South Africa denies trying to bend the rules to give Musk's Starlink preferential treatment
South Africa's communications minister Tuesday denied accusations that a draft policy watering down Black ownership requirements for tech firms was proposed to benefit the Starlink business of white South Africa n-born billionaire Elon Musk.
Under South African law, foreign-owned companies are required to sell 30% of their subsidiaries to shareholders who are Black, or from other racial groups disadvantaged under the former apartheid system of white minority rule, in order to acquire a license.
However, Communications Minister Solly Malatsi on Friday proposed easing the requirement, prompting criticism from various political parties. The proposed change would allow Starlink and others to fulfill their empowerment requirements through things like investing in skills development and job programs and striking deals with local suppliers.
The minister put forward the directive days after South African President Cyril Ramaphosa met with U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House, when Trump made baseless claims that white South African farmers were being systematically killed, raising eyebrows.
A senior African National Congress lawmaker, Khusela Diko, questioned the timing of the directive and whether the country was bending over backward to accommodate Musk's Starlink satellite telecom business.
The Association of Communications and Technology (ACT), an industry body, said the proposed changes could usher in 'a new era' for the industry provided they are implemented consistently, fairly and openly.
'We advocate for smarter, scalable approaches that deliver meaningful impact and restore policy clarity, consistency, and investor confidence,' the ACT said in a statement.
On Tuesday, Malatsi, who belongs to the Democratic Alliance party, appeared before Parliament in Cape Town to defend the move and denied suggestions it was introduced specifically for Starlink.
Lawmakers questioned whether the directives were correctly opening up the playing field for foreign players or tampering with the government's economic empowerment agenda by catering to Starlink.
Musk has repeatedly denounced the Black ownership laws and said on social media that Starlink wasn't able to get a license to operate in South Africa because he was white. South African authorities say Starlink hasn't formally applied.
According to the Starlink website, the service in southern Africa is available in Eswatini, Mozambique, Botswana, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Kenya and Madagascar.
Since Trump's inauguration, his administration is reported to have intervened on behalf of Starlink in Gambia, Lesotho and a few other developing nations, using the U.S. government's foreign policy apparatus to advance Musk's business interests.
After Trump threatened them with large tariffs, Lesotho approved Starlink for a 10-year license in April, just a week later.
Malatsi said the regulations would allow for more than one new operator to enter the market, boosting competition.
'We are not attempting to open a special dispensation for Starlink or any other company or an individual,' Malatsi told lawmakers, adding that work on the policy direction started around September, and was not prompted by the recent meeting between Trump and Ramaphosa.
"There is no conspiracy on our part with regard to this policy direction,' said the minister.
Stakeholders, industry players and the public have been given 30 days to send in submissions and provide comment before the framework is finalized.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
JD Vance silence on Musk may be the most Game of Thrones tactic ever — and Trump might not even notice
The kingdom is in turmoil, the great Houses of Musk and Trump at war, and their subjects forced to choose sides. But as the scheming Littlefinger in Game of Thrones famously said as he plotted to take the King's place: 'chaos is a ladder.' And so it is for JD Vance, the ostensibly loyal vice president, and perhaps the person who stands to benefit the most from the chaos unleashed by the feud between Elon Musk and Donald Trump — which is perhaps why he's remaining uncharacteristically subdued. Vance has never been one to shy away from a fight, especially an online one, especially if it's in defense of his boss. He once launched a 400-word diatribe against historian Niall Ferguson for criticizing Trump's Ukraine policy, slamming his 'moralistic garbage' and 'historical illiteracy.' He had no problem accusing senior members of his own party of ' pettiness ' for voting against what Trump wanted, and mocked world leaders who've had run ins with the president. The practicing Catholic even found himself on the wrong side of the Pope himself when he got into another online beef with British politician Rory Stewart over Trump's deportation policies. So one would expect the online warrior to rush to the defense of his president in response to the firestorm of abuse unleashed by Musk against the president on Thursday, which began with accusations of ungratefulness and ended with claims of him being close to Jeffrey Epstein. But Vance has been remarkably quiet. His only public comment at the time of writing has been the kind of terse statement a wife gives in support of a cheating politician spouse. 'President Trump has done more than any person in my lifetime to earn the trust of the movement he leads. I'm proud to stand beside him,' Vance wrote on X. The next day, he continued with his lawyerly posts. 'There are many lies the corporate media tells about President Trump. One of the most glaring is that he's impulsive or short-tempered. Anyone who has seen him operate under pressure knows that's ridiculous,' he wrote. 'It's (maybe) the single biggest disconnect between fake media perception and reality,' he went on. Where was the combative Vance who demanded the Ukrainian president say thank you to his boss in the Oval Office? The one who told Kamala Harris to 'go to hell' over the Biden administration's handling of the withdrawal from Afghanistan? Instead, Vance did not utter Musk's name in the 24 hours since the feud burst into the open. Vance was asked by Trump to remain diplomatic in his dealings with Musk, The Independent learned from a source familiar with the situation. Regardless, the VP has other motivations for keeping quiet. For years, he has been dogged by rumors of dual loyalties between the tech billionaires who fueled his rise and the president he now serves. Vance first came to public attention as the best-selling author of Hillbilly Elegy, a memoir of a rough Appalachian upbringing that many liberals praised as an intellectual explanation of Trump's appeal to the white working class. But before that book set him on a path to Congress and the Senate, he was already being courted by a set of right-wing tech billionaires known as the 'PayPal mafia' — the billionaires Musk, David Sacks and Peter Thiel, who worked together at the pioneering online payments company back in the late Nineties and early Noughties and were bound together by a belief in deregulation, libertarianism and later, by darker right-wing ideology that railed against multiculturalism. Vance was working in venture capital at the time and went to work for Thiel at his San Francisco investment house, Mithril Capital. Thiel would be instrumental to Vance's rise, backing his campaign for Senate in 2021-22 to the tune of $15 million, and reportedly introduced Vance to Trump. The trio of Musk, Sacks and Thiel were instrumental in convincing Trump to choose Vance as his running mate, seeing in him an ideological ally, the libertarian tech investor who could one day take over as president. Some have gone so far as to call Vance a Manchurian Candidate for the tech elite. When the feud between Musk and Trump spilled out into the open, Musk was not shy about announcing his desire for Vance to take over as president. He responded to a tweet calling for Trump to be impeached and replaced with Vance with one word: 'Yes.' That is not an empty threat. Vance's path to the White House would inevitably require the support of Musk, the man who spent $395 million on electing Republicans in 2024. So his decision to ignore Musk's call for mutiny is an interesting — and calculated — choice. Much like Littlefinger, Vance has made sharp ideological turns and formed strategic alliances to find his way to within arm's length of the throne. He was once vehemently opposed to Trump, only to radically change course to stand by his side in his quest for power. But, spoiler alert, his fictional counterpart's calculating and maneuvering didn't end well for him. Trump spent his entire first term weeding out traitors, and claims to have gotten very good at it over the years. Will he be able to sniff out Vance?
Daily Mail
30 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump escalates war on Gavin Newsom by threatening to rip millions of federal dollars from California
With his public battle with Elon Musk going into overdrive, President Donald Trump 's team has made preparations to yank money from California in connection with another standoff, according to a report. Days after threatening to withhold 'large scale federal funding' from California, aides are identifying potential grants to pull back in a clash over the state's policy on transgender athletes. A whistleblower told a congressional committee that all research grants to the state are set to be nixed, CNN reported. Agencies are being told to identify grants to the nation's wealthiest state, which is a Democratic stronghold. A White House official dismissed the idea that any action was imminent, while agreeing that officials are always trying to identify spending for elimination throughout the government. 'No decisions have been made,' the official told when asked about the state of play. Trump signed executive orders before leaving the White House Friday dealing with drone technology, but the White House announced no action on California. Real or not, Trump's threat has gotten the attention of California's educational institutions, which are among the most prominent in the nation and rely on billions in federal funding. 'Every university, every research organization, pretty much I saw them passing through here the last two days,' Rep. Darrell Issa told the network. The report comes days after Trump threatened to yank federal funding to California after a transgender athlete won the long jump and triple jump in a school meet and qualified for the state championships. The athlete, AB Hermandez, went on to win gold in the high jump and triple jump at the state Track and Field Championships last weekend. University of California system identified $4 billion in awards it got from the federal government in 2024, an 11 percent drop from the prior year. The threat came in late May asTrump blasted Gov. Gavin Newsom, who he called 'Newscum,' and called the high school sporting results results 'not fair and totally demeaning to women and girls.' 'Please be advised that large scale federal funding will be held back, maybe permanently,' Trump threatened on his Truth Social site. He said he would speak to the governor today. Then, without citing a specific legal basis, Trump wrote that 'I am ordering local authorities, if necessary, to not allow the transitioned person to compete in the State Finals. This is a totally ridiculous situation!!!' His post came after transgender athlete AB Hernandez of Jurupa Valley won the women's long jump and triple jump at the California Interscholastic Federation Southern Section Masters Meet. A week prior, Reese Hogan of Crean Lutheran High School, one of the opponents defeated by Hernandez, a biological male, took the podium following the official ceremony. The moment took off online, and earned praise from former college swimmer and conservative political activist Riley Gaines. In March, Hernandez drew backlash online after winning a triple jump event by three feet. Trump fumed about the results of the weekend's meet, and teased an upcoming phone call with Newsom. He wrote: 'California, under the leadership of Radical Left Democrat Gavin Newscum, continues to ILLEGALLY allow 'MEN TO PLAY IN WOMEN'S SPORTS.' 'This week a transitioned Male athlete, at a major event, won 'everything,' and is now qualified to compete in the 'State Finals' next weekend. As a Male, he was a less than average competitor. As a Female, this transitioned person is practically unbeatable.' Then, he added in all caps, 'this is not fair and totally demeaning to women and girls.' Trump went on to threaten: 'Please be hereby advised that large scale Federal Funding will be held back, maybe permanently, if the Executive Order on this subject matter is not adhered to. 'The Governor, himself, said it is 'UNFAIR.' I will speak to him today to find out which way he wants to go??? In the meantime I am ordering local authorities, if necessary, to not allow the transitioned person to compete in the State Finals. This is a totally ridiculous situation!!!' Trump's public pressure on Newsom comes after the leading Democrat and potential 2028 presidential contender hedged on the issue on his podcast in March, in comments to conservative activist Charlie Kirk. 'I think it's an issue of fairness I completely agree with you on that ... It's deeply unfair,' Newsom said. 'By the way, as someone with four kids, two daughters — and a wife that went, God forbid, to Stanford and played on the junior national soccer team,' Newsom said. 'I revere sports, and so the issue of fairness is completely legit,' he said. He also told Kirk how Trump and Republicans were able to 'weaponize' the issue politically. 'I'm not wrestling with the fairness issue. I totally agree with you,' Newsom said of the hot-button topic that Trump highlighted throughout his successful campaign. California lawmakers opted last month not to change the state's policies on participation of transgender athletes after Democrats on two state Assembly committees turned back Republican proposals on the issue following heated debate. During an April press conference, when asked if there should be legal restrictions on transgender athletes, Newsom responded that 'I'm about as transparent about this as anybody out there, particularly in my party, on this, and to the extent someone can and do it in a way that's respectful and responsible and could find a kind of balance, then I'm open to that discussion.' The Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law estimates there are 49,000 trans youths aged 13 to 17 in California. Trump issued an executive order on his first day in office titled 'defending women from gender ideology extremism and restoring biological truth to the federal government.'
The Independent
35 minutes ago
- The Independent
The Trump vs Musk feud will prove a historic turning point
Lovers' spat – or acrimonious divorce? With two individuals so volatile as Donald Trump and Elon Musk, it is impossible to tell where their 'relationship', such as it now is, will go. We know they were once close – a bromance, indeed, where Mr Musk declared he loved Mr Trump 'as much as any straight man can love another man '. The president was never quite so gushing about his friend in return, but only a few days ago, during a farewell in the Oval Office, during which Mr Musk was gifted an outsize golden key, he described Mr Musk as 'one of the greatest business leaders and innovators the world has ever produced. He stepped forward to put his very great talents into the service of our nation, and we appreciate it.' Now? Not so much. Mr Musk has called Mr Trump's signature 'Big, Beautiful Bill' an 'abomination', made lurid reference to the president appearing in as-yet unreleased Epstein files, and backed replacing him with JD Vance. The president, never the most resilient or easy-going of men, responded in kind, threatening to cancel contracts with Mr Musk's companies, scrapping the electric vehicle mandate (important for Mr Musk's Tesla operations) and accusing the former 'First Buddy' of suffering from 'Trump derangement syndrome'. There are a few signs, glimpsed, naturally, on Mr Musk's social media platform X, formerly Twitter, that these two giant egos might be persuaded to kiss and make up, metaphorically, and Mr Musk is sounding a little more emollient than on Thursday. But Mr Trump, who's been through a couple of actual divorces, may need more wooing. Even if the personal insults stop, Mr Musk is unlikely to change his mind about the Big, Beautiful Bill, and President Trump will continue to press for it and the tax cuts it contains for vital electoral reasons as much as any (spurious) economic justification. Much the same may be said for their now open differences on tariffs, where Mr Musk rightly warns they spell recession for America – if not the world – later in the year. One thing seems certain, though: it will never be glad, confident morning in America for Maga again. What it means for the Trump administration is, very simply, that it can no longer be sure of the kind of generous and unconditional financial and media support Mr Musk provided in the 2024 presidential campaign. At best, from the point of view of the White House, Mr Musk will attend to his business interests – including the urgent task of reviving Tesla, whose share price has slumped in line with Mr Musk's reputation in recent weeks. He will, on this assumption, give up on politics and maintain a stance of studied neutrality. That feels unlikely, given Mr Musk's ownership of X. At worst, then, instead of Mr Musk spending $250m helping loyal Maga candidates get elected to back Mr Trump in next year's Congressional midterm elections, he will spend serious money on swing states and districts with the aim of wrecking the president's key economic policies. No doubt X will now tone away from pro-Trump sentiment. The midterms were always going to be dicey for Mr Trump, whose hold on the Senate is weak even now. And it's perfectly possible that Mr Musk's interventions would make matters worse for the Trump partisans. After all, Mr Musk's $1m prize lottery in the key state of Pennsylvania might have delivered that state to Mr Trump, and the Musk-backed America PAC (political action committee) many more voters than that. Mr Musk certainly thinks he won the last election for his former best friend: 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate. Such ingratitude.' There are no heroes in this story. Neither the world's richest person nor the most powerful man on Earth has shown much interest in improving the state of the world. They are both impetuous and puerile. America has known some earthy types at the top of politics and business, and plenty of gamblers and chancers. But never before has the world been entertained, if that's the word, by such a breathtaking display of such man-baby behaviour. Even by their own standards, it has been a depressing spectacle. The only good that might come from it is that both men emerge weaker, and President Trump will at last find himself challenged by a more confident and assertive legislature – one that joins with the independent judiciary to restrain his dictatorial tendencies. So let us hope there will be no Trump-Musk reconciliation, the marriage is dissolved and their infantile hatred continues to run deep.
