JOHANNESBURG – Key Republicans are already pressing the incoming Trump administration to kick South Africa out of lucrative trade arrangements, should the South African government not change its position on Russia, China, Iran and Israel.

Most at risk is South Africa’s duty-free exports to the U.S. of items such as cars and citrus fruit under AGOA – the African Growth and Opportunity Act, and with it the potential loss of tens of thousands of African jobs. South Africa is likely to be under intense scrutiny from the incoming administration. 

A publication from the Center for African Studies at Howard University, in 2023, warned that a country wanting AGOA’s preferential trade agreements ‘cannot act in a manner that undermines U.S. national security or foreign policy interests’.

South Africa joins Russia’s military aircraft and naval vessels on exercises, allowing Pretoria’s naval bases to be used by the Kremlin and Russia’s sanctioned warships. Senior South African military officials have received training in Moscow. At the U.N., South Africa has refused to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. 

South Africa’s majority ANC party has met with terror group Hamas, and recently one branch of the ANC supported a local Muslim leader who reportedly shouted to a cheering crowd, ‘I am Hamas, Cape Town is Hamas, Viva Hamas!’ The government also issued a statement condemning the killing this year of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh. The country’s foreign minister, Ronald Lamola, spoke out against the ‘assassination’ of this designated terrorist leader, saying ‘such acts of extrajudicial killings violate international law.’

South Africa has accused Israel of genocide at the International Court of Justice.

South Africa’s biggest trading partner is China, with the two countries being founder members of the BRICS trade organization. South Africa has welcomed the inclusion now of Iran in BRICS. There have been accusations of deep links between Tehran and Pretoria.

‘Given the South African positions on the Russia-Ukraine and Mideast conflicts, South Africa is leaning away from American positions in a number of ways, most especially in its vigorous pursuit of Israel and its leaders in the international courts,’ J. Brooks Spector told Fox News Digital. 

Spector, a former U.S. diplomat now based in Johannesburg, and deputy editor of the respected Daily Maverick, added that ‘continuing action and rhetoric by South Africa in its pursuit of Israel in international court efforts will, however, encourage Republicans in Congress (and probably in the administration as well) to strip South Africa of benefits under the African Growth and Opportunity Act, assuming the act is renewed next year.’

‘Such pursuits by the South African government may also lead to efforts to cut back on assistance to important efforts such as PEPFAR – the aid program that, together with the Global Fund and local organizations, has been crucial in the country’s successful efforts combatting HIV and AIDS.’

One such leading Republican, Sen. Jim Risch of Idaho, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Fox News Digital, ‘I remain concerned about South Africa’s efforts to cozy up to Russia, China and Iran, including Iran’s terror proxies, and the impact this has on U.S. national security – a vital element in AGOA eligibility. The country’s foreign policy actions will remain a focus of my oversight efforts.’ 

Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Africa and member of the Senate Finance Committee, slammed South Africa in 2023, ‘South Africa has harbored sanctioned Russian ships, expanded relations with Iran and issued statements against Israel’s right to defend itself following Hamas’ recent terror attacks’ 

Both of these influential Republican leaders are expected to become more powerful when President-elect Trump takes office in January, with Scott’s office staff telling Fox News Digital, ‘Sen. Scott looks forward to working with the Trump administration to ensure that AGOA participants are not undermining our national security interests.’

South Africa’s moves are very definitely in an extremely bright spotlight in Washington. From inside the beltway, Richard Goldberg told Fox News Digital he’s worried particularly over potential links between South Africa and Iran. Goldberg is a former member of the National Security Council, and a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He told Fox, ‘The first step is to build the case publicly, and give South Africa one last moment of choosing. We should declassify intelligence about South Africa’s deep relationship with Iran, and any other support or partnership with terrorist groups.’

Goldberg continued, ‘And then we need to use our full diplomatic and economic weight to force Pretoria to choose between the United States and our terrorist adversaries. AGOA should be one of several items on the policy menu.’

South Africa’s Department of International Relations didn’t respond to several requests for comment. But COSATU’s Parliamentary Co-ordinator, Matthew Parks did. COSATU is the Confederation of South African Trade Unions, historically aligned with President Cyril Ramaphosa’s ANC party. Parks is highly respected for his meaningful and dignified pursuance of workers’ rights. His members have much to lose, including potentially their jobs, if South Africa is pushed out of AGOA. But he appeared to be cautiously optimistic when talking to Fox News Digital, ‘We are confident that our relations with the U.S. will continue to grow, including through AGOA, simply because it is to the benefit of both our peoples.’

‘We’ve been extensively involved in engagements between South Africa and the U.S., on how to deepen our relations and toward the renewal of AGOA,’ Parks continued.  ‘We’ve engaged extensively with our colleagues in the U.S. labor movement, business community, Congress (both Republicans and Democrats), the State Department, Department of Labor, NSC and the White House.’

As Trump moves into the White House, nearby Ebrahim Rassool will be starting his second term as South African ambassador to the U.S. This month he talked to the Daily Maverick on South Africa’s challenges with the new administration, referring to South Africa’s attack on Israel at the ICJ. ‘We will stick by the case, but let us now trust our legal team,’ he said, ‘trust the evidence that we have placed in front of the judges of the ICJ, trust the judges of the ICJ to come to a sustainable, just solution – but that we need to put away the megaphone now.’ 

Rassool pointed out that the South African oranges exported to the U.S. under AGOA enabled Americans to drink orange juice all year round, when Florida and California oranges were out of season. 

And Rassool added, ‘Why would you want to punish America with expensive cars when the BMWs coming from South Africa are going to be much cheaper than getting them from Germany or manufacturing your own?

‘Likewise, to point out that American cancer patients are receiving medical nuclear isotopes that come from South Africa.’

The expulsion of South Africa from AGOA would be ‘disastrous,’ Renai Moothilal wrote in the Business Day newspaper last year. Moothilal is CEO of the National Association of Automotive Component & Allied Manufacturers, and wrote, ‘It will be no surprise if some component manufacturers close their doors. U.S.-headquartered multinational manufacturers with plants here may exit the South African country if there are volume losses linked to our exclusion from AGOA, or other forms of political pressure are brought to bear.’

Observers note there are loud threats coming from President-elect Trump himself, including a claim that he will slap a 100% import tariff on countries like South Africa if, as members of BRICS, they adopt a new currency to rival the dollar. In the other corner of the ring, South African politicians are taking a more placatory and reserved tone. The Democratic Alliance or DA is South Africa’s main opposition party. But since May, they have also been members of the government of national unity, working in a sometimes noisy coalition with President Ramaphosa’s ANC. 

Emma Powell, the DA’s national spokesperson for foreign affairs, told Fox News Digital that it’s likely the relationship between Pretoria and Washington ‘will become increasingly transactional, with greater emphasis placed on equitable reciprocity. This would contrast the Biden administration’s approach to beneficiation-based investment and development. There is also likely to be less tolerance for any action on the part of the South African government that may be perceived as undermining the national security interests of the United States.’

Powell added ‘the Trump administration is also likely to take a more cautious approach on AGOA eligibility.’

J. Brooks Spector told Fox News Digital he could take home one strong positive: ‘The incoming U.S. president’s often-expressed support for transactional foreign economic policies may possibly be an incentive for Africa’s nations – urged on by South Africa – to come together with initiatives offering trade and market concessions in Africa to America.’

President-elect Trump got the attention of Panama and the entire international community when he said this week that the United States would demand that Panamanian officials return control of the Panama Canal to the United States if Panama does not halt the ‘rip-off’ of the United States.

Trump made the case that the United States built it, paid for it and that President Jimmy Carter ‘foolishly gave it away.’

President José Raúl Mulino shot back that the Panama Canal belongs to Panama. Trump noted that ‘it was given to Panama and to the people of Panama, but it has provisions. You got to treat us fairly and they haven’t treated us fairly.’

Make no mistake what Trump is doing is negotiating a new treaty for the Panama Canal and hence, a better deal for the American people. This is much akin to the playbook executed by President Teddy Roosevelt, who maneuvered a complex situation involving the French, the government of Colombia, and the Panamanian people to build the Panama Canal.

The Panama Canal is vital to free commerce and the national security interests of the United States. Approximately 73% of all ships coming through the Panama Canal are heading to or coming from U.S. ports. 

It is also vital for international supply chains and global maritime trade itself. It played a huge role in the shipping of goods needed by allied forces during World War II, and thousands of U.S. troops were stationed there to guarantee its security.

Most concerning now is the growing influence of Communist China in Central and South America. In 2017, under the administration of former Panamanian President Juan Carlos Varela, Panama switched diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to Communist China. The then Trump administration went into action and, following a visit by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in October of 2018, the Varela government canceled five infrastructure projects with Chinese companies.

Craig Fuller, CEO at FreightWaves, recently pointed out that there are concerns that ‘China might embed surveillance technology within the Canal’s infrastructure, which could be used to monitor U.S. naval and commercial movements.’ He further notes that this potential for espionage increases strategic risks and could provide China with key insights into U.S. logistics and military operations. 

This certainly helps explain why the commander of U.S. Southern Command, Gen. Laura Richardson, told the House Armed Services Committee earlier this year that ‘China is exercising our playbook of being present economically and equipping the United States’ hemispheric neighbors militarily.’ From a timing standpoint, the new president of Panama, who took office earlier this year, is seen as being more aligned with Trump philosophically, and thus, much better to negotiate with.

It is important to understand the history of the Panama Canal treaty. President Carter negotiated giving full control of the canal in 1977 to Gen. Omar Torrijos, the military leader of Panama who took power in a coup d’état. He was also an ally of Manuel Noriega’s. 

The giveaway of the Panama Canal was hugely unpopular in the United States and was one of the reasons why Ronald Reagan was able to close the gap in his 1976 GOP presidential challenge to President Gerald Ford. As Reagan was preparing for his subsequent and successful run for the presidency in 1980, he addressed this issue in a speech at Western Kentucky University. 

There he blasted the Carter administration for moving forward with the transfer of the canal to ‘a man (Omar Torrijos) who’s there, not because he had the most votes, but because he had the most guns.’ Reagan went on to say internationally that the world would not see the giveaway of the canal ‘as a magnanimous gesture on our part…’ but as ‘once again America backing away and retreating in the face of trouble.’

One thing that many observers are overlooking is that many legal scholars agree that a United States president has the power to rescind or terminate a treaty. For example, President George W. Bush unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002.

Likewise, President William MicKinley terminated certain articles in a commercial treaty with Switzerland, and President Calvin Coolidge withdrew the United States from a convention to prevent smuggling with Mexico. 

And during World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt unilaterally terminated a number of treaties. Look for Trump to use this threat to negotiate a treaty, or at least extract concessions, from the Panamanian government.

Trump has inherited the most complex foreign policy landscape a commander in chief has ever faced. Whether it is the growing threat of Communist China, the thought of Iran with nuclear weapons, turmoil in the Middle East, or the Russian-Ukraine situation, Trump is facing constant national security challenges on the world stage. 

Yes, it is an international chess game and, thus far, America’s incoming commander in chief is playing it like the late World Chess champion Bobby Fischer.

Former President Barack Obama’s years of dominating Democratic Party politics may be drawing to a close, as he and party leaders will likely face a ‘greater reckoning’ after Democrats’ losses in the 2024 election, experts predict. 

The whirlwind presidential election saw the Democratic Party rally around both President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris as their nominee at separate times – all with Obama’s seal of approval. The political landscape shifted with a single tweet from Biden on a Sunday July afternoon, with Obama and his allies deeply entwined with efforts to navigate the party to what they hoped would be an electoral victory come Nov. 5, a look back at the cycle shows. 

President-elect Trump notched a decisive win last month, racking up 312 electoral votes to Harris’ 226 and taking a victory lap for what the media has described as an ‘historic political comeback’ that has shaken the Democratic establishment as they pivot to combating Trump 2.0 and his policies. 

‘I think there are going to be big demands for a greater reckoning. The Democratic politburo – Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, Jeffries and others – all participated in the obvious lie that Biden was capable of a second term, in the anti-Democratic move to install a wholly untested Vice President Harris,’ Democratic strategist Julian Epstein told Fox News Digital when asked about Obama’s legacy following the election. ‘And in lacking the courage for the past four years to stand up a progressive left whose policies are far out of touch with most voters.’ 

‘They all failed the test of leadership in this respect.’ 

Obama and his orbit criticized for not understanding why Democrats lost the election 

This month, Obama delivered a speech at the 2024 Obama Democracy Forum, which earned him a headline on MSNBC, reading, ‘Obama still doesn’t get why Trump won. That’s the problem.’

Obama’s characteristic rhetorical virtues were on full display. He was a constitutional law professor before he was a politician, and he still sounds like one. At the same time, he was a once-in-a-generation talent as a political communicator. He knows how to convey a complex set of ideas in a digestible and appealing way,’ the op-ed read. 

‘But there was a massive gaping hole at the center of his speech. He still doesn’t understand why his eight years in power culminated in the rise of Trump,’ the op-ed continued, arguing that the ‘first step’ to better respond to Americans’ demand for change from the status quo ‘​​is to stop listening to Barack Obama.’

The Democratic Party and Harris campaign have been dragged by some allies, such as Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, for moving away from working-class voters while Trump rallied their support. Harris came under fire, for example, for featuring Hollywood celebrities and musicians during her campaign rallies, which were viewed as tone-deaf as Americans struggled with inflation, and their anxiety mounted over ongoing wars in Israel and Ukraine.

Now,the Democratic Party is in the midst of a reckoning over the failed election efforts, which saw the White House and Senate flip red and the House remain in the GOP’s control.

‘Harris’ advisers blame everything but themselves for their loss,’ an op-ed published in the Washington Post this month reads. The piece took issue with how a handful of Harris campaign staffers joined the left-wing ‘Pod Save America’ podcast, which is hosted by former Obama aides, and defended their work on the campaign. 

David Plouffe, Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, Stephanie Cutter and ​​Quentin Fulks joined the show – all of whom, except Fulks, previously worked for Obama’s presidential campaigns or administration. 

‘What the four never did is directly admit any major mistakes they made. ‘We should have really pushed Harris to distance herself from President Biden’; ‘Maybe we spent too much time in Arizona’ (Harris lost there by 6 percentage points); ‘We should have had a Palestinian speaker at the Democratic National Convention.’ There were no blunt statements like that,’ the op-ed read. 

While the New York Post editorial board declared in a headline following the election: ‘Trump and America bury the Obama doctrine.’

When ‘​​Obama installed Kamala Harris as the latest face of his revolution, the American public of all colors, ages and genders finally called time,’ the Post editorial board argued. ‘Voters at last saw through the industrialized demonization of Trump and woke up to the truth that his policies are far closer to the American ideal and what they consider normal.’

‘Let’s all pray that our self-proclaimed betters in their Martha’s Vineyard mansions will finally realize that this was the death of ‘Obamaism’ once this latest thumping fully sinks in,’ they concluded. 

Amid the unprecedented election cycle for Democrats, Obama and his longtime allies have been entwined with Biden’s exit and Harris’ rise and fall as the nominee.  

Biden Pushed Out 

Concerns over President Biden’s mental fitness had circulated for years, heightening last winter when Special Counsel Robert Hur, who was investigating the president’s alleged mishandling of classified documents when he was vice president, characterized Biden in his report as ‘a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.’ 

Biden’s actions on the national and international stage soon came under further scrutiny, showcasing a handful of gaffes and miscues, including Obama taking Biden’s wrist to seemingly lead him offstage at a fundraiser in LA in June, and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni directing Biden back to a gaggle of world leaders in Italy that same month, and data showing Biden frequently delivered remarks to supporters at campaign rallies for a shorter amount of time than a sitcom. 

Amid the controversy, however, Obama was seemingly acting as Biden’s political closer to help lock up votes and donations, joining the 46th president at swank fundraisers in California and New York City, and at a moderated conversation with late night host Stephen Colbert between Obama, Biden and former President Bill Clinton. 

Biden and Trump’s only debate of the election cycle opened the floodgates to both Democrats and Republicans questioning and sounding off with concern over Biden’s mental acuity. Biden was seen tripping over his words during the debate, losing his train of thought at times, responding with a raspy voice, and was overall slammed for having a slow and weak demeanor while squaring off against Trump.

Just days after the disastrous debate, Obama defended Biden’s performance by arguing the election pitted a political crusader supporting ‘ordinary folks’ against Trump, whom he described as a man ‘who only cares about himself.’ 

‘Bad debate nights happen. Trust me, I know. But this election is still a choice between someone who has fought for ordinary folks his entire life and someone who only cares about himself. Between someone who tells the truth; who knows right from wrong and will give it to the American people straight – and someone who lies through his teeth for his own benefit. Last night didn’t change that, and it’s why so much is at stake in November,’ he posted to X, accompanied by a link to Biden’s campaign website. 

Obama remained vocally coy on Biden in the subsequent days, as the White House was grilled about the president’s mental acuity, and soon traditional Democratic allies of the president began calling on Biden to pass the torch to a younger generation. 

Notably, a list of Obama allies and former advisers led the charge in calling for Biden’s exit from the race, including former adviser David Axelrod, former director of speech writing Jon Favreau, former advisers Jon Lovett and Tommy Vietor, and Hollywood actor and longtime Obama friend George Clooney. 

‘It’s devastating to say it, but the Joe Biden I was with three weeks ago at the fundraiser was not the Joe ‘big F-ing deal’ Biden of 2010,’ Clooney wrote in a New York Times op-ed after joining Biden and Obama for the fundraiser in L.A. ‘He wasn’t even the Joe Biden of 2020. He was the same man we all witnessed at the debate.’

As media reports circulated that Obama was working ‘behind the scenes’ to oust Biden from the race, the 44th president remained mum, not denying the reports. Politico reported that Clooney even gave Obama a ‘heads-up’ that his op-ed calling on Biden to bow out of the race was set to publish, with Obama reportedly not objecting to the opinion piece.

Biden dropped out of the race on July 21 in a message posted to X that Sunday afternoon. Obama commended Biden’s decades in politics in response, but did not tip his hand on who he would endorse to take his place. 

​​’There is no singular reason why we lost, but a big reason is because the Obama advisers publicly encouraged Democratic infighting to push Joe Biden out, didn’t even want Kamala Harris as the nominee, and then signed up as the saviors of the campaign, only to run outdated Obama-era playbooks for a candidate that wasn’t Obama,’ one former Biden staffer told Politico.

Harris Takes the Mantle 

Biden endorsed Harris the same afternoon he dropped out of the race, teeing her up for a likely nomination with just 100 days and change to rally support from voters. 

Obama has had a long relationship with Harris, as she was among the first elected Democrats in the nation to endorse Obama’s first run for president in the 2008 election, snubbing Hillary Clinton in favor of the then-Illinois senator. 

Harris was in attendance when Obama announced his candidacy for president in 2007, after first meeting him in 2004 when he was an Illinois state senator running for the U.S. Senate, the Washington Examiner previously reported. 

‘Barack Obama will be a president who finally ends the era of fear that has been used to divide and demoralize our country,’ Harris said during California’s Democratic convention in 2008. 

As Harris built her political career from San Francisco district attorney to California attorney general and then senator, Harris was even dubbed ‘the female Obama’ by some political analysts. 

In her second presidential campaign, Harris on-boarded or retained a bevy of Obama orbit allies and former staffers, including: former Obama campaign manager David Plouffe; former deputy campaign manager for Obama’s 2012 election Stephanie Cutter; former Obama campaign grassroots strategist Mitch Stewart; and former Obama White House director of communications Jennifer Palmieri.

Harris also tapped Obama’s former attorney general, Eric Holder, to lead the vetting process of her potential running mates, while Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, who worked as Obama’s 2012 deputy campaign manager and Biden’s 2024 re-election campaign chair, was announced as Harris’ campaign manager. 

Obama has historically held his presidential endorsements close to his vest, offering his support to Harris the Friday after Biden dropped out as speculation mounted surrounding the coveted Obama endorsement. 

Obama, who was joined by former first lady Michelle Obama in the endorsement of Harris, solidified Harris as the likely nominee before the official virtual roll call vote and Harris flying to Chicago, where she accepted the nomination at the DNC. 

‘I’m feeling hopeful because this convention has always been pretty good to kids with funny names who believe in a country where anything is possible. Because we have the chance to elect someone who’s spent her entire life trying to give people the same chances America gave her. Someone who sees you and hears you and will get up every single day and fight for you: the next President of the United States of America, Kamala Harris,’ he declared from the DNC. 

The week before the DNC, Harris announced Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz would join the ticket as her running mate. Two years before winning the Oval Office in 2008, Obama was one of the few high-profile Democrats in the nation to campaign for Walz when he first launched a career in politics. 

Obama and Democratic establishment cave to left-wing faction 

Democratic strategist Julian Epstein, who formerly served as chief counsel for the House Judiciary Committee, took issue with Obama for not ‘sticking to his guns’ this election cycle in the face of left-wing policies. 

He commended Obama for challenging ‘woke’ culture ahead of the 2020 election, but said Obama failed to amplify those calls in the coming years. He arguably allowed the left-wing faction of the party to dominate messaging and policy that shifted the party left. 

‘This idea of purity and you’re never compromised and you’re always politically ‘woke’ and all that stuff,’ Obama said back in 2019 of ‘woke’ culture. ‘You should get over that quickly.’

‘The world is messy; there are ambiguities,’ he added. ‘People who do really good stuff have flaws. People who you are fighting may love their kids, and share certain things with you.’

Epstein said Obama ‘backed down’ to progressive Dems, while pointing to his comments from October scolding Black men who did not support Harris. 

‘For his part, Obama called out woke four years ago only to be shouted down by far-left virtue signalers.  But rather than sticking to his guns, he backed down both during the last four years when the progressive left hijacked policy on issues like immigration, but then more recently by suggesting that working-class Black men were bad people if they didn’t fall into line with the Democratic bosses and vote for Harris. It was a very bad look,’ Epstein said.