US suspends HIV funding to South Africa over concerns about white minority treatment

President Donald Trump‘s administration in the United States has declared that it will be ending the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) in South Africa, on account of the problems of violence, discrimination and displacement of whites in South Africa.

According to reports, the State Department of the US listed several reasons for why the South African government failed to address its concerns prior to the decision to end PEPFAR.

The concerns included the Black Economic Empowerment policy of South Africa which, according to the US officials, does not give enough exemption to American businesses in South Africa. The US State Department also criticized the inability of the South African government to denounce the racial slurs such as the “Kill the Boer” slogan.

The State Department also expressed its concern regarding the Expropriation Act 2024 of South Africa.

It was also requested that Pretoria treats crime in rural areas as a priority and allocate sufficient resources to counter-attack violence perpetrated in farms. Moreover, there were serious worries about South Africa’s approach to dealing with the refugee situation.

“South Africa is a middle-income nation that is more than capable of providing for its health programs,” said a State Department official.

According to Trump, the government in South Africa does not provide adequate protection for the country’s white farmers and the country’s white population.

In his meeting with the South African president, Cyril Ramaphosa, in May 2025 at the White House, Trump allegedly showed videos of opposition parties shouting anti-white farmers slogans of death to Boers, a word normally used to describe white farmers. Trump also showed newspapers and reports documenting the violent acts against white South Africans, adding that the issue had not been given enough international attention.

Withdrawing funding from PEPFAR program shows a major shift in relations between the two countries and may have repercussions on some health programs. However, critics argue that this may affect the poor who depend on those programs in their struggle against disease.