Zimpapers Logo

Marshall Ndlela, [email protected]

IN South Africa’s fragile democracy, where Nelson Mandela’s vision of a “Rainbow Nation” sought to heal centuries of racial division, AfriForum and its ally, Solidarity, stand as polarising forces.

Far from being mere advocates for minority rights, these organisations are accused of preserving Caucasian privilege, rooted in colonial legacies and sustained through legal cunning, international meddling and divisive tactics. This article dissects their actions — from their pursuit of Zimbabwe’s former First Lady Dr Grace Mugabe to their entanglement with Elon Musk (or “Ellon Muskey”) and United States president Donald Trump — arguing they represent a treasonous affront to South Africa’s national interest and Africa’s broader aspirations, all while clinging to a confused identity that undermines democratic progress.

President Donald Trump

A sanctuary for white settler remnants
AfriForum is explicitly based on the protection of white Afrikaners, Rhodesians and Portuguese remnants in South Africa. It positions itself as a defender of Afrikaner culture — descendants of Dutch, French and German settlers who dominated during apartheid — but its mission stretches beyond this group. Rhodesians, displaced after Zimbabwe’s 1980 independence, and Portuguese descendants from Angola and Mozambique, uprooted by post-colonial conflicts, find a sympathetic home in AfriForum’s rhetoric. Critics argue this broad coalition reveals an intent to safeguard not just culture, but the entrenched privileges of white settler communities across southern Africa.

Solidarity, another confusing organisation also created to promote white supremacy in Africa, mirrors this agenda. Ostensibly a trade union, it overwhelmingly represents white workers, opposing affirmative action and other redress policies in a nation where economic power remains skewed towards the Caucasian minority.

Together, these entities exploit legal provisions in the Constitution of South Africa to create colonial and white supremacy-justified organisations — namely AfriForum and Solidarity. By invoking minority rights clauses, they challenge land reform and equity measures, framing their resistance as a defence of justice while entrenching a neo-colonial hierarchy.

Their continuous use of law to justify the independence of minority cultures has led to the creation of Orania, a whites-only Afrikaner enclave in the Northern Cape and similar initiatives. Promoted as self-determination, Orania is a glaring rejection of Mandela’s Rainbow Nation plan or agenda, which envisioned a unified, multiracial society. Instead, these legal manoeuvres resurrect apartheid’s segregationist ethos under a modern veneer, prioritising white autonomy over collective healing.

Extremist ties and selective justice.

The proximity of AfriForum and Solidarity leaders to the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB), a racist, anti-progressive Boer organisation, casts a dark shadow over their claims of moderation. Founded in 1973 by Eugene Terre’Blanche, the AWB’s swastika-like insignia and calls for a Boer state, echo AfriForum’s own rhetoric of cultural survival and resistance to black governance. Although AfriForum rejects the AWB’s violence, the ideological overlap and personal connections between their leaders suggest a shared lineage of racial exclusivity.

This hypocrisy is laid bare in their attempt to arrest Dr Mugabe and ignore her diplomatic immunity. In August 2017, Zimbabwe’s then-First Lady assaulted Gabriella Engels, a South African model, with an extension cord in a Johannesburg hotel. AfriForum leapt into action, filing a legal case to prosecute Dr Mugabe and arguing her diplomatic immunity — granted as the spouse of former President Cde Robert Mugabe — was invalid for a private visit.

They pressed the issue even after she fled to Zimbabwe, securing a 2018 High Court ruling that deemed South Africa’s immunity grant unlawful. Although Dr Mugabe evaded arrest, AfriForum’s pursuit was relentless, framed as a stand against impunity — yet critics saw it as a racially charged vendetta against a prominent black African figure. Contrast this with their stance on Benjamin Netanyahu.

The late Nelson Mandela

Despite South Africa’s 2024 accusation of war crimes against the Israeli Prime Minister at the International Court of Justice, AfriForum continues to protect Netanyahu in the event he comes to South Africa, either through silence or tacit support. This double standard — aggressively targeting Dr Mugabe while shielding Netanyahu — exposes a bias favouring white or Western-aligned figures, undermining their credibility as impartial defenders of justice.
Musk’s capture of Trump and sanctions fallout

AfriForum’s influence extends globally through their continuous investment or support of Elon Musk’s devastating advice to Trump to issue sanctions to South Africa. Musk, a South Africa-born billionaire, has long echoed AfriForum’s false narrative of white persecution, particularly over land expropriation. His sway over United States President Donald Trump — described here as Musk effectively capturing Trump’s policy direction — culminated in a February 7, 2025, executive order slashing US aid to

South Africa. Citing the Expropriation Act and South Africa’s anti-Israel stance, Trump’s decision bore Musk’s imprint, a direct result of AfriForum’s lobbying efforts in the US since 2018.

This “capture” of Trump by Musk, fuelled by AfriForum’s backing, amplifies their reach, turning domestic grievances into international punishment. Yet, this alliance has dire domestic consequences. Critics argue AfriForum’s failure to recognise that their approach is treasonous and against the national interest of South Africa and Africa reflects a profound disconnect. By inviting sanctions that harm the broader population, they replicate colonial strategies of external domination, betraying the sovereignty Mandela’s struggle secured.

Former First Lady Mrs Grace Mugabe

The uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party filed treason charges against AfriForum on February 10, 2025, accusing them of undermining the nation for selfish ends — a charge they dismiss, clinging to their legalistic defences. Adding to their contradictions, Trump’s offer for asylum to them and their refusal show they are confused. Labelling Afrikaners as “victims” of racial discrimination, Trump extended refuge — yet AfriForum and Solidarity rejected it, insisting their future lies in South Africa. This refusal baffles observers: if their persecution narrative holds, why not flee? It suggests a refusal to relinquish the privileges they retain, exposing a muddled identity neither fully oppressed nor reconciled with a transformed nation.

Dividing to conquer
Most troubling is their sponsorship of black-on-black violence just to divert land expropriation, leading to current xenophobic hatred in South Africa against fellow African blacks. Critics allege AfriForum and Solidarity amplify crime narratives with racial undertones, stoking tensions between black South Africans and African migrants. Recent xenophobic attacks reflect this strategy’s success, diverting public outrage from land inequities —where whites still own over 70 percent of agricultural land — to internecine conflict. This divide-and-conquer tactic preserves their economic dominance by fracturing black unity, a cynical betrayal of African solidarity.

Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) Logo

A treasonous relic in a democratic age
AfriForum and Solidarity embody a tenacious remnant of Caucasian privilege, wielding law, extremist ties, and international allies like Musk —who has captured Trump’s ear — to resist South Africa’s transformation. Their pursuit of Dr Mugabe contrasts starkly with their protection of Netanyahu, while their rejection of asylum reveals a confused refusal to abandon local power.

By sponsoring division and inviting sanctions, they pursue a treasonous path against the national interest, clashing with Mandela’s Rainbow Nation vision. In the interest of democracy and freedom of speech, their actions demand scrutiny — not as mere minority advocates, but as relics of a colonial past fracturing a nation striving for equity. South Africa’s future hinges on confronting such forces, lest they undermine the democratic promise Mandela died for.