Lyn Frans
In his annual address to the nation on Thursday, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa appeared to address threats from U.S. President Donald Trump, asserting that his country would “not be bullied.”
Ramaphosa’s remarks were interpreted as a response to Trump’s announcement to cut all funding to South Africa due to a new land expropriation law, although he did not directly name Trump.
“We are witnessing the rise of nationalism and protectionism, the pursuit of narrow interests, and the decline of common cause,” Ramaphosa stated at Parliament in Cape Town. “This is the reality that we, as a developing economy, must navigate.”
He emphasized, “But we are not daunted. We will not be deterred. We are a resilient people. We will not be bullied. We will stand together as a united nation and we will speak with one voice in defense of our national interests, our sovereignty, and our constitutional democracy.”
Related:https://mediawireexpress.co.tz/trump-plans-to-cut-us-funding-to-south-africa/
That part of the of the speech received applause and cheers from members of Parliament and other attendees at South Africa’s version of the State of the Union.
Throughout the week, Ramaphosa and his administration have been working to defend the country’s reputation and legal processes following Trump’s post on Sunday on his Truth Social platform. Trump announced he would halt all U.S. funding to South Africa, accusing it of “confiscating land and treating certain classes of people VERY BADLY,” without specifying who he meant. He claimed that the country’s leadership was committing a “massive Human Rights VIOLATION” that the media was overlooking.
He claimed that the South African government was “doing some terrible things, horrible things,” without offering any specifics
Trump’s remarks appeared to refer to a law passed last month in South Africa that permits the government to expropriate land from private owners. Ramaphosa and his administration have defended the law, stating it targets unused land or land that can be redistributed for the public good, and emphasized that there are legal safeguards in place to prevent arbitrary land seizures. They asserted that no land has been confiscated.
