Afrikaners: Persecuted Refugees or White-Privileged Aliens?

In line with President Trump’s February 7, 2025, executive order “Addressing Egregious Actions of The Republic of South Africa”, the “first group” of over 50 Afrikaners were admitted into the United States as refugees. They landed in Washington, D.C., and, as reported, flew onward to Texas. It is not clear how many will follow, but U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said that, “In the coming months, we will continue to welcome more Afrikaner refugees and help them rebuild their lives in our great country.”

Opening the doors to some 50 white Afrikaners on a case-by-case basis amid the suspension of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) by Trump drew fervent criticism. One resettlement agency (which are religious or community-based organizations contracted by the State Department to provide services to refugees once they’re here), the Episcopal Migration Ministries, refused to play a part in resettling Afrikaners, in light of, in their own words, their “steadfast commitment to racial justice”.

Those critics said nothing when President Biden changed the refugee program significantly and opened the door to non-refugees to be picked for resettlement by U.S.-based non-citizens. They kept silent when Biden extended the benefits and beneficiaries of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) to include non-refugees on U.S. soil (including hundreds of thousands of Afghan and Ukrainian parolees). Were these dissonant voices today offended when Biden let into the United States millions of aliens under “parole” knowing that, per U.S. law, immigration parole should only be granted on a case-by-case basis “for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit”? Where was the outrage when Biden allowed foreign nationals (of any nationality) who have “temporary authorization” to remain in the United States — such as on parole — to sponsor other foreign nationals in turn to come here on parole?

But, more importantly, would those criticizing Trump today have said anything if Afrikaners happened to be black instead of white?

Travel

Afrikaners were flown to the United States on a charter flight paid for by the U.S. government. This is contrary to previous modus operandi: Usually, the cost of transportation is provided to refugees in the form of interest-free loans. The Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) funds the International Organization for Migration (IOM) to administer a program for the international transportation of refugees. Refugees are expected to repay these loans over time to “resettlement agencies” in charge of their reception and placement (R&P) within the United States six months after their arrival. Resettlement agencies, which have nothing to do with granting these travel loans but are in charge of collecting loan payments for a period of five years, retain up to 25 percent of the payments. After five years, the loan is transferred to IOM for additional collection.

An significant chunk of refugees have not repaid their loans (around 30 percent on average), rendering the program costly to the U.S government throughout the years.

According to Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), since the implementation of the Refugee Act in 1980 until 2016, more than $876 million in refugee loan repayments were sent to the U.S. government. What he doesn’t mention, however, is the cost (and loss) incurred by the government.

More to Come, not Just Afrikaners?

There are around 2.7 million Afrikaners among South Africa’s population of 62 million. Afrikaners are not the only white (or other racial) minority in the country. Around two million white people with British or other descent are there as well. Other racial minorities include those with biracial heritage (so-called “Cape Coloureds”, around five million) and those with Indian or other South Asian heritage.

While the EO focused on white Afrikaners (the descendants of mainly Dutch and French colonial settlers who first came to South Africa in the 17th century), eligibility for resettlement was expanded to include other racial minorities. To be eligible, individuals must meet all of the following criteria:

• Must be of South African nationality; and
• Must be of Afrikaner ethnicity or be a member of a racial minority in South Africa; and
• Must be able to articulate a past experience of persecution or fear of future persecution.

Self-Referral

Interested South African individuals who want to be considered for referral to the USRAP can apply online by completing and submitting a Statement of Interest form. The form is quite straightforward. Applicants need to give the following information: name, contact details, country of residence, number of interested family members, valid South African passport, earliest possible travel, and refugee claim (past persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, membership in a particular social group and fear of future harm based on these criteria).

This self-referral is unusual. Traditionally, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), with “the international mandate to provide protection to refugees worldwide, has … referred the vast majority of [resettlement] cases to the United States”. This changed with the launch by the Biden-Harris administration of a new private sponsorship program called the “Welcome Corps” within USRAP. The program allowed U.S.-based sponsors (including non-citizens) to take on the primary responsibility of selecting candidates for resettlement. The former administration also expanded “equitable access” to resettlement by increasing resettlement referrals through non-governmental organization networks and establishing new referral authorities for U.S. government officials with a focus on human rights activists and “LGBTQI+” populations.

Why this Executive Order on South Africa?

There are several reasons behind Trump’s February 7 EO on South Africa. First, as Trump explained in his EO, “South Africa has taken aggressive positions towards the United States and its allies, including accusing Israel, not Hamas, of genocide in the International Court of Justice.” Actually, Trump had issued an EO imposing sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC) the previous day, February 6.

Second, in January 2025, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa signed a “controversial land seizure law” allowing land seizures by the state without compensation of farmland owned mainly by white South Africans, especially Afrikaners. The law replaces the 1975 Expropriation Act that had the state pay owners it wanted to take land from, following the “willing seller, willing buyer” model. Furthermore, “violent crimes against farm owners” in South Africa have long been a concern and could be on the rise. Back in 1998, former President Nelson Mandela recognized the seriousness of these targeted attacks:

While killings on farms, like crime in general, have been a feature of South African life for many decades, the incidents of murder and assault in farming areas have increased dramatically in recent years.

Some believe that crimes against farmers were committed with the primary motive of committing robbery, while others recognize “a political environment that is seen as being increasingly hostile to the farming community” pointing at prominent political leaders “accusing white farmers of having stolen the land and calling for the expropriation of land without compensation to address the injustices of apartheid”.

Third, one can perceive Elon Musk’s (who was born and raised in South Africa) footprint behind sanctioning South African leaders and opening the door to Afrikaners (though Musk is of British background).

A President’s Prerogative

As soon as he took office, Trump paused USRAP by an executive order titled “Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program”, only allowing for the admission of some refugees on a case-by-case basis. The EO stipulates that the secretaries of State and Homeland Security “may jointly determine to admit aliens to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion”, provided they determine that the admission of such refugees “is in the national interest and does not pose a threat to the security or welfare of the United States”.

That said, it is the prerogative of the U.S. president in office to prioritize populations of concern for resettlement. Biden pushed his administration to identify and expedite resettlement for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) individuals after issuing a “Memorandum on Advancing the Human Rights of LGBTQI+ Persons Around the World” days after he was sworn into office.

Under Biden, PRM formalized a partnership with the Equitable Resettlement Access Consortium (ERAC) — led by HIAS alongside Refuge Point and the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP) — to grow the network of NGOs that refer LGBTQI+ individuals directly to USRAP. Biden also increased resettlement efforts for individuals from Latin America and the Caribbean. In addition, his administration designed the Welcome Corps program to allow U.S.-based non-citizens to pick (in other words, prioritize) their own friends and acquaintances (of any nationality) to be resettled here as refugees.

So, for Trump to underline a specific population he believes is being persecuted in its own country due to “race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group” is perfectly within his prerogative.

Biden Changed the Essence of Resettlement

Those who are challenging the persecution claims of these Afrikaners seem to have forgotten Biden’s open door to non-refugees. The Biden-Harris administration launched the Welcome Corps, a private sponsorship program within the refugee program, that privileged those who happen to have friends or family who made to the United States before them. Beneficiaries could be picked for resettlement by non-citizens based in the United States. Sponsored individuals did not need to actually be refugees according to UNHCR Refugee Status Determination, let alone in that subset of refugees determined by the UN to be in “need of resettlement”. And the sponsors could themselves be earlier refugees or other newcomers. Biden’s actions changed the essence of resettlement itself. A program meant to “save lives” had been turned into one that resettled people who “somebody who made it to the United States and gotten a green card happens to know”.

Color Bias?

For all those who are outraged by these white Afrikaners being welcomed into the United States by Trump, here’s a question: What if this group happened to be black? Would the outcry be as loud or would it fade away?

A brilliant movie, specifically one powerful summation scene in the movie, comes to mind here: A Time to Kill. It recounts the story of a white lawyer in Mississippi who defends a black man accused of killing the two white men who allegedly raped his 10-year-old daughter. In his summation, Matthew McConaughey, who plays the father’s lawyer, appeals to the jury:

I want to tell you a story. I’m going to ask you all to close your eyes while I tell you the story. … This is a story about a little girl walking home from the grocery store one sunny afternoon. I want you to picture this little girl. Suddenly a truck races up. Two men jump out and grab her. They drag her into a nearby field and they tie her up and they rip her clothes from her body. Now they climb on her. First one, then the other, raping her, shattering everything innocent and pure with a vicious thrust in a fog of drunken breath and sweat. … Can you see her? Her raped, beaten, broken body … left to die. Can you see her? I want you to picture that little girl. Now imagine she’s white.

How about we simply close our eyes?