This Act mandates a full review of U.S.-South Africa bilateral relations, requires a presidential certification on whether South Africa harms U.S. interests, and terminates South Africa's trade preferences if such harm is certified.
John Kennedy
Senator
LA
The U.S.-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act mandates a comprehensive review of the current relationship between the two nations based on concerns over South Africa's foreign policy alignment with Russia, China, and Hamas. Following this review, the President must report to Congress and certify whether South Africa's actions harm U.S. national security interests. If such harm is certified, the bill requires the President to identify sanctionable officials and immediately terminate South Africa's eligibility for key trade preference programs.
The US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act is essentially a massive, mandatory policy review triggered by Congress’s deep frustration with South Africa’s foreign policy choices. This isn't just a strongly worded letter; it sets up a formal mechanism to potentially strip South Africa of crucial trade benefits if the President agrees that their actions are hurting U.S. national security.
Section 2 of this Act reads like a detailed indictment, listing exactly why Congress is concerned. They argue that South Africa, led by the African National Congress (ANC), is no longer truly non-aligned. Instead, Congress sees them actively siding with U.S. adversaries. For instance, the bill cites South Africa’s increasing ties with Russia, pointing to things like allowing the sanctioned Russian ship Lady R to dock and transfer arms in December 2022, and conducting joint naval exercises with Russia and China around the anniversary of the Ukraine invasion (Sec. 2). They also highlight South Africa’s deepening relationship with China, noting the presence of numerous CCP-linked Confucius Institutes and cooperation that imports China’s surveillance model via firms like Huawei and ZTE (Sec. 2).
Crucially, the findings focus heavily on South Africa’s response to the October 7, 2023, attacks, citing officials who blamed Israel, met with Hamas leaders, and filed a genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (Sec. 2). For the average person, this means the U.S. government is formally linking South Africa’s geopolitical choices—like who they talk to and who they trade with—to a direct threat to U.S. interests.
This bill gives the President 120 days to conduct a full review of the U.S.-South Africa relationship and then make a critical, public decision: Is South Africa doing anything that harms U.S. national security or foreign policy interests? (Sec. 5). This certification is the whole ballgame. If the President certifies that South Africa is causing harm, Section 7 kicks in immediately.
Section 7 is the economic hammer: South Africa would instantly lose its eligibility for trade preferences under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). For South African businesses, especially those exporting goods like cars, textiles, and agricultural products to the U.S. duty-free, this is a massive deal. Losing AGOA status means their products suddenly face tariffs, making them more expensive and less competitive in the U.S. market. Think of it like a small South African wine producer suddenly seeing a 10-15% price hike on their bottles in American stores. This shift could lead to job losses and economic strain in South Africa.
The bill also requires the President to create a special, classified report listing high-ranking South African government officials and ANC leaders who might be eligible for sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act (Sec. 6). This is the targeted approach. The report must detail the corruption or human rights abuses they are allegedly involved in and state whether the U.S. plans to sanction them or explain why they won't (Sec. 6). While this section aims at individuals, it signals that the U.S. is prepared to use financial penalties against the country's political elite, potentially chilling diplomatic and business interactions involving those officials.