low birth rate isn't the crisis: Child care is.
Let's just get this out of the way: The birth rate is a red herring. It's been a common refrain that if the Trump administration and congressional leadership truly wanted to make it easier for families in America to grow and thrive, they would turn to policies like national paid leave, affordable child care, maternal health care and home and community-based services for our aging and disabled loved ones. They would be investing in early education and the caregiving workforce. They would be supporting commonsense accommodations like remote work. They would be growing social safety nets. But they've done none of that. Their response to child care is to send in grandma. They've said next to nothing about paid leave. What they apparently have suggested instead is both hilarious and dystopian. A medal for women with six or more children? Classes on your own menstrual cycle? Coupons for minivans? And instead of investing and building for the future, they're slashing and burning. From fertility and maternal health programs, to food and farm assistance, to Medicaid and Social Security, they're going after all the powerful things our country has built to sustain life. Elon Musk says the birth rate crisis is about the disappearance of civilization. I'd say he's already destroying its foundations. The real crisis is one of care. As baby boomers age, more and more of us are taking care of our parents and children all at the same time, with little help, and drowning financially and emotionally. No federal paid leave, in many counties without access to child care. The answer to the real crisis is not what we can gut and burn and take away from people, but what we can give them, the world we can create. My organization, Paid Leave for All, is asking people to envision their lives if they had the guarantee of paid family and medical leave ‒ if they knew no matter where they worked and the joy or loss they faced, they could maintain their life and their livelihood. Imagine the businesses and ventures that might be started, the families that could be sustained, the moments we wouldn't miss. Imagine the peace of mind, the paychecks kept, the lives saved. Opinion: Trump's $5,000 'baby bonus' isn't what new moms like me need What Musk, President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and beyond are suggesting isn't about any of that ‒ it's not about affording working families the security and dignity of being able to take care of themselves and each other. It's simply code for hatred and bigotry, driven less by concern for families than by a desire to preserve a demographic majority. But the good news? They're still at odds with supermajorities of Americans. They're overplaying their hand, ignoring the desperate real needs of working families and missing a political opportunity. In April, House Speaker Mike Johnson went to great lengths to try to kill a bipartisan measure to simply allow new parents in Congress to vote by proxy ‒ a pro-family protocol that would cost nothing. A lot of people had never heard of it, but message testing found that when you told people even a little bit about it and Johnson's unprecedented moves to kill it, their support for the measure jumped up to 23 points. This was true across every demographic group tested, across gender, race, age and ideology. What's more, their support for broader federal policies like paid family and medical leave shot up as well. Your Turn: Are you planning to have children? Why or why not? Here's what USA TODAY readers told us. | Opinion Forum In polling done in battleground states just before the 2024 election, there was record-high support for paid leave across party lines and walks of life, however you sliced it. That included 90% of independents, 96% of suburban women and 97% of low turnout Democrats. Commentary and post-election analyses have pointed to the family policies like paid leave and affordable care that would have offered tangible improvements in people's daily lives and stress, and could have changed the political landscape and outcomes. 'We didn't deliver what people wanted ‒ help with child care, help with elder care, more security in their lives,' said Ron Klain, a former chief of staff for Joe Biden. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. And that's the task ahead ‒ not just to respond to dangerous and very real threats to our families and communities, but to also counter with a vision of how much better our lives could be, and a plan to achieve it. To outline the damage they're doing to people's wallets and freedoms, and opportunities, and then to contrast with the policies that enable us to hold onto jobs and care for our own families. The desire to succeed in life, to be able to afford one, to be able to support your loved ones, is universal. It's not a liberal fantasy, it's an idea of strength and dignity. Making more babies by threat, faux incentives or even force is not a goal or a solution. But the idea of supporting families and allowing all of us to live healthier and richer lives is one we should be restoring front and center, and a conversation we should be having. This is the project facing all of us who actually care about the survival of civilization. Dawn Huckelbridge is the founding director of Paid Leave for All. You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Musk is wrong: Birth rate isn't the crisis. Child care is | Opinion
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The entirely predictable Trump-Musk divorce threatens Musk's business empire
Elon Musk's decision to go all in on Donald Trump never made much sense. His scorched-earth approach to breaking up with Trump is even harder to square. As a close Trump ally, Musk's actions inevitably affected Tesla – the biggest piece of his business empire and the maker of one of the most visible and expensive items that Americans can purchase: electric vehicles. First, Musk turned off Tesla's core customers, Democrats on the coasts, by pouring money and using his influence to help Trump return to the White House. Then he took a chainsaw to the federal workforce. Trump confirmed their relationship has soured, with Musk repeatedly blasting the president's sweeping domestic agenda bill in recent days and a public fight on social media on Thursday. Now, Musk's war of words with the president risk turning off the same Trump voters who may have considered buying a Tesla until this week. Not only that, but Tesla's ambitions for self-driving vehicles require government approval, something that no longer looks like a sure thing amid the Musk-Trump feud. Other Musk businesses like SpaceX are built on government contracts – contracts that Trump wasted no time threatening on Thursday. The past 12 months – with Musk marrying himself to the polarizing Trump brand and then breaking up with him – look like a textbook example of what a CEO should not do, especially a consumer-facing CEO. 'It's a bit of a head-scratcher that Musk is going so rogue-negative towards Trump so quickly. It's a potentially very hazardous path,' Dan Ives, a senior equity research analyst at Wedbush Securities and a longtime Tesla bull, told CNN in a phone interview on Thursday. The Musk-Trump break-up, playing out on the billionaires' respective social media platforms, was both entirely predictable and shocking nonetheless. After Musk blasted Trump's policy bill as a 'disgusting abomination' earlier this week, Trump suggested Musk has 'Trump derangement syndrome.' Musk responded by undercutting Trump's political prowess, saying: 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election.' As two of the world's most powerful people continued to trade public barbs, Tesla shares dropped lower and lower. Tesla shares (TSLA) plummeted 14% on Thursday as the bromance between Trump and Musk imploded in front of the entire world. The selloff erased about $152 billion from Tesla's market value and $34 billion off Musk's net worth, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Tesla shareholders are dismayed on multiple levels. First, Musk taking on the president so publicly could further shrink the car maker's customer base by angering Trump backers. 'You could end up alienating both sides of the aisle in the course of just a few months. When you're a consumer-facing company, that's the opposite of what you want to do,' Ives said. Secondly, Tesla relies on the federal government for tax credits and for approval of its controversial full-self driving technology, a green light that investors had been hoping for after the election. Neuralink, Musk's brain chip startup, is also reliant on FDA approval. Bigger picture, the Trump administration will help set the regulatory landscape for autonomous vehicles, not to mention artificial intelligence and other Musk priorities. And the president has not been shy about flexing the power of the federal government to hurt his opponents. 'You want Trump nice in the sandbox. You don't want Trump on your bad side,' Ives said. Bill George, an executive fellow at the Harvard Business School and former CEO of health tech company Medtronic, described the recent feud as a 'brutal breakup.' 'Never go to war with the president of the United States,' he said. 'There's going to be a lot of collateral damage to your business.' Trump threatened on Thursday to go after Musk's business empire. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,' Trump posted on his social media platform, Truth Social. 'I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it! SpaceX, Musk's privately held space company, relies heavily on federal contracts, especially from NASA. SpaceX's Starlink satellite internet recently won business from the Federal Aviation Administration to help the agency upgrade networks used to manage US airspace. Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, founder of the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute, said the lesson is not about CEOs taking political positions. 'The lesson here is that there is no honor among thieves. These are two mob bosses that have had a parting of ways. And now they are going to take each other down,' Sonnenfeld told CNN. Harvard Business School's George noted that Musk and Trump had been acting like 'best bros' just days earlier. 'The lesson here is that you can either work in government or run your business,' George said. 'But you can't do both.' Sign in to access your portfolio

Business Insider
32 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Trump's AI czar says UBI-style cash payments are 'not going to happen'
Americans probably won't be getting a universal basic income as long as President Donald Trump's AI czar has a say in the matter. David Sacks, the cofounder of Craft Ventures and a member of the so-called " PayPal Mafia," which includes Elon Musk and Peter Thiel, is now a top White House policy advisor for AI. It's an important role as rapid advances in AI bring about generational changes in how the world lives and works. The technology is already reshaping the job market, as chatbots like ChatGPT begin to do the work of entry-level employees. Those at the forefront of the AI revolution have long warned about the risk AI poses to jobs, and have called for a universal basic income to soften the blow. A UBI is a government program that distributes no-strings-attached checks to all residents to spend how they please. Numerous cities and states are already experimenting with its humble cousin, a guaranteed basic income, which distributes checks to specific populations in need. The idea has a long history, and support for these kinds of programs has skyrocketed at the local level in recent years. Any consideration of a basic income at the federal level, however, will likely have to wait. Sacks is not a fan. The AI czar said on X this week that such government "welfare" is a "fantasy." "The future of AI has become a Rorschach test where everyone sees what they want. The Left envisions a post-economic order in which people stop working and instead receive government benefits," Sacks wrote. "In other words, everyone on welfare. This is their fantasy; it's not going to happen." Although reports from recipients who participate in basic income programs are overwhelmingly positive, they have faced political pushback. Last year, Republicans in Arizona voted to ban basic income programs in the state, and similar opposition efforts have gained traction in Iowa, Texas, and South Dakota. Lawmakers in several states have argued that the checks increase reliance on the government and dissuade recipients from working. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman helped fund one of the largest basic income studies, which found, in part, that it encouraged recipients to work harder. Elon Musk, who until recently was the face of Trump's effort to reduce government spending, has said a basic income will likely play a role in future economies as AI continues to rapidly develop. Sacks' comments came as another prominent AI leader, Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis, called for not just a universal basic income, but a "universal high income" at SXSW in London this week. When asked about AI's impact on jobs, Hassabis said there would be a "huge amount of change," but that "new, even better" jobs could replace affected positions and boost productivity. "Beyond that, we may need things like universal high income or some way of distributing all the additional productivity that AI will produce in the economy," Hassabis said.