Latest news with #AngolanCivilWar
Miami Herald
27-05-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Ernie Els and Retief Goosen's Trump Visit Sparks Backlash-'Quite Troubling'
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa took golfers Ernie Els and Retief Goosen to his White House meeting with Donald Trump but there has been some backlash to what they said there. Trump had asked Ramaphosa to bring along the sportsmen for the Oval Office meeting on Wednesday and while many South Africans praised Els and Goosen for voicing their concerns about violence in the country, others spoke out against them. Newsweek has contact Els and Goosen, via email, for comment. The hope was that Els and Goosen—two Afrikaaner golfers who have eight major championship wins between them—would help to woo Trump, a keen golfer who owns two golf courses. "If there was Afrikaaner farmer genocide, I can bet you these three gentlemen would not be here," Ramaphosa said referring to Els, Goosen and South African billionaire Johann Rupert. The genocide comment referred to claims about attacks on white farmers in South Africa. However, some South Africans feel the golfers "didn't do much good," posting their criticism on social media. Els said he was a proud South African and acknowledged Ramaphosa's role in the anti-apartheid struggle, before going on to say: "I know there's a lot of anger through the transition—there was a lot of stuff happening in the apartheid days. You know we grew up in the apartheid era, but I don't think two wrongs makes a right." He went on to say later: "I feel we need the U.S. to push this thing through. We've got a great ally—the U.S. has always been an ally of South Africa for a very long time, even in the days of the war in Angola, you know you guys helped us. So, very important for us to have your support and get the change we need." Goosen detailed his life in the farmland area of Polokwane and said that while his family "live a great life despite everything going on," they have been attacked. "They're trying to burn the farms down to chase you away, so it is a concern to try and make a living as a farmer," he added. Matšhela Koko, a former executive at Eskom, South Africa's state-owned electricity utility, wrote on X: "Ernie Els expressed his gratitude to Donald Trump for the United States' support of South Africa during the conflict in Angola. This situation is quite troubling. These people still miss Apartheid South Africa." South Africa's apartheid regime got involved in the Angolan Civil War—a Cold War proxy conflict that erupted after Angola gained independence from Portuguese colonial rule in 1975—to fight the People's Movement for the Liberation of Angola, a Marxist party. While America did not deploy its own forces alongside apartheid South Africa, it did provide support that bolstered the country's intervention. Several other South Africans referenced Els' nod to this relationship in their critiques, including writer Sizwe Sikamusi, who said: "Ernie Els made this clear when [he] thanked Donald Trump for the United States 'helping' the Apartheid regime in Angola. By doing this, Els revealed the persistence of a parallel Afrikaner consciousness that remembers Apartheid not with shame, but with pride and nostalgia." "For Els to thank the US for Angola is to openly align with the Apartheid regime's logic and to see that period not as a shameful episode of regional imperialism, but as a proud moment of Western solidarity and military action," Sikamusi added. He also said: "While Black South Africans are often urged to 'move on,' 'focus on the future,' or 'stop living in the past,' White South Africans, particularly within the Afrikaner establishment, continue to carry, revere, and even celebrate their past." Entrepreneur Lynette Engelbrecht wrote: "The golfers were there by Trump's request so of course they didn't do us much good." Writer and media figure Mvelase Peppetta said: "Ernie Els waxing about the good old days of the Border Wars in the Oval Office is why I never 100% trust a white person." "There are so many nice things he could've said about U.S./SA relations & he chooses to go back to when the U.S.A was supporting the apartheid regime," said the activist, who is followed on X by the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), the party featured in most of the four-minute video Trump played during the meeting showing its leader, Julius Malema chanting "kill the Boer." Newsweek has broken down the history and legal context of the controversial phrase, which has recently been deliberated on in a South African court. In 2022 the Equality Court of South Africa ruled that the chant does not constitute hate speech. Malema argued that the chant was not literal, rather that it was "directed at the system of oppression." EFF fan Rushé Cawa took aim at Goosen, writing on X: "I never want to see Retief Goosen in this country again." The EFF and Malema have repeatedly criticized the South African delegation that visited Washington, saying South Africa had been "embarrassed" and calling the meeting an "interaction dominated by white privileged men, who have amassed wealth at the expense of African people." Sihle Lonzi, the head of the EFF's Students' Command, posted a photo of Els, Goosen and Rupert, saying: "Cyril Ramaphosa has surrendered South Africa's Foreign Policy to these three Golfers! Johann Rupert, Ernie Els, and Retief Goosen." Although Rupert is not a golfer he serves as chairman of the South African PGA Tour and chairman of the South African Golf Development Board. Not all South Africans agreed with the criticism of the golfers. Katia Beeden, a campaigner for "persecuted minority South Africans" and spokesperson for Amerikaners, a group that supports "disenfranchised South Africans seeking a new future in the United States" praised how the meeting went. "It was very intense, and I think it was very brave, and necessary, and it was the first time ever the ANC and Cyril Ramaposa have been called out for their crimes," she told Newsweek. "So, yeah, I am absolutely delighted that the rot and the corruption and the death has been called out and exposed for the world to see. And let's hope that it's going to bring out positive change," she added. Volkstaat, an account advocating for "independence and freedom for Afrikaaners," wrote on X: "This is pure gold. Ramaphosa brought two white Pro golfers (Retief Goosen and one other) to show there's no systemic genocide of whites. This backfired when Retief told everyone his dad's farmer friends were murdered." Gilbert Martin, the founder of the group We Are South Africans (the largest independent civil-society movement in South Africa), thanked Els, Goosen and the others present at the White House in a Facebook post praising the meeting. "Did anyone notice that during the media briefing between South Africa and the United States, not just one but our entire government, including the official ruling party, opposition, ministers, organized labour, sportspeople, and big business, were all present in the White House Media Room," he said. "They openly discussed our many pressing issues, with each of them speaking honestly about the concerns raised by the United States." Els said: "We proud South Africans. I still have my South African passport. We travel with these passport and I got my visa here. So we wanna see things get better in our home country, that's the bottom line. "It's been 35 years since the transition. President Ramaphosa was in the middle of the transition at the time, in 1990, and before that. So it's been 35 years of ANC government and I know there's a lot of anger through the transition – there was a lot of stuff happening in the apartheid days. You know we grew up in the apartheid era, but I don't think two wrongs makes a right. "You know, President Mandela, when he came out of prison for all that time, didn't come out with hatred, you know, and really unified our nation through sport. You know we won the Rugby World Cup in '95." He went on: "We won the African Nations Cup in soccer, you know we've won some majors as golfers and so forth. So what I'm trying to say is – this has been a long time coming. That's why we really wanted to meet you, meet the administration and see our way forward, because we still want see our country flourish. You know, we've got so many great things going on – businesses getting involved with government, farming, farmers are getting involved in local municipalities trying to rebuild some of the infrastructure that's been decaying for a long time. So there's a lot of co-existence going on and help from a lot of areas. But we need – I feel we need the U.S. to push this thing through. We've got a great ally – the U.S. has always been an ally of South Africa for a very long time, even in the days of the war in Angola, you know you guys helped us. So, very important for us to have your support and get the change we need." Goosen said: "I grew up in an area in South Africa that is a farmland area – Polekwane – and there is some issues up there, obviously. My dad was a property developer as well as part-time farmer and yeah, some of his buddy farmers got killed. The farm is still going, my brothers run it. But that's a constant battle with farms trying to get – they're trying to burn the farms down to chase you away, so it is a concern to try and make a living as a farmer. And, at the end of the way, you know, without farmers, there's no food on the plate. So we need the farmers. "You know, food and fresh water is the most important thing in life. Without those two things, you can't survive." Trump then asked: "Your family and your brothers—do they feel safe on the farm?" Goosen answered: "They live behind electric fences you know, tryna be at night safe. But it is constant, whenever you leave, that something could happen. Both of them have been attacked in their houses, my mom's been attacked... It is difficult but you know the guys live a great life despite everything going on." Related Articles Ex-Trump Adviser Fact-Checks 'White Genocide' Claim-'Just Not True'Hundreds of Gold Miners Trapped Underground RescuedThe 1600: Trump's Tax Bill Clears House in Razor-Thin VoteWhite House Lashes Out Over South Africa Video 'Unsubstantiated' Comments 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Yahoo
02-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - Ceasefires aren't guesswork: Trump's Ukraine deal needs data, not bluster
President Trump's much-hyped Ukraine ceasefire lasted only one hour. But was anyone really that surprised? Its terms were vague, short-sighted and lacked components that any credible peace deal requires. In the 21st century, data informs most public policy decisions. So why aren't peace negotiations evidence-led? Is there a secret formula for a successful ceasefire? That depends on how we define success. Is the aim to stop the fighting quickly, to build the foundation for lasting peace, or to avert a humanitarian catastrophe? Each outcome requires different priorities, and each should be shaped by evidence. So far, Trump's negotiations — focused on land and power plants — have failed to address any of these goals. His demands were unlikely to secure a durable peace and unsurprisingly, the ceasefire collapsed in just 60 minutes, as Russia resumed strikes on homes, hospitals and power infrastructure. Before attempting further talks, Trump needs to consult academia, experts in peacebuilding, international relations and, yes, even history. Fortunately, we're not just flying blind. Academics and researchers have spent decades analysing peace and negotiations and identifying the factors that lead to sustainable outcomes. One report categorizes ceasefire success into two distinct criteria: the immediate objective and the underlying purpose. Trump's demands didn't align with either, and it showed. The Ceasefire Project reviewed all ceasefires involving at least one state actor between 1989 and 2020. Their findings? Successful ceasefires typically have three things in common: a political process that addresses the root causes of the violence, a robust monitoring mechanism, and the ceasefire must last a minimum of 100 days. Trump's discussion with Russia's president didn't even address the first criteria, the underlying cause of the war (such as Ukraine's proposed NATO membership), and lacked any verification plan. There's also no shortage of case studies specific to Russia. During the 2014 Donbas conflict, the Minsk Protocol created a ceasefire that satisfied many of Moscow's initial demands. Yet fighting resumed within weeks. Conversely, in the 2008 Georgia conflict, Russia accepted several structured terms to end hostilities, including humanitarian aid access, mutual troop withdrawals and the temporary presence of Russian peacekeepers, which in this case did prevent violence from resuming. These details matter — they reflect a negotiated process, not a political stunt. Ceasefires can also come with difficult trade-offs. In some conflicts, humanitarian access has been part of the negotiated pauses in fighting. For instance, in Sudan, a 2024 ceasefire allowed food and medicine to reach civilians displaced by conflict. But history shows this can be a double-edged sword. In the Angolan Civil War, a humanitarian pause enabled a successful polio vaccination drive, yet the same pause gave warring factions time to rearm. These examples don't define a ceasefire's success, but they do reinforce why careful planning and data must underpin every negotiation. We use data and evidence to shape decisions in nearly every policy domain. Academics produce policy-relevant research, advise government agencies and contribute to policy debates. Researchers and academics advise the U.S. National Academy of Sciences's new pandemic committee, using lessons from the COVID-19 outbreak to guide future decision-making. Yet in war and peace, arguably the highest stakes arena, some leaders still rely on instinct over insight. That needs to change. Ultimately, there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach for ceasefires, especially given Vladimir Putin's ideological and political motivations for invading Ukraine. Some even question whether peace is a real objective for him. But what we do know is that ceasefires that collapse in minutes cost lives. Every negotiation must be rooted in rigorous analysis. The intelligence exists, so let's learn from it instead of repeating history. Gilad Tanay is the founder and chairperson of research and consultancy firm ERI Institute. Previously, he co-founded and served as U.S. director of Academics Stand Against Poverty, an international nongovernmental organization. He also served as a lecturer and fellow at the Global Justice Program at Yale University. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
02-04-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Ceasefires aren't guesswork: Trump's Ukraine deal needs data, not bluster
President Trump's much-hyped Ukraine ceasefire lasted only one hour. But was anyone really that surprised? Its terms were vague, short-sighted and lacked components that any credible peace deal requires. In the 21st century, data informs most public policy decisions. So why aren't peace negotiations evidence-led? Is there a secret formula for a successful ceasefire? That depends on how we define success. Is the aim to stop the fighting quickly, to build the foundation for lasting peace, or to avert a humanitarian catastrophe? Each outcome requires different priorities, and each should be shaped by evidence. So far, Trump's negotiations — focused on land and power plants — have failed to address any of these goals. His demands were unlikely to secure a durable peace and unsurprisingly, the ceasefire collapsed in just 60 minutes, as Russia resumed strikes on homes, hospitals and power infrastructure. Before attempting further talks, Trump needs to consult academia, experts in peacebuilding, international relations and, yes, even history. Fortunately, we're not just flying blind. Academics and researchers have spent decades analysing peace and negotiations and identifying the factors that lead to sustainable outcomes. One report categorizes ceasefire success into two distinct criteria: the immediate objective and the underlying purpose. Trump's demands didn't align with either, and it showed. The Ceasefire Project reviewed all ceasefires involving at least one state actor between 1989 and 2020. Their findings? Successful ceasefires typically have three things in common: a political process that addresses the root causes of the violence, a robust monitoring mechanism, and the ceasefire must last a minimum of 100 days. Trump's discussion with Russia's president didn't even address the first criteria, the underlying cause of the war (such as Ukraine's proposed NATO membership), and lacked any verification plan. There's also no shortage of case studies specific to Russia. During the 2014 Donbas conflict, the Minsk Protocol created a ceasefire that satisfied many of Moscow's initial demands. Yet fighting resumed within weeks. Conversely, in the 2008 Georgia conflict, Russia accepted several structured terms to end hostilities, including humanitarian aid access, mutual troop withdrawals and the temporary presence of Russian peacekeepers, which in this case did prevent violence from resuming. These details matter — they reflect a negotiated process, not a political stunt. Ceasefires can also come with difficult trade-offs. In some conflicts, humanitarian access has been part of the negotiated pauses in fighting. For instance, in Sudan, a 2024 ceasefire allowed food and medicine to reach civilians displaced by conflict. But history shows this can be a double-edged sword. In the Angolan Civil War, a humanitarian pause enabled a successful polio vaccination drive, yet the same pause gave warring factions time to rearm. These examples don't define a ceasefire's success, but they do reinforce why careful planning and data must underpin every negotiation. We use data and evidence to shape decisions in nearly every policy domain. Academics produce policy-relevant research, advise government agencies and contribute to policy debates. Researchers and academics advise the U.S. National Academy of Sciences's new pandemic committee, using lessons from the COVID-19 outbreak to guide future decision-making. Yet in war and peace, arguably the highest stakes arena, some leaders still rely on instinct over insight. That needs to change. Ultimately, there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach for ceasefires, especially given Vladimir Putin's ideological and political motivations for invading Ukraine. Some even question whether peace is a real objective for him. But what we do know is that ceasefires that collapse in minutes cost lives. Every negotiation must be rooted in rigorous analysis. The intelligence exists, so let's learn from it instead of repeating history. Gilad Tanay is the founder and chairperson of research and consultancy firm ERI Institute. Previously, he co-founded and served as U.S. director of Academics Stand Against Poverty, an international nongovernmental organization. He also served as a lecturer and fellow at the Global Justice Program at Yale University.
