State Department Bars South African Officials Without Disclosing Names; Secrecy Raises Acc

Secretary of State Marco Rubio invoked Section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act on Tuesday, 15 September, to impose targeted visa restrictions on unnamed individuals within South Africa’s government and state apparatus. The legal authority permits the Secretary of State to bar any foreign national whose entry would carry serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.

The restrictions do not apply to South Africa as a nation or its general population. They target specific officials and state actors deemed responsible for, or complicit in, laws and policies that the United States characterizes as enabling uncompensated land seizures, race-based discrimination, and incitement of violence against minority ethnic or racial groups. Rubio framed the action as a response to what he described as the South African government’s failure to adequately address longstanding American concerns, stating that the United States would not permit such behavior to proceed unchecked and that these actions undermine peace, economic stability, and the rule of law.

The US government has declined to publish a list of targeted individuals. Affected persons will learn of their status only when they attempt to apply for visas or travel to the United States. Past reporting has suggested that EFF leader Julius Malema and potentially some ANC leaders could be among those affected, though no official confirmation has been provided. Certain family members of targeted individuals may also fall within the scope of the restrictions, according to Rubio’s explanation of the policy’s legal basis. No further detail on how broadly that provision applies has been released.

US Ambassador to South Africa Leo Brent Bozell III made clear that the visa restrictions are not the final word. In a post on X, Bozell described the policy as “only the first step in a series of escalatory measures that will show America’s firm resolve in this matter,” adding that dialogue between the two governments had reached its limit and that consequences would necessarily be severe.

The announcement follows a formal message delivered to President Cyril Ramaphosa in Pretoria on 26 August, when Bozell conveyed specific American grievances on behalf of President Donald Trump. Those grievances included concerns about Black Economic Empowerment policies, the government’s response to the “Kill the Boer” struggle chant, expropriation legislation, and what Washington views as insufficient efforts to address rural crime. Ramaphosa’s spokesperson Vincent Magwenya indicated the president was preparing a “timely” response, though whether that response has since been delivered remains unclear.

The visa policy builds on an executive order Trump signed in February 2025, titled “Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa.” That order expressed grave concern about racially motivated crime and government-sponsored discrimination against Afrikaners and other minority populations, citing race-based legislation, threats of land expropriation without compensation, and incitement of racial violence through dehumanizing chants and slogans.

South Africa’s government rejected the February executive order outright. Officials stated it lacked factual accuracy and failed to recognize the country’s history of colonialism and apartheid. The government characterized the order as part of a campaign of misinformation and countered that Afrikaners were among the most economically privileged groups in the country. Ramaphosa has previously described Trump’s Afrikaner refugee policy as uninformed and racist.

By contrast, AfriForum, a civil rights organization, welcomed the fact that the restrictions targeted individuals rather than the nation as a whole. AfriForum leader Kallie Kriel stated that the organization was pleased the measures focused on those who incite ethnic violence and those responsible for implementing expropriation and race-based discrimination policies. Kriel placed full responsibility for the American action on the South African government, citing its failure to take meaningful steps to address the issues raised.

Democratic Alliance MP Ryan Smith acknowledged the right of democratic countries to determine their own laws but noted that many ANC policies referenced by the United States had failed to serve the South African public or achieve their intended outcomes. Smith pointed to economic contraction, rising unemployment, and endemic crime as domestic policy failures warranting government attention independent of any international pressure.

The ANC, the EFF, and the Department of International Relations and Cooperation had not yet issued substantive responses at the time of reporting, though officials indicated statements would follow. Whether Pretoria’s formal reply to Trump’s August message will shape the next round of escalatory measures, or arrive too late to alter the trajectory, is the question now hanging over both governments.