US diplomats asked if non-whites qualify for Trump refugee programme for South Africans
To date the state department has resettled 88 South Africans under the programme, including the initial group of 59 who arrived in May. Another 15 are expected to arrive by the end of August, one source said. Trump, a Republican who recaptured the White House pledging a wide-ranging immigration crackdown, placed an indefinite freeze on refugee admissions from around the world after taking office, saying the US would only admit refugees who 'can fully and appropriately assimilate'.
Weeks later he issued an executive order that called for the US to resettle Afrikaners, describing them as victims of 'violence against racially disfavoured landowners', allegations that echoed far-right claims which have been contested by government.
Since the executive order, US diplomats working to implement the programme have been deliberating internally about which racial groups could be considered eligible, one source said.
In the July 8 cable, Greene laid out a summary of the different ethnic and racial groups in the country before seeking guidance on eligibility. In addition to Afrikaners and mixed-race South Africans, Greene mentioned indigenous South Africans known as the Khoisan people.
He said members of the Jewish community had also expressed interest, but in South Africa they are considered a religious minority and not a racial group.
'In the absence of other guidance, [the US embassy] intends to give consideration to well-founded claims of persecution based on race for other racial minorities,' Greene wrote.
At least one family identified as coloured has travelled to the US as refugees, two people familiar with the matter said.
The cable forced the administration to clarify its position on whether the policy is for whites only, and if it does include other aggrieved minorities, who would qualify, two people familiar with the matter said.
Chretien, a conservative who wrote op-eds promoting the Heritage Foundation's 'Project 2025" plan to overhaul the federal government, is the senior official at the state department's bureau of population, refugees, and migration.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
15 minutes ago
- Mail & Guardian
Africa, the US and the East: In search of balance in a changing world
Africa's choice should not be limited to East v West but rather to move from dependence to balance through diversified partnerships based in mutual respect and shared benefit. Photo: File In the shifting theatre of global geopolitics, Africa often finds itself framed as the prize in a contest of giants, courted, cajoled or overlooked, depending on the mood of the hour in foreign capitals. Yet perhaps the time has come to reframe the narrative. What if Africa were not the object of this great power drama, but its most quietly pivotal actor? With the Trump administration now six months into its term, we are beginning to discern not just a change in tone from Washington, but a potential recalibration in substance. The sharpness of the rhetoric, the transactional language and the clear scepticism towards multilateralism and traditional alliances — these are more than stylistic flourishes. They raise profound questions about how the US views its role in the world and how it perceives Africa's place within that worldview. Yet we must be careful not to conflate noise with novelty. The deeper question is whether this administration's approach is a radical departure from past US policy towards Africa or merely a blunter continuation of old patterns, patterns marked by episodic engagement, selective interest and a tendency to speak at Africa rather than with it. What is new might not be the content, but the candour. Africa, for its part, must decide how to engage with this changing landscape. Should it wait, reactively, for signals from Washington? Or should it lean forward, setting the terms of engagement, articulating its own priorities and navigating the shifting alliances with a clear-eyed sense of purpose? This is not a theoretical exercise. The choices being made now, about trade, diplomacy, infrastructure and digital sovereignty, will reverberate for generations. One of the most striking shifts in the global economic order today is the growing trend toward de-dollarisation. It is a term that has quietly entered the lexicon of economists and policymakers and yet its implications are anything but quiet. At a recent event in Johannesburg that I was privy to, the conversation around bypassing the dollar in trade transactions, settling directly from rand to renminbi or some other Brics country's currency, captured this shift with unusual clarity. This is not simply a matter of convenience or efficiency because, from a business point of view, it makes absolute economic sense. But it is also a political and philosophical statement about autonomy. For decades, the dollar has functioned not just as a currency, but as a mechanism of influence, a means through which global power is exercised and, at times, withheld. To move away from dollar dependency is to assert a kind of economic self-determination. This trend is not confined to currency. Alternative payment systems are being developed to reduce reliance on Swift, the interbank messaging system that effectively allows the US to enforce financial sanctions across borders. Such innovations challenge not just institutions, but the very architecture of global finance. How might the US respond to such shifts, especially under an administration that views both Brics and Chinese influence with deep suspicion? Would it resort to even greater punitive tariffs, or even secondary sanctions, to dissuade countries from participating in what it sees as rival systems? Moreover, these are not hypothetical concerns, they are questions African policymakers must weigh with urgency and care. But amid this complexity lies a remarkable opportunity, Africa need not be a passive participant in a game of titans. It can, and must, be a strategic actor in its own right. The binary of 'East versus West' is a false choice, because what Africa should seek is not alignment, but balance. Not dependence, but diversified partnerships rooted in mutual respect and shared benefit. That requires not only a shift in diplomacy, but also in mindset, because for too long, Africa has been spoken about in terms of charity, aid or crisis, but today's realities demand a different frame, one of investment, innovation and intellectual engagement. Africa is not merely catching up to the world — in many ways it is imagining the world anew. Consider the digital economy, where African startups are leapfrogging legacy infrastructure with mobile-based solutions, or the energy sector, where decentralised solar power is redefining access in rural communities. These are not stories of marginal progress, they are signals of a continent thinking for itself, building for itself and increasingly, financing itself. That said, we should not romanticise the challenges, because the road ahead is uneven and the risks are real. Global power remains asymmetrical and navigating that terrain requires more than idealism, it demands strategy, unity and an unflinching appraisal of our own vulnerabilities. But nor should we underestimate our leverage. In a multipolar world, Africa's 54 votes at the UN, its vast natural resources, its youthful population, its mineral deposits and its growing markets make it a partner no global power can afford to ignore. So the question becomes, how do we use this leverage? Do we trade it cheaply for short-term gains or do we invest it wisely in long-term sovereignty? And perhaps even more fundamentally, what kind of global future does Africa wish to help shape? If we can answer that, not with slogans, but with substance, we might find that Africa's most powerful position is not as a swing state in someone else's game, but as a steward of its own destiny. This is the moment to step into that role, with clarity, courage and quiet confidence. Not to choose sides, but to choose ourselves. Daryl Swanepoel is the chief executive of the Inclusive Society Institute. This article draws on his opening remarks in a webinar on Africa-US relations and its nexus with China hosted by the institute.
Mail & Guardian
15 minutes ago
- Mail & Guardian
US Congress should ask questions about the Ivanhoe Atlantic Deal
Iron ore mine in West Africa. The Liberty Corridor railroad provides a mechanism for Ivanhoe Atlantic to get that ore to market on favourable terms. Photo: File On the eve of the Those questions will not only force consideration of favouritism in US commercial diplomacy. They will demand evaluations of the conduct of US ambassadors, a senior adviser to the US president and a reported candidate for US assistant secretary of state for African affairs. There are concerns that the US government has endorsed a commercial project that will benefit Chinese and South African individuals and entities who undermine US national security and foreign policy interests according to the America First Foreign Policy Agenda endorsed by the Trump administration. What is the Liberty Corridor? The Liberty Corridor is a heavy duty railroad that will connect the Nimba District of Guinea with a new deepwater port in Didia, Liberia. The corridor will be developed on top of the existing Yekepa-Buchanan Railway Corridor. Its development will promote regional economic integration in West Africa and allow Ivanhoe Atlantic to export iron ore from its Kon Kweni Iron Ore Project through Liberia. The Liberty Corridor is opposed by a Luxembourg-based multinational steel and mining company ArcelorMittal (AML). Back in 2005, AML entered into a Mineral Development Agreement with the Guinea government. One of the provisions of that agreement granted AML a monopoly over the Yekepa-Buchanan Railway. Since then, AML has invested a The Liberty Corridor has been championed by The Liberty Corridor could prove to be a game-changer for Ivanhoe Atlantic and the US mining sector. There are other undeveloped mineral deposits in the Southern Guinean Highlands. One is the Simandou Iron Ore Mine. It is estimated to have The Liberty Corridor is seen as a valuable alternative to the Trans-Guinean Corridor for the Kon Kweni Iron Ore Project. Industry experts suggest that Ivanhoe Atlantic would have struggled to ever realise the full potential of the Nimba Iron Ore Mine if mining financier Robert Friedland had chosen to stand and fight with Rio Tinto, Winning Consortium Simandou and the government of Guinea for fair and open access to the Trans-Guinean Corridor. Ivanhoe Atlantic simply did not have enough leverage to achieve a desired outcome. The Liberty Corridor has been publicly endorsed by the US government. The US embassy in Monrovia publicly declared that the US government What are the Issues for the US Congress? The Liberty Corridor raises a number of issues that the US Congress may want to consider. Two of the most important involve the appearance of favouritism and insufficient due diligence in US commercial diplomacy. With respect to favouritism, private claims have been made that the letter of intent was signed between the Guma Africa Group and the Liberian government only on the eve of the White House visit through coercive actions undertaken by the US government behind the scenes. According to people with knowledge of the negotiations, that diplomatic intervention was spearheaded by the US ambassador to Liberia, Mark Toner, with the support of senior Africa bureau official Troy Fitrell and senior Africa adviser to the US president, Massad Boulos. Those unattributable remarks demand critical scrutiny from the US Congress. If true, then US commercial advocacy not only favoured one company Ivanhoe Atlantic) over at least one another (AML). It favoured a company whose With respect to insufficient due diligence, private claims have been made that the US government failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that the Liberty Corridor fully aligned with US national security and foreign policy interests prior to endorsing the deal. Those allegations revolve around the claim that the project will benefit Chinese and South African individuals and entities who apparently undermine US national security and foreign policy interests as set forth in the America First Foreign Policy Agenda embraced by the Trump administration: People's Republic of China: Through Ivanhoe Capital, there is an indirect South Africa: Through Guma Africa Group, there is a direct association between Ivanhoe Atlantic and South African Robert Gumede, who has reportedly been accused of major corruption. Among other things, the South African Special Investigating Unit recently sought to recoup more than The Liberty Corridor therefore begs important questions for the American people: With respect to favouritism, one has to wonder whether the US government actually coerced the government of Liberia into signing the letter of intent with Ivanhoe Atlantic? Did Boulos, Fitrell, and Toner have any conflicts of interest that may have improperly influenced US commercial diplomacy (for example, business connections; post-retirement employment interests)? Did ambassador Pham ever make improper use of government connections and private information that was gained during his time in office for personal gain in the private sector? With respect to insufficient due diligence, one has to wonder whether the Liberty Corridor is well aligned with the strategic goals of countering major corruption, mitigating the At present, the American people do not know the answers to any of those questions. That makes it difficult to make sense of the private claims and counter-claims about the deal that are swirling around Washington. The US Congress could put an end to all of this political theatre by simply holding a public hearing on the matter and setting the record straight once and for all. Of course, that raises a knock-on question: how should the White House respond if a congressional hearing was called on the matter? Assuming everything was above board with the negotiations, the White House might want to consider welcoming such oversight by the US Congress. A public hearing would not only provide the Trump administration with a platform to put to bed nasty insinuations about Boulos, Fitrell, Pham and Toner, such as those made in the recent Africa is Not a Country . It would provide the Trump administration with a platform to make the case to the American people that their approach to US commercial diplomacy is far superior to those of the Biden administration. That includes their approach to putting an end to the global stranglehold that companies linked to the Chinese Community Party have on access to critical minerals. Michael Walsh is a non-resident senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute.
The South African
2 hours ago
- The South African
US department official says refugee programme is for 'white people'
A US Department of State official has reportedly confirmed that the refugee programme offered to South Africans was intended for white people, particularly Afrikaners. In February, President Donald Trump signed an executive order granting minorities resettlement under the programme on the grounds of 'racial discrimination'. Since then, two groups of Afrikaner people have arrived in the US, with more expected to follow. According to Reuters , the US Department of State's Spencer Chretien, the highest-ranking official in the refugee and migration bureau, stated that the refugee programme was 'intended for white people'. Chretien had declined to comment further. This throws into disrepute the Refugee Admission Programme's claim that it is open to all 'minorities'. Despite initially being targeted at Afrikaner farmers and white people, US authorities have since included coloured, Indian, and 'mixed-race' South Africans. Applicants must prove that they are 'persecuted' South Africans who are victims of 'racial discrimination'. The US Embassy has updated its refugee status programme application, with an announcement that communication will be coordinated by RSC Africa, which manages all US-bound applicants from Africa. This will include: Conducting intake and referral interviews Collecting applicants' data and documentation Requesting background checks Scheduling USCIS interviews Arranging for medical exams Booking travel to the United States Ultimately, the application will be reviewed and determined by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). The embassy has also detailed that the refugee status application would include several stages, as outlined in the diagram below. Image via US Embassy Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 . Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp , Facebook , X, and Bluesky for the latest news.
