
There is no ‘white genocide' in South Africa. But Trump has made up his mind
As Donald Trump confronted the South African president in an extraordinary meeting in the Oval Office, he clutched a sheaf of news reports he said showed mass killings of white farmers.
In a powerful stroke of political theatre, he reeled off the fate of each of the people in the stories. 'Death, death, death, horrible death, death,' he intoned as he went through each example.
The reports along with a video of incendiary speeches from firebrand opposition politicians threatening to steal white land, or attack white people, showed Cyril Ramaphosa was allowing a genocide to occur, he suggested.
Such claims have been circulating for years and were also raised in 2018 during Mr Trump's first term, but the accusation has now become so ubiquitous it is a significant obstacle in South Africa's attempts to reset relations with Washington.
Accusations that white people in South Africa are victims of a genocide have become a rallying cry for Right-wing groups in Europe and the US.
The claims have roots in South Africa's appalling levels of violent crime; in unresolved racial tensions over the distribution of land and in the very real fears of exposed rural communities.
Yet researchers say the claims are also false and that while white farmers have been killed, it is as part of a pattern of crime, extreme violence and lawlessness across the country.
They say the attacks are motivated by opportunistic criminality, are not part of a concerted campaign, and that black people, including black farmers, are far more likely to be killed.
None of South Africa's political parties, including those representing Afrikaners, allege a 'white genocide' is underway.
A South African judge in February ruled the idea of a genocide was 'clearly imagined' and 'not real', when deciding an inheritance case involving a wealthy benefactor's donation to the Boerelegioen right wing paramilitary group.
'The idea of a 'white genocide' taking place in South Africa is completely false,' said Gareth Newham, head of a justice and violence prevention program at the Institute for Security Studies in South Africa.
'As an independent institute tracking violence and violent crime in South Africa, if there was any evidence of either a genocide or targeted violence taking place against any group based on their ethnicity this, we would be amongst the first to raise (the) alarm and provide the evidence to the world.'
'Murder' case with no murders
The fact that the reality was different than Mr Trump suggested was illustrated by the very first murder case study that he held up.
The first cutting reported an attack on 73-year-old Jan Jurgens in his farm outside Mbombela, in the country's north-east.
Mr Jurgens was not killed as Mr Trump said, however, though he was badly hurt when armed intruders attacked him and tied him up last week.
Mr Jurgens' wife, Antoinette, was also attacked when she returned home. She managed to fight them off and lock herself in the house and alert staff on the farm. The attackers fled with a HP laptop, a mobile phone, and a handbag containing bank cards and an ID.
The fear of such crime is widespread in rural South Africa, where the majority of farmland is still owned by white farmers and police are accused of doing too little to protect them or catch the culprits. Attackers can use horrific violence.
Adding to the sense of being under siege are the incendiary speeches by populists like Julius Malema of the opposition Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) who preaches the redistribution of land.
He also leads supporters in a song with the refrain 'kill the boer', which critics say is an incitement to violence against white farmers.
Most people killed in South Africa are black
But researchers say that while violent crime is rife in South Africa, the vast majority of victims are black and poor, and white people are not being deliberately targeted.
Quarterly figures show that around 75 people are murdered in the country each day. That compares with fewer than two murders each day in England and Wales, with a similar population size.
Police statistics show that nearly 7,000 people were killed in the last three months of 2024 and of those, 12 murders occurred on farms. The data do not record race, but one of those killed was a farmer and the rest were farm workers, people staying on farms and a security guard.
When Mr Trump earlier this year raised the issue, the chief of South Africa's largest farm lobby group, AgriSA, denied farmers were being killed for political reasons.
Johann Kotzé said: 'Crime in South Africa is too high. If a murder is on a farm, we call it a farm murder. But remember that same night somebody was also murdered in the little township where the farm workers came from.'
At a major agricultural fair last week in the Free State province, farmers told reporters that they were worried about safety and the lack of government help, but said the crime was affecting everyone.
Thobani Ntonga, a black farmer from Eastern Cape province, told Associated Press he had been attacked on his farm by criminals and almost kidnapped before a neighbour intervened.
He said: 'Crime affects both black and white. ... It's an issue of vulnerability.
'Farmers are separated from your general public. We're not near towns, we are in the rural areas. And I think it's exactly that. So, perpetrators, they thrive on that, on the fact that farms are isolated.'
Prof Rudolph Zinn, a criminologist at the University of Limpopo, has interviewed dozens of convicted farm attackers and said in all cases he had found they were driven by financial gain. Attackers sought cash or goods, and often saw farms as soft targets.
Mr Ramaphosa, backed by his delegation and mutual friends of Mr Trump like Ernie Els and the businessman Johann Rupert, will be trying to make these arguments to the US government.
Their fear is that Mr Trump does not really want to listen.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Metro
19 minutes ago
- Metro
Americans mock underwhelming Flag Day parade with soldiers 'marching out of step
Donald Trump's military parade yesterday was supposed to show the strength and power of the States, but not everyone was impressed – with some even branding it 'humiliating' and 'lacklustre'. The pageant, which marked the 250th anniversary of the US army, and also took place on the President's 79th birthday, received a lukewarm reaction after soldiers were shown marching out of lockstep in front of 'tiny' crowds. Viewers posted photos of sparse crowds on social media, and even seemingly disinterested soldiers as they processed through Washington. Some even mocked the parade as a knock-off version of awesome displays put on in autocracies such as North Korea. Veteran Christopher David gave a damning verdict on the quality of the procession. He posted on X: 'I've marched in more military parades than I even care to remember. Probably watched dozens more as a spectator. And this is easily the worst and sloppiest marching I've ever witnessed at a formal military parade. It feels like a big 'f*** you' to Trump from the soldiers.' To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video More than 6,600 soldiers were joined by tanks and robot dogs on the march down Constitution Avenue as well as military aircraft in what was the first event of its kind in the US since 1991. Attendance appeared to fall far short of early predictions that as many as 200,000 people would attend, and there were large gaps between viewers near the Washington Monument. Even Trump himself was shown on a clip appearing to look downcast and bored as he watched the parade alongside his wife Melania. But the lack of crowds could be partly down to the weather, with humid conditions and the threat of thunderstorms dampening turnout. Not everyone was underwhelmed: Larry Stallard, a retired American Airlines pilot, said he travelled from Kansas City for the weekend 'to see the military and see Trump.' The Republican voter said it was 'hard to believe' people were upset about the cost of the event when 'they blow that in 10 seconds on things that we don't even need'. The parade had been criticised for costing up to 45 million dollars (£33 million), as well as the possibility that the heavy tanks could tear up city streets. More Trending About six in 10 Americans said it was 'not a good use' of government money, according to a poll from the Associated Press-NORC Centre for Public Affairs Research. The low turnout at the display was contrasted with huge crowds at 'No Kings' protests held around the country on Saturday, planned to coincide with the military parade. These were protests against what they see as the concentration of power in one leader's hands, claiming that Trump has overstepped the limits of presidential authority. Large crowds were seen in major cities including Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia and Houston. Got a story? Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ Or you can submit your videos and pictures here. For more stories like this, check our news page. Follow on Twitter and Facebook for the latest news updates. You can now also get articles sent straight to your device. Sign up for our daily push alerts here. MORE: Trump 'considering adding 36 more countries to US travel ban list' MORE: 'I'm a conservative dad who voted for Trump – I'd do anything for my trans child' MORE: Putin calls Trump to say 'happy birthday' but there was 'no time to talk about Ukraine'


The Guardian
33 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Toll of Trump's USAID cuts on Australian aid revealed, with projects to help children among hardest hit
The Trump administration's gutting of foreign aid has seen a $400m hit to Australian projects, with 120 projects affected, at least 20 offices closed and people left without crucial support for health, education, humanitarian and climate change issues, the Australian Council for International Development (Acfid) has found. Acfid has surveyed its members and their partners, who deliver projects on the ground, on the impact of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) cuts, which took effect when the president, Donald Trump, froze funding for 90 days from 20 January. By the time the 90 days expired, despite a waiver for humanitarian assistance, 5,200 of the agency's 6,200 programs had been stopped. Those that were left were absorbed into the state department. Workers in Australian programs described 'chaos' and 'total panic' at the time, and warned programs could shut, causing 'unnecessary deaths and suffering'. Some Australian aid projects had direct USAID funding, while others were jointly funded or subsidised through US funding. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email 'Australian NGOs and their partners have had to reduce operations and staff with dire consequences to local communities that are now no longer receiving essential healthcare, education, food or other assistance,' Acfid's report, released on Monday, says. 'At least 20 partner organisations and/or country offices of Australian NGOs have closed. Some local organisations have also had to close their doors permanently.' The report points out that it collected information during that 90-day period, that it was a time of 'upheaval' and many organisations did not have a clear picture of the impacts. Less than half provided financial data, so the figures 'should be read as a low estimate of impact on the Australian aid agencies and the local partners they work with around the world', the report states. More than 120 projects were hit, with a financial value of more than $400m. The projects were mostly in the Pacific and south-east Asia. Projects to help children, combat climate change and provide humanitarian support were the hardest hit. In Nepal, 307 girls are no longer able to go to school after an education project closed. Without education, girls are at higher risk of child marriage and being trafficked, Acfid says. In Kiribati, almost 2,000 people lost access to improved water, sanitation and hygiene practices, leading to reduced access to clean water and increased risk of disease. The Acfid policy and advocacy chief, Jessica Mackenzie, said the development sector was only now fully grasping the scale of the fallout. 'We've heard first-hand accounts from people on the ground ranging from communities in the Pacific losing access to clean water, to girls in Nepal deprived of education and fearful they may be forced into marriage,' she said. 'At least $400m in humanitarian and development projects have been directly impacted by the USAID freeze for Australian NGOs. That's millions of people losing access to food, healthcare and education.' Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion The cuts could not have come at a worse time, she said. 'Communities already on the frontline of climate change are losing access to programs that were helping them adapt, prepare and survive.' Acfid says Australia's own foreign aid spending is the lowest it has ever been, at a time when the world needs it most. Other countries including the UK, the Netherlands and Germany have cut their foreign aid, despite the context of growing global conflict and uncertainty. Acfid is calling for the government to increase spending on foreign aid from 0.65% to 1% of the federal budget. Save the Children Australia has made a similar call. Its proposals include spending on climate action, development, and work on gender, disability and social inclusion. In March, Australia moved to plug the funding gaps in the region by directing about $120m in foreign aid to support economic, health, humanitarian and climate responses in the Indo-Pacific. That money came from funding for other programs, which the foreign affairs minister, Penny Wong, called 'hard strategic decisions'. DFAT has also committed to 2.5% annual increases in aid funding. Wong announced on Friday that another $10m would go to help distribute urgent medical and food supplies in Gaza, taking the total assistance there to $110m since 7 October 2023. On Thursday, the Trump administration announced it would eliminate all USAID overseas positions by 30 September.


The Guardian
33 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Majority of Australians think China will be world's most powerful country by 2035, poll finds
A majority of Australians expect China will be the most powerful country in the world by 2035 as trust in the US tumbles, new research has found. Just over one in three Australians (36%) trusted the US to act responsibly on the world stage, representing a 20-point fall from 2024 and the smallest proportion since the Lowy Institute began polling in 2005. The thinktank's 2025 report found only one in four respondents had any confidence in president Donald Trump's approach to world affairs – less than half of the 46% who expressed faith in Joe Biden the previous year. Confidence in the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, rose four points to 16%, and Australians were evenly split on whether Xi or Trump was a more reliable partner. Australians were just as likely to view China as an economic partner than as a security threat for the first time since 2020 – though a high proportion of voters still distrust China and believe it will become a military threat to Australia in the next 20 years. 'There's slightly more trust, slightly less threat perceptions, [but] it's still a pretty bleak picture for how Australians look at China,' said Ryan Neelam, the poll author and a director at the Lowy Institute. A majority of respondents believed the US would come to Australia's defence if it were attacked, with 63% agreeing, a drop from the 75% agreement recorded in similar questions in recent years. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email But Australians nonetheless continued to support the strong military relationship, despite a loss of trust likely inspired by Trump's 'shocking' and 'norm-breaking' foreign policy, according to Neelam. 'It's almost as if the Australian public are separating those two things in their minds: the instability and unpredictability of Trump's approach to world affairs, from the institution of the alliance.' Since the 2024 survey, the gap between Australians' trust in the US compared with China has more than halved, as perceptions of China continued to improve from their nadir in 2022, Neelam said. 'That's quite remarkable for Australia's key security ally to have such a low level of trust,' he said. 'The weight of expectation is that China will be more powerful and more predominant in the global system.' Just over one in four respondents believed the US would be the most important and powerful nation in 10 years' time, with more than half expecting China to take the lead. Four in five voters said the alliance with the US was important for Australia's security, similar to the support observed in 2023 and 2024. Support for the Aukus nuclear-powered submarine deal was also steady with two-thirds of those polled in favour, similar to the level observed since 2022. Coalition voters and residents of Queensland and Western Australia were especially supportive, each recording about four in five people in favour, while Victorians and Labor voters were more lukewarm, at three in five. Respondents were polled in March, prior to the US defence department's announcement of a review of the Aukus deal, which Anthony Albanese described as 'appropriate' ahead of a possible meeting with Trump on the sidelines of the G7 meeting in Canada. Three in five people expressed confidence in Albanese's approach to world affairs in the Lowy poll, putting the prime minister just behind France's Emmanuel Macron and New Zealand's Christopher Luxon. Luxon was the most trusted world leader, though nearly a quarter of those polled expressed no view, most of whom saying they did not know who he was.