Trump backs South Africa ‘white genocide' claims with Congo footage
Trump showed the image during a White House meeting with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa on Wednesday, holding up a printout of an article that featured a screengrab from the footage, which Reuters said it originally published on February 3.
According to the news agency, the video shows humanitarian workers handling body bags in Goma, one of the main cities in eastern Congo captured by M23 rebels amid intense fighting in late January.
The screengrab appeared in a blog post by conservative outlet American Thinker, which discussed conflicts in both South Africa and the DRC, but did not caption the image.
'These are all white farmers that are being buried,' Trump said.
'You have hundreds of people, thousands of people trying to come into our country because they feel they're going to be killed and their land is going to be confiscated. And you do have laws that were passed that give you the right to confiscate land,' he claimed.
Andrea Widburg, the managing editor at American Thinker and author of the post, told Reuters that Trump 'misidentified the image.' She said the article raised concerns about 'increasing pressure placed on white South Africans.'
Ramaphosa's visit to Washington was aimed at repairing diplomatic ties amid heightened tensions with the US over land policy, foreign affairs, and Trump's accusations of discrimination against the white minority.
During the meeting, the US president played a five-minute montage that included clips of South African political figures and images he claimed show graves of white farmers.
Ramaphosa rejected the claims, stating that South Africa is a multi-party democracy and that crime affects all communities. 'There's no genocide in South Africa. That is a fact that's borne out of a lot of evidence,' he said, adding that those shown in the video were not part of his government.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
37 minutes ago
- Russia Today
Trump threatens BRICS with tariffs over ‘anti-US' agenda
US President Donald Trump has said he is considering tariffs on BRICS nations, accusing the group of adopting anti-US policies. Earlier, Trump warned that any attempt by the group to challenge the US dollar would be met with harsh economic measures. BRICS members targeted by his latest sanctions, such as India and Brazil, said they would protect their domestic interests. Speaking at the White House on Wednesday, he claimed the group is working to weaken the dollar and strip it of its role as the world's reserve currency. 'They have BRICS, which is basically a group of countries which are anti the United States, and India is a member of that if you can believe it,' Trump said. 'It's an attack on the dollar, and we're not going to let anybody attack the dollar.' The same day, Trump announced that India will face 25% tariffs and additional penalties starting on Friday over its continued trade with Russia. He said the tariffs were imposed partly because of India's membership in BRICS, and partly because of what he called a 'tremendous' trade deficit with New Delhi. Trump also imposed a 50% tariff on all goods from Brazil effective August 1, claiming the country poses a threat to 'the national security, foreign policy, and economy' of the US. BRICS was established in 2006 by Brazil, Russia, India, and China, with South Africa joining in 2010. Over the past year, it has extended membership to Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, the United Arab Emirates, and Indonesia. BRICS partner countries include Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Uganda, and Uzbekistan. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said BRICS countries are seeking alternatives to the dollar to shield themselves from Washington's 'arbitrariness,' calling the shift irreversible. Last year, Russia's Finance Ministry said national currencies made up 65% of BRICS trade, with the dollar and euro falling below 30%. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said BRICS is not a rival to the US, but warned that 'the language of threats and manipulation… is not the way to speak to members of this group.'
Russia Today
37 minutes ago
- Russia Today
South Africa comments on Palestinian statehood
South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola has called for a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict in an address at a high-level UN conference aimed at advancing concrete steps toward peace. Lamola said South Africa continues to condemn the horrific events of October 7, where innocent Israeli citizens were killed. In a reaffirmation of its anti-war stance, South Africa outlined key principles necessary to restore the credibility of the two-state solution. 'Firstly, all states must urgently recognise Palestinian statehood, and the territorial integrity and contiguity of Palestine should be established and respected. In this regard, South Africa welcomes the intentions of recognition of the state of Palestine by France as an important step towards achieving a two-State solution,' Lamola said. 'Secondly, there cannot be peace while the very existence of the Palestinian people is being threatened by Israel's continued genocidal actions in Gaza and the forced displacement of Palestinians in the West Bank. This is part of a systematic pattern of injustices and oppression of Palestinians since the adoption of Resolution 181 and the subsequent Nakba in 1948. These actions must be condemned, and the UN Security Council must act to protect the Palestinian people in whole and in part. 'Thirdly, preserving the viability of the two-state solution must include promoting safeguards such as the full respect for international law, including international humanitarian law, and human rights law. It is necessary for the immediate and full implementation of resolutions of the United Nations and the provisional measures, as well as Advisory Opinions of the International Court of Justice,' Lamola continued. The minister said all states, not just Israel, must follow their collective obligations under international law. They all must preserve the sanctity of international law and ensure accountability. Against this backdrop, the Hague Group was established, and the Madrid Group recently convened. Both initiatives aim to elevate the primacy of international law, promote accountability, and ensure a just peace. Lamola said all obstacles to a two-state solution must be removed. This includes an immediate ceasefire and a commitment to a peace process; the release of hostages by Hamas and political prisoners by the state of Israel; the halting of illegal Israeli settlement expansion; the removal of the illegal separation wall cutting across the occupied Palestinian Territory; and the resumption of all internationally reputable humanitarian relief efforts and the reconstruction of Gaza, which of course can only take place once there is peace. 'Global attention is on this conference. There is an expectation that we will deliver an effective response to the destruction of an entire population and a peaceful path for preserving the prospect of a viable Palestinian State existing side by side with the State of Israel in peace and security. This expectation is not misplaced, and it could not be higher,' he said. 'Eighty years since the founding of the United Nations, this is a matter that has plagued our collective conscience. The solution lies with a tangible re-commitment from all of us to the values that bind us.' UN Secretary-General António Guterres said statehood for the Palestinians is a right, not a reward. Denying statehood would be a gift to extremists everywhere. 'The only realistic, just, and sustainable solution is two States – Israel and Palestine – living side-by-side in peace and security, within secure and recognised borders, on the basis of the pre-1967 lines, with Jerusalem as the capital of both – in line with international law, UN resolutions and other relevant agreements,' Guterres said. He implored the international community not only to keep the two-state solution alive, but to take the urgent, concrete, irreversible steps necessary to make it published by IOL
Russia Today
an hour ago
- Russia Today
Ukraine has given Trump ‘main principles' for arms deals
Ukraine's Vladimir Zelensky has said he has presented US President Donald Trump with Kiev's 'main principles' for future weapons deals. The Ukrainian leader did not clarify, however, whether Trump had agreed to the purported terms. In a video address on Thursday, Zelensky said he and Trump had discussed 'large-scale agreements' on weapons deliveries. The Ukrainian leader added that he was 'very much counting on us being able to implement them all' and that it would 'undoubtedly strengthen both of our countries.' Zelensky provided no further details on the talks, including whether the US would be financing the weapons deliveries. Last week, Trump said Washington and the EU had reached an agreement under which the bloc would pay '100% of the cost of all military equipment' provided by the US. 'They're going to ship it to the European Union, and then they'll distribute it, and much of it will go to Ukraine,' he added. The EU will also pay for any US-made Patriot air defense systems destined for Ukraine, Trump stated, noting that 'this will be a business for us.' NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said at least eight NATO countries were ready to contribute to the overall plan financially. Trump and Rutte both said Ukraine would receive additional Patriots under the arrangement. According to the Washington Post, Germany has already given Ukraine three Patriot systems and is negotiating with the US for replacements. Politico reported earlier this week that several EU countries are seeking tens of billions of dollars in loans from the bloc to buy weapons for Ukraine. The Trump administration has for months been reluctant to approve new aid packages to Ukraine, and on several occasions frozen deliveries of certain weapons for Kiev, citing inadequate stocks at home. Russia has consistently criticized Western weapons deliveries to Ukraine, warning they do not change the outcome of the conflict and result in direct NATO's involvement in the hostilities.
