South Africa not planning to retaliate over Trump's tariffs
South Africa has no immediate plans to retaliate against the United States over tariffs announced by President Donald Trump this week and will instead seek to negotiate exemptions and quota agreements, senior government officials said on Friday.
Trump imposed a 31% tariff on U.S. imports from South Africa on Wednesday, when he announced a 10% baseline tariff on all imports and higher targeted duties on dozens of countries.
The United States is South Africa's second-largest bilateral trading partner after China.
Africa's most industrialised nation has said previously that it wants to agree a bilateral trade deal with Trump's team. That looks to be a tall order, however, after the U.S. president's repeated attacks on South Africa since his return to the White House in January.
"To say we will impose reciprocal tariffs without first understanding how the U.S. arrived at 31% ... would be counterproductive," trade minister Parks Tau told a press conference, saying South Africa's average tariff on imports was 7.6%.
Foreign affairs minister Ronald Lamola, meanwhile, said Trump's tariffs effectively nullified the benefits African countries had enjoyed under the African Growth and Opportunity Act.
The AGOA initiative, which grants qualifying African nations duty-free access to the U.S. market, is due to expire in September. And Trump's far-reaching tariffs suggest that a renewal of the trade accord enacted in 2000 is now unlikely.
The actions by the United States underscored the need for South Africa to accelerate efforts to diversify its export markets, the ministers said, mentioning markets in Asia and the Middle East as potential opportunities.
In the meantime, they said the government would seek to support industries most affected by the tariffs, including car manufacturing, agriculture, processed foods and metals.
The government will not remove benefits U.S. carmakers enjoy under its Automotive Production Development Programme, a production incentive scheme, Tau said.
South Africa's National Treasury estimates that losing its AGOA status could reduce economic growth by less than 0.1 percentage points.
The central bank has modelled several scenarios related to South Africa's access to U.S. markets, with the impacts ranging from under 0.1 percentage points to 0.7 percentage points depending on the severity of the trade barriers and how badly financial market sentiment is affected.
Trump's latest tariffs are in addition to the 25% imposed on all vehicles and car parts imported into the U.S. That is a particular threat to South Africa, which exports over $2 billion a year in vehicles and auto parts to the U.S.
(Reporting by Nqobile Dludla and Bhargav Acharya; Additional reporting by Sfundo Parakozov and Olivia Kumwenda-Mtambo; Writing by Alexander Winning Editing by Joe Bavier)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
36 minutes ago
- Gulf Today
Pakistan formally recommends US President Trump for Nobel Peace Prize
The Pakistani government has decided to formally recommend US President Donald Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his decisive diplomatic intervention and pivotal leadership' during the recent India-Pakistan crisis. In a post shared on X on Friday night, the government said the international community bore witness to unprovoked and unlawful Indian aggression, which constituted a grave violation of Pakistan's sovereignty and territorial integrity, resulting in the tragic loss of innocent lives, including women, children, and the elderly. In May, a surprise announcement by Trump of a ceasefire brought an abrupt end to a four-day conflict between India and Pakistan. Trump has since repeatedly said that he averted a nuclear war, saved millions of lives, and grumbled that he got no credit for it. Pakistan agrees that US diplomatic intervention ended the fighting, but India says it was a bilateral agreement between the two militaries. "President Trump demonstrated great strategic foresight and stellar statesmanship through robust diplomatic engagement with both Islamabad and New Delhi, which de-escalated a rapidly deteriorating situation," Pakistan said. "This intervention stands as a testament to his role as a genuine peacemaker." Governments can nominate people for the Nobel Peace Prize. There was no immediate response from Washington. A spokesperson for the Indian government did not respond to a request for comment. Trump has repeatedly said that he's willing to mediate between India and Pakistan over Kashmir region, their main source of enmity. Islamabad, which has long called for international attention to Kashmir, is delighted. In a social media post on Friday, Trump gave a long list of conflicts he said he had resolved, including India and Pakistan and the Abraham accords in his first term between Israel and some Muslim-majority countries. He added: "I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do." Pakistan's move to nominate Trump came in the same week its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, met the US leader for lunch. It was the first time that a Pakistani military leader had been invited to the White House when a civilian government was in place in Islamabad. Following the Indian aggression, Pakistan "launched Operation Bunyan-um Marsoos — a measured, resolute, and precise military response, the post read and noted that the response was executed to exercise the country's "fundamental right to self-defence' and "carefully to re-establish deterrence,' defending its "territorial integrity while consciously avoiding civilian harm.' The post further said that "at a moment of heightened regional turbulence,' President Trump "demonstrated great strategic foresight and stellar statesmanship through robust diplomatic engagement with both Islamabad and New Delhi.' It continued that the US president de-escalated a rapidly deteriorating situation, ultimately securing a ceasefire and averting a broader conflict between the two nuclear states that would have had catastrophic consequences for millions of people in the region and beyond. The post said that this intervention stands as a testament to Trump's role as a genuine peacemaker and his commitment to conflict resolution through dialogue. The government also acknowledged President Trump's "sincere offers to help resolve the longstanding dispute of Jammu and Kashmir between India and Pakistan - an issue that lies at the heart of regional instability. "Durable peace in South Asia would remain elusive until the implementation of United Nations Security Council resolutions concerning Jammu and Kashmir,' it said. The government noted that President Trump's leadership during the 2025 Pakistan-India crisis "manifestly showcases the continuation of his legacy of pragmatic diplomacy and effective peace-building.' The post said that Pakistan remains hopeful that Trump's "earnest efforts' will continue to contribute towards regional and global stability, particularly in the context of ongoing crises in the Middle East, including the humanitarian tragedy unfolding in Gaza and the deteriorating escalation involving Iran.
Khaleej Times
an hour ago
- Khaleej Times
US attacks Iran: What are the nuclear contamination risks from Iranian sites?
[Editor's Note: Follow our live blog for real-time updates on the latest developments in the Israel-Iran conflict.] President Donald Trump said Iran's main nuclear sites had been "obliterated" in military strikes overnight, including on the deeply buried Fordow facility, as the US joined attacks launched by Israel on June 13. Experts have said military strikes on Iran's uranium enrichment facilities pose limited risks of contamination, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Sunday no increased off-site radiation levels had been reported following the US attacks. Which Iranian nuclear sites have been hit so far? The US military struck sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Trump said Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities had been "completely and totally obliterated". The attacks follow previously announced Israeli attacks on nuclear sites in Natanz, Isfahan, Arak and Tehran itself. Israel says it aims to stop Iran building a nuclear bomb and the US says Tehran would not be allowed to get such weapons. Iran denies ever seeking nuclear arms. The international nuclear watchdog IAEA has previously reported damage to the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, the nuclear complex at Isfahan that includes the Uranium Conversion Facility and to centrifuge production facilities in Karaj and Tehran. Israel has also attacked Arak, also known as Khondab. The IAEA said Israeli military strikes hit the Khondab Heavy Water Research Reactor, which was under construction and had not begun operating, and damaged the nearby plant that makes heavy water. The IAEA said it was not operational and contained no nuclear material, so there were no radiological effects. Heavy-water reactors can be used to produce plutonium which, like enriched uranium, can be used to make an atom bomb. What risks do these strikes pose? Speaking to Reuters before the US strikes took place, experts said Israel's attacks had posed limited contamination risks so far. Darya Dolzikova, a senior research fellow at London think-tank RUSI, said attacks on facilities at the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle — the stages where uranium is prepared for use in a reactor — pose primarily chemical, not radiological risks. At enrichment facilities, UF6, or uranium hexafluoride, is the concern. "When UF6 interacts with water vapour in the air, it produces harmful chemicals," she said. "In low winds, much of the material can be expected to settle in the vicinity of the facility; in high winds, the material will travel farther, but is also likely to disperse more widely. The risk of harmful chemicals being dispersed is lower for underground facilities." Simon Bennett, who leads the civil safety and security unit at the University of Leicester in Britain, said risks to the environment were minimal when subterranean facilities are hit because you are "burying nuclear material in possibly thousands of tonnes of concrete, earth and rock". James Acton, co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said that before uranium goes into a nuclear reactor it is barely radioactive. "The chemical form uranium hexafluoride is toxic ... but it actually doesn't tend to travel large distances and it's barely radioactive," he added. Attacks on enrichment facilities were "unlikely to cause significant off-site consequences", he said, while stating his opposition to Israel's campaign. What about nuclear reactors? The major concern would be a strike on Iran's nuclear reactor at Bushehr on the Gulf coast. Fears of catastrophe rippled through the Gulf on June 19 when the Israeli military said it had struck a site in Bushehr, only to say later that the announcement was a mistake. Israel says it wants to avoid any nuclear disaster. Richard Wakeford, honorary professor of epidemiology at the University of Manchester, said that while contamination from attacks on enrichment facilities would be "mainly a chemical problem" for the surrounding areas, extensive damage to large power reactors "is a different story". Radioactive elements would be released either through a plume of volatile materials or into the sea, he added. Acton of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace said an attack on Bushehr "could cause an absolute radiological catastrophe". Why are Gulf states especially worried? For Gulf states, the impact of any strike on Bushehr would be worsened by the potential contamination of Gulf waters, jeopardising a critical source of desalinated potable water. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is on high alert to monitor for any possible environmental contamination after the attacks, said a source with knowledge of the matter. There have been no signs of radiological contamination so far, the source said, adding that the GCC had emergency plans in place in case of a threat to water and food security in the Gulf. In the United Arab Emirates, desalinated water accounts for more than 80 per cent of drinking water, while Bahrain became fully reliant on desalinated water in 2016, with 100 per cent of groundwater reserved for contingency plans, authorities say. Qatar is also 100 per cent dependent on desalinated water. In Saudi Arabia, a much larger nation with a greater reserve of natural groundwater, about 50 per cent of the water supply came from desalinated water as of 2023, according to the General Authority for Statistics. While some Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia, Oman and the UAE have access to more than one sea to draw water from, Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait are crowded along the shoreline of the Gulf with no other coastline. "If a natural disaster, oil spill, or even a targeted attack were to disrupt a desalination plant, hundreds of thousands could lose access to freshwater almost instantly," said Nidal Hilal, professor of engineering and director of New York University Abu Dhabi's Water Research Center. "Coastal desalination plants are especially vulnerable to regional hazards like oil spills and potential nuclear contamination," he said.
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
US strikes on Iran: What we know so far
The US strikes on Iran early on Sunday marked a significant escalation in the ongoing Israeli war on Iran. At midnight GMT (8pm Washington time), President Donald Trump announced that US bombers had struck three Iranian nuclear sites. He claimed all three had been "obliterated". However, the extent of the damage and the precise impact of the strikes remains unclear. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Middle East Eye takes a closer look at what we know so far. Which facilities were targeted? US forces targeted three major nuclear facilities: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Isfahan houses a prominent nuclear research centre, while Fordow and Natanz are key uranium enrichment sites. Earlier reports suggest that Israeli warplanes had previously hit Natanz, cutting power to its centrifuge hall and potentially damaging the equipment. Fordow, considered one of Iran's most fortified facilities, is located 80–90 metres underground in a mountainous area. Israel had avoided striking Fordow earlier in the war, lacking munitions capable of penetrating to such depths. The White House has not disclosed what munitions were used, though a US official said B-2 heavy bombers took part in the operation. The scale of damage is still unknown, and no casualties have been confirmed so far. Could there be a nuclear disaster? Iranian officials have downplayed the impact of US strikes on nuclear sites, saying there is no threat to nearby residents, according to state media. The Crisis Management Headquarters in Qom province, where the Fordow facility is located, told Iran's state-run news agency IRNA: "There is no danger to the people of Qom and the surrounding area." Al Jazeera also cited an official who claimed Fordow had been "long evacuated" and had not sustained any irreversible damage. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia's Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Authority said no radioactive effects had been detected in Gulf countries. How has Iran responded? Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation condemned the strikes as "a barbaric act" and a violation of international law, including the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned the attack would have "everlasting consequences" and said Iran "reserves all options" in its response. "The events this morning are outrageous," Araghchi wrote on X. "Every UN member should be alarmed by this dangerous, lawless and criminal behaviour." State media reported that Iran has formally requested an emergency UN Security Council session to prevent further escalation. How has Israel responded? Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump for ordering the strikes. He called it an act of "awesome and righteous might" that would "change history". In a video address, Netanyahu said the United States had "done what no other country on Earth could do". Trump, in turn, lauded Netanyahu, saying the two leaders had "worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before" and had taken a major step towards "erasing this horrible threat to Israel".
