Flip Buys is the chairperson of the Solidarity Movement.
It is essential to respond to the growing barrage of negative media reporting directed at the Solidarity Movement. Much of the criticism is vested in ideological bias and fails to engage with the movement’s actual contributions to South African society.
That the media has a duty to report facts and events accurately is a widely accepted and uncontroversial expectation, just as it is expected of public officials to carry out their responsibilities with diligence, transparency and integrity, free from bias or malicious intent.
This seemingly common cause position, which both the media and politicians claim to uphold, has recently exposed a stark shortcoming in the media coverage of a series of executive orders and public statements issued by US President Donald Trump in relation to South Africa, and of a visit by a Solidarity Movement delegation, including AfriForum and Solidarity, to the US.
We have seen a convergence of views coming from many quarters in the media and from politicians in high office to advance a certain narrative in relation to the actions of the Trump administration as they pertain to the Solidarity Movement and the Afrikaner in South Africa.
A narrative has taken root, suggesting that the Solidarity Movement – which includes AfriForum and Solidarity – has engaged in a widespread misinformation campaign in the US. According to this view, this campaign led directly to the US withdrawing its support for aid programmes in various forms in South Africa.
Furthermore, it is claimed that the Solidarity Movement is actively engaged in presenting South Africa in a negative light, with the aim of provoking American aversion towards South Africa – a strategy supposedly designed to negatively influence both current and future US actions towards the country.
The presupposition of this is that the US, despite having one of the world’s most sophisticated intelligence infrastructures, supported by highly trained analysts with extensive global capabilities, is not capable of reaching its own conclusions, and is therefore susceptible to any wayward view. This view undermines the extensive capabilities of the US and impedes any objective understanding of the true causes of US actions.
Two of the most prominent points pinning the “misinformation” label on the back of the Solidarity Movement are that we have claimed that a “genocide” is taking place in the country and that the state is carrying out “land grabs”, similar to those that occurred in Zimbabwe.
On that score, it is worth mentioning that News24, Sunday World, the Mail & Guardian, TimesLIVE and Newzroom Afrika had to issue apologies for specifically claiming that AfriForum has referred to farm murders as a “white genocide” and that it (AfriForum) is promoting the claim in the US of a “white genocide” taking place in South Africa.
Despite the apologies offered by the above media outlets, along with several other instances where AfriForum had successfully lodged complaints with the Press Ombudsman, the overarching recurring claim of “misinformation” persists.
The earliest traceable reference linking the Solidarity Movement’s visit to and engagements in the US to actions taken by the American government appears in a media statement issued by the ANC on 3 February. In this statement, spurious claims are directed specifically at AfriForum, accusing it, among other things, of attempting to protect “post-apartheid era landownership patterns”, defend “white privilege” and uphold the “oppressive status quo”.
Although much could be said about these claims – clearly intended to deflect responsibility from the ANC – the statement goes on to assert that the ANC “strongly condemns the misinformation campaign orchestrated by AfriForum”. It further claims that “President Trump’s recent tweet, echoing AfriForum’s false claims of ‘land confiscation’, is a direct result of the lobby group’s ongoing efforts to mislead the global community”.
On 27 March, Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni stated – without a hint of hesitation – that “Cabinet noted with concern the continuing spreading of false information campaigns by Solidarity and AfriForum and their allies at home and in the US”, as though it were an undisputed truth. No acknowledgement was given to the increasingly evident reality that the ANC itself had committed significant blunders in managing its relationship with the US.
‘Missed’ information by the ANC and the media at large
Since Trump’s public statement and the ANC’s media release on 3 February, the media has largely remained one-sided in its views, operating within the boundaries set by the ANC under the broad and vague label of “misinformation” – a claim that has been offered with little substantive evidence. No meaningful challenge or serious scrutiny has followed, and this pattern continues to this day.
It is a strange phenomenon that the charge of “misinformation” can so easily be normalised and accepted as a fact and is being advanced consistently. The ANC’s unquestionable fault lines are so evident that they remind one of the quote by George Orwell in his epic book, 1984: “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
The “evidence”, to use Orwell’s words, is there for all to see. And if there is any doubt as to the rationale for the US actions, it is to be found in the Bill introduced by Congressman Ronny Jackson (R-TX) this month, the US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025.
This Bill will serve before the House Committees on the Judiciary and on Foreign Affairs.
A summary of the core objections that serve as the basis for reviewing the relationship between the US and South Africa, includes the following pertinent points:
- Strategic alignment with US adversaries
The Bill points to South Africa’s deepening ties with nations considered adversarial to US interests – aligning itself particularly with China, Russia and Iran. These relationships, the Bill argues, challenge the integrity of South Africa’s claimed policy of non-alignment. - Engagement with terrorist organisations
South Africa’s interactions with Hamas, a US-designated foreign terrorist organisation, with specific reference to high-profile meetings between South African officials and Hamas representatives. - Hostility towards Israel
According to the Bill, South Africa’s increasingly hostile stance towards Israel, including the recent case it brought before the International Court of Justice accusing Israel of genocide, aligns it with anti-Israel agendas that contradict long-standing US policy. - Concerns over corruption and human rights
The proposed legislation calls for the identification of senior South African officials and senior members of the ANC who may be implicated in human rights abuses or significant corruption. It suggests these individuals could be subject to US sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. - Military cooperation with Russia and China
South Africa’s participation in joint naval exercises with Russia and China in early 2023 is highlighted as evidence of a growing strategic pivot, inconsistent with Western security interests and South Africa’s professed neutrality.
The gravity of this long list of objections against the South African government predates the second Trump presidency and warrants serious, sustained scrutiny – not just by the media, but also by members of the government of national unity (GNU) and civil society at large.
The Solidarity Movement’s position
In this context, it is essential to respond to the growing barrage of negative media reporting directed at the Solidarity Movement. Much of the criticism is vested in ideological bias and fails to engage with the movement’s actual contributions to South African society – especially in areas where the state has failed. The movement has consistently advocated for constitutionalism, functional institutions and self-reliance, often stepping in where the government has been absent or ineffective.
Within the context of this article, we add that:
- We have not claimed that state-led land expropriation is already happening in South Africa;
- We have never asked the US to cut funding to or impose sanctions on South Africa;
- We have actively opposed South Africa’s removal from the African Growth and Opportunity Act and shared research with the US embassy on the economic risks for South Africa of such removal;
- We urged the US not to punish South Africans for the ANC’s actions but to take steps against corrupt individual ANC officials rather than to take actions that have an adverse effect on the country as a whole. The Zondo Commission identified no fewer than 97 ANC members who should face investigation – yet meaningful progress in this regard remains elusive, underscoring a troubling lack of accountability; and
- We are proud South Africans, committed to the country’s future, and willing to help restore healthy US-South Africa relations.
We reaffirm our unwavering loyalty to South Africa.
Our aspirations for cultural autonomy are not in opposition to national unity but are aimed at the wellbeing of the country and all its people. We firmly believe in the importance of healthy race relations and the promotion of mutual recognition and respect among all people in the country. That is why it remains our aim to achieve our goals within the framework of the Constitution.
We hold fundamentally different views from the ANC regarding the path South Africa should follow. Disagreeing with a party that has steered the country into decline over decades does not equate to being against the nation’s prosperity. On the contrary, our divergence stems from a deep commitment to South Africa’s success. To differ from the ANC is not to stand against the country – it is, in fact, to stand for it.
Many of South Africa’s current challenges under the ANC stem from a focus on redistribution rather than on the creation of real economic value. Policies such as expropriation without compensation and rigid race legislation may serve political interests, but they do little to create long-term growth.
Economic progress depends fundamentally on the development of human capital – education, skills and entrepreneurship – not on state grants or populist grandstanding. When these foundations are ignored, the result is rising dependency, declining productivity and worsening inequality.
The pattern to invoke historical injustice as justification for poor governance and failing policies has also become a serious obstacle to progress.
For this reason, we propose in the Afrikaner Declaration that a cultural accord be concluded with Afrikaners to safeguard our cultural interests and institutions, enabling us to once again enjoy equal citizenship and contribute to the nation and the country. DM
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2025-04-24-anc-and-medias-missed-information-in-claims-against-solidarity-movement/
