The critical meeting between President Cyril Ramaphosa and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, was a peculiar spectacle when it played out on the world stage.
It made the bizarre bully-boy White House ambush on Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky seem like a sane exercise in bilateral diplomacy.
There is so much to criticise in SA, including its poor policing and high crime rates — dominated by the violent crimes of rape and murder.
There is unchecked public sector corruption and overt maladministration which has consumed billions of rand which should have been spent on addressing backlogs and inequality by a government which claims to be pro-poor.
And, of course, there is the ANC’s contradictory and inconsistent foreign policy which is supposed to be — but isn’t — guided by solidarity, peace, equality, human rights and sustainable development.
Ramaphosa was not called to account for any of this.
Instead, he faced a barrage of misinformation including mythical land grabs and the so-called “genocide” of white farmers.
These incredibly odd and clearly fake narratives were Trump’s justifications for suspension of USAID programmes, the termination of vital Aids relief (Pepfar) funding, and his inexplicably punitive tariffs.
Ramaphosa had brought in a delegation including white agriculture minister and DA leader John Steenhuisen, billionaire Johann Rupert and golfers Ernie Els and Retief Goosen who, he told Trump, would dispel the stories of white genocide.
And then Trump produced his “evidence”.
Lights were dramatically dimmed and the delegation and media were confronted by videos of the tired and vile rantings of EFF leader Julius Malema.
A dumbfounded Ramaphosa then faced a video of a field of white crosses which Trump said was a graveyard of thousands of white farmers killed in genocidal attacks.
It turns out, according to Centre for Creative Arts UKZN director Ismail Mahomed, that the “cemetery” was in fact one of many public art installations designed to protest against violent crime — most of which affected black communities.
The chances of a sensible diplomatic encounter after such a bizarre start seemed slim.
Ramaphosa was not in a position to come out swinging.
At risk was some R70bn worth of preferential market access which the DA’s national spokesperson for international relations has pointed out “sustains job-rich supply chains that cannot be replaced elsewhere”.
But those who had hoped for a serious discussion on funding and trade were disappointed.
Ramaphosa hailed the meeting a success because, he said, it formed a start to resetting relations with the US government and there was a mutual commitment to continue to engage over trade relations.
Clearly then, the behind-closed-doors session must have seen a more sane engagement than the circus the US administration put on for the public.
The spectacle was an embarrassment, but it is not the SA delegation who should be red-faced.
Daily Dispatch