Berlin challenges US authority to bar South Africa from G20

Berlin’s intervention this week has sharpened a question that has been building since last year: does the United States, as host of the 2026 G20 summit, have the authority to exclude South Africa, a full member of the grouping, from a gathering it is scheduled to host in Miami in December 2026?

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz weighed in at the Berlin Global Dialogue conference, telling his audience that “Africa belongs at the table” and noting that both South Africa and the African Union hold official G20 membership. His remarks place Germany alongside a widening list of governments that have formally objected to the exclusion announced by US President Donald Trump, who last year said South Africa would not be invited to the summit at Trump National Doral in Miami.

Trump cited a breakdown in diplomatic relations, a dispute over the G20 presidency handover in Johannesburg, and unsubstantiated claims of a “white genocide”, farm attacks, and land confiscations against Afrikaners in South Africa. President Cyril Ramaphosa’s office rejected the accusations outright, calling them “misinformation and distortions”.

Merz is not the first head of government to challenge the decision. In April, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva made a similar call during a joint press conference with the German chancellor in Hannover, Germany. Lula asserted that South Africa is a founding member of the G20 and insisted that Ramaphosa “must attend” the Miami summit, arguing that Trump lacks the authority to ban South Africa.

Berlin’s position has been consistent across levels of government. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul publicly criticised the exclusion in July, in a speech delivered at the South African African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA) at the University of the Witwatersrand, stating that sidelining South Africa removes an important African voice and a regional economic and political leader at a time of global economic uncertainty.

Russia has also registered its objection. The Russian Embassy in South Africa, together with Ambassador-at-Large Marat Berdyev, posted on X calling South Africa’s exclusion an “egregious violation” and describing the G20 as a collegial format that cannot be controlled unilaterally. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov followed up in September, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, saying he had raised the matter directly with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and that the rotating G20 presidency does not give the United States the power to bar a full member.

African institutions have weighed in as well. African Union Commission chairperson Mahmoud Ali Youssof condemned the US decision during a meeting with International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) Minister Ronald Lamola in Pretoria earlier this year, stating that holding a global summit on sustainability and development without South Africa “makes no sense”. According to diplomatic reports, France, the United Kingdom, China and Canada have also raised objections concerning representation and diversity.

At home, accountability questions are mounting. Asked what legal or procedural mechanisms within the G20 framework DIRCO is exploring to challenge the US move, department spokesperson Chrispin Phiri declined to comment. Professor Andre Thomashausen, Professor Emeritus of International Law at the University of South Africa, said Germany’s support for South Africa’s inclusion is legally meaningless because the G20 is an informal platform with no official membership rules. “As the G20 is not an international agency or institution, but merely an informal consultation platform, there is no defined membership, nor is there any particular status that a participant nation could claim. Countries hosting a G20 meeting are free to determine the framework and levels of participation, just as much as invited countries are free to stay away and not participate. So far, no G20 participating country has threatened to stay away in solidarity with South Africa, which fact reveals the poor performance of DIRCO in South Africa,” he said.

Other analysts read Berlin’s posture differently. Professor Theo Neethling, head of the Department of Political Studies and Governance at the University of the Free State, said Germany is attempting a delicate diplomatic balancing act, protecting vital economic ties with South Africa while managing strained relations with the Trump administration. “This does not mean that Berlin will be willing to put its security and trade relationship with Washington at risk. As early as July 2026, German foreign policy official Johann Wadephul stated that Germany would seek to promote South Africa’s interests during the US-hosted G20 summit, but would not boycott the summit out of solidarity with South Africa,” he said.

Professor John Streamlau, an international relations expert, said he doubts Trump will listen to calls to include South Africa, describing the US president as a “racist and a white nationalist”. Streamlau added that South Africa is a prominent G20 member and that Germany and other members will have to consider downgrading their participation should South Africa not be invited.