Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

The 30% tariff hike: SA must strengthen diplomatic ties, diversify trade partnerships beyond the US

07 April 2025 Photo Supplied

Opinion article by Dr Calvin Mudzingiri, Assistant Dean: Economic and Management Sciences, University of the Free State, Qwaqwa Campus

The sudden hike of import tariffs by US President Donald Trump and his administration to countries across the world is set to reduce the volume of goods traded and affect citizen welfare across the globe. The Trump administration implemented a global 10% import tariff and a varying targeted reciprocal tariff to a host of countries, including South Africa. The reciprocal import tariff to be levied on South African export goods to the US is set at 30%. Historical data show that yearly trade between SA and US amounts to $23 billion and the US is SA’s the second biggest trading partner after China. The high tariff will reduce the competitiveness of South African export goods to American markets, leading to reduced demand of SA exports in US markets, low income to firms, job losses, low income to households and ultimately lower South African economic growth.

SA and US trade

South Africa exports platinum, locally assembled cars, raw aluminium, ferroalloys and agriculture products, among other goods, to the US. The implication of the US administration’s 30% tariff hike could result in job losses in the mining, automobile, agriculture and many other industries. More income losses to SA agricultural exports can also be experienced if the African Growth Opportunity Act (AGOA) expires in September 2025, if the US congressmen decide not to renew the agreement. Given the low economic growth rate in South Africa in 2024, which is estimated at 0.6%, the tariff hike by the US will exacerbate sluggish economic growth and recovery from the COVID 19 pandemic.

Statistics also show that SA imports energy products, machinery, vehicle, industrial and other consumer goods. The goods and services SA imports from the US play a critical role in developing and sustaining local industry. SA can decide to source the goods from other markets and if this happens with all economies where tariffs were imposed, the US will be worse off. There is a possibility that economies which received a tariff hike from the US will implement a reciprocal tariff hike to the US reducing the volume of global trade. The reduced trade volumes have dire implications for job creation, income generation by firms and households, making citizens worse off.

US current trade policy

It is important to note that President Trump administration’s trade policies are premised on a trade notion synonymous to ‘mercantilism’, which was practised in Europe between the 16th to 18th centuries. Under mercantilism, an economy aims to maintain a trade surplus, the government regulate the economy, discourage imports (in the case of the US using tariff hikes) and promote growth of home industries among other initiatives. Conventional economics wisdom has proved that policies pursued by the Trump administration of protectionism are a breeding ground for trade wars. There is great potential of fellow trading partners retaliating and if that happens, global citizens will be made worse off as they will be forced to pay high prices for goods due to additional costs driven by tariff hikes. In addition, US industry relies on raw materials from other countries. If the suppliers of raw material resources retaliate, the production cost model of US firms will rise, reducing export competitiveness of US exports.

Trump’s administration is calling for firms across the world to move and produce goods in the US to avoid tariff levies. The action works against the benefits of free trade and can affect firms’ comparative advantages. The production cost structure in the US can be higher than in other countries leading to firms realising low profits if they move to the US. It is essential to note that free trade with absolutely no trade barriers will enhance the welfare of citizens at large, since goods and services will be purchased at low prices. The US government’s act of over-regulating trade can limit economic growth not only of other countries but even that of the US economy.

Options for the SA government

In the face of trade adversity, the SA government must not fold its hands and do nothing. It is enlightening to note that the authorities have already initiated diplomatic and trade negotiations. Negotiations can possibly focus on tariff reduction, maintaining the AGOA, and delving deep in the logic used to arrive at the 30% tariff hike. The diplomatic initiatives must encompass improving perceptions and clarity of SA policies such as the Expropriation Act which is one of the reasons cited by the US administration in ratcheting the tariff trade war.

South Africa must re-orient its trading patterns and partnerships. The aggregate world gross domestic product (GDP) is greater than the US total production for goods and services. There is need for SA to improve trade relations with other economies to broaden its trade base. The current frosty trade relationship between SA and the US presents a window to strengthen trade with the EU, Asia, BRICS plus, Africa, and any other economy willing to get into trade partnerships. SA must explore other markets where the export goods still enjoy competitiveness.

To ensure economic resilience to trade wars in the long run, SA needs to seriously invest in research and development that promote value addition of local production, enhancing local production and technology advancement that can stimulate economies of scale, which can boost competitiveness of export goods. Competitiveness can be further enhanced by improving energy production efficiency, which is a crucial input of goods and services production. Developing a powerful and skilled human capital base can lead to labour productivity efficiency, further enhancing competitiveness. SA has a dilapidated infrastructure ranging from roads, rail, buildings and industry among others. Improving the infrastructure will go a long way in improving local production, leading to creation of jobs and improved incomes for households.

Boosting local economic activity can stimulate local consumption of goods as household income improves. If the incomes of SA citizens improve, there is a potential to increase local consumption. Goods meant for export markets can end up being consumed in the domestic markets, providing a homemade solution to dwindling export goods markets. The SA government must consider developing and supporting new industries that can compete in the local and international markets. In this way, the trade challenges posed by unfriendly US administration trade policies can present opportunities to the SA economy in the long run.

News Archive

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during Reconciliation Lecture

2014-03-05

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during the Third Annual Reconciliation Lecture entitled Forgiveness, Law and Justice.
Photo: Johan Roux

No one could have anticipated the atmosphere in which Prof Martha Minow would visit the Bloemfontein Campus. And no one could have predicted how apt the timing of her message would be. As this formidable Dean of Harvard University’s Law School stepped behind the podium, a latent tension edged through the crowded audience.

“The issue of getting along after conflict is urgent.”

With these few words, Prof Minow exposed the essence of not only her lecture, but also the central concern of the entire university community.

As an expert on issues surrounding racial justice, Prof Minow has worked across the globe in post-conflict societies. How can we prevent atrocities from happening? she asked. Her answer was an honest, “I don’t know.” What she is certain of, on the other hand, is that the usual practice of either silence or retribution does not work. “I think that silence produces rage – understandably – and retribution produces the cycle of violence. Rather than ignoring what happens, rather than retribution, it would be good to reach for something more.” This is where reconciliation comes in.

Prof Minow put forward the idea that forgiveness should accompany reconciliation efforts. She defined forgiveness as a conscious, deliberate decision to forego rightful grounds of resentment towards those who have committed a wrong. “To forgive then, in this definition, is not an obligation. It’s a choice. And it’s held by the one who was harmed,” she explained.

Letting go of resentment cannot be forced – not even by the law. What the law can do, though, is either to encourage or discourage forgiveness. Prof Minow showed how the law can construct adversarial processes that render forgiveness less likely, when indeed its intention was the opposite. “Or, law can give people chances to meet together in spaces where they may apologise and they may forgive,” she continued. This point introduced some surprising revelations about our Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

Indeed, studies do report ambivalence, disappointment and mixed views about the TRC. Whatever our views are on its success, Prof Minow reported that people across the world wonder how South African did it. “It may not work entirely inside the country; outside the country it’s had a huge effect. It’s a touchstone for transitional justice.”

The TRC “seems to have coincided with, and maybe contributed to, the relatively peaceful political transition to democracy that is, frankly, an absolute miracle.” What came as a surprise to many is this: the fact that the TRC has affected transitional justice efforts in forty jurisdictions, including Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia and Liberia. It has even inspired the creation of a TRC in Greensborough, North Carolina, in the United States.

There are no blueprints for solving conflict, though. “But the possibility of something other than criminal trials, something other than war, something other than silence – that’s why the TRC, I think, has been such an exemplar to the world,” she commended.

Court decision cannot rebuild a society, though. Only individuals can forgive. Only individuals can start with purposeful, daily decisions to forgive and forge a common future. Forgiveness is rather like kindness, she suggested. It’s a resource without limits. It’s not scarce like water or money. It’s within our reach. But if it’s forced, it’s not forgiveness.

“It is good,” Prof Minow warned, “to be cautious about the use of law to deliberately shape or manipulate the feelings of any individual. But it is no less important to admit that law does affect human beings, not just in its results, but in its process.” And then we must take responsibility for how we use that law.

“A government can judge, but only people can forgive.” As Prof Minow’s words lingered, the air suddenly seemed a bit more buoyant.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept