The U.S. House of Representatives’ committee on trade signalled that it will take up a proposed three-year extension of AGOA, the landmark trade initiative that for over two decades provided eligible Sub-Saharan African countries with duty-free access to U.S. markets. That extension effort comes after the scheme lapsed in September, raising alarms across many African economies that had grown dependent on it.
Yet the efforts to revive AGOA carry a twist: the U.S. appears ready to treat countries differently, and among them, South Africa may face exclusion. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has publicly described Pretoria as a “unique problem,” warning that unless South Africa lowers tariffs and dismantles certain trade barriers on U.S. goods, the administration may sustain steep protective duties on South African imports, including a 30 per cent tariff already imposed this year.
READ ALSO: What South Africa Gains From the PetroSA–Shell Offshore Oil Agreement
The proposed extension legislation, as currently drafted, does not explicitly single out South Africa for exclusion. But the House Committee on Ways and Means has the power to amend the bill before sending it to the full House, leaving open the real possibility that South Africa may lose preferential access. Meanwhile, a companion bill in the Senate proposes only a two-year renewal and adds a full bilateral review of U.S.–South Africa trade relations, a process that has yet to advance.
AGOA has long been more than a trade agreement; it has served as a pathway for many African countries to integrate into global value chains and tap U.S. consumer markets. During 2001–2021, average annual U.S. imports from AGOA-eligible nations reached approximately US$37.7 billion. That figure dwarfs the roughly US$7.6 billion per year in average U.S. aid to the same countries over the same period.
For some economies, especially those that diversified into manufacturing, such as garments and textiles, AGOA provided a lifeline. In Kenya, for instance, analysts warn that the lapse of the deal threatens as many as 300,000 direct and indirect jobs in the apparel and textile sector.
The stakes are arguably even higher for South Africa. As the most industrialised economy on the continent, South Africa has historically enjoyed the lion’s share of AGOA benefits. Although precise recent employment or export-value figures tied solely to AGOA for South Africa are not yet publicly released, experts have long pointed out that tens of thousands of jobs across manufacturing, agro-processing, and other export-oriented sectors could be at risk should preferential access vanish.
More broadly, African economies already facing headwinds, slowdown in investment, high unemployment, and rising debt might find the window to the U.S. market narrowing sharply. For countries that repositioned their export strategies around AGOA-enabled access, the loss could mark a setback in industrial development and trade diversification.
Economy, Trade and the Risk of Isolation
For South Africa, exclusion from AGOA would represent more than lost export revenues. It could deepen existing economic woes. Despite being the continent’s most advanced economy, South Africa’s growth in recent years has been sluggish, with formal unemployment stuck persistently above 30 per cent.
By threatening exclusion, the U.S. is effectively pressing South Africa to overhaul its trade and tariff regime. Greer’s demand for tariff cuts and dismantling of non-tariff barriers is, in effect, an ultimatum: comply, or face punitive 30 per cent tariffs on exports to the U.S., a prospect that would shrink profitability for South African exporters and potentially trigger job losses at a precarious moment for the domestic economy.
Politically, the pressure amplifies Pretoria’s sense of diplomatic isolation. It comes against the backdrop of other punitive measures: Washington has already excluded South Africa from planning meetings of next year’s G20 under U.S. presidency, signalling a broader turn in U.S.–South Africa relations.
Pretoria’s Response and the Risk of Retaliation
South Africa’s government has responded by affirming its commitment to remain part of AGOA should the extension proceed. In official statements, Pretoria has underscored that it remains a founding member of multilateral forums and argued it deserves equal treatment.
At the same time, many political analysts in South Africa interpret the U.S. posture as a form of coercion, one that conflates legitimate trade policy concerns with broader geopolitical grievances, including unsubstantiated accusations by U.S. leaders about racial-minority treatment inside South Africa.
Domestically, the potential loss of AGOA benefits threatens to worsen employment, fuel social discontent, and deepen economic inequality. For a government already under pressure to deliver growth and jobs, the stakes could not be higher.
Wider Implications for Africa and Beyond
If South Africa is excluded from AGOA, the consequences will likely reverberate far beyond its borders. First, it sets a dangerous precedent of bilateral discretion in what was once a multilateral, rules-based trade initiative. The fact that a powerful economy like the U.S. is willing to carve out exceptions or impose unilateral tariffs raises doubts about the stability and reliability of trade partnerships worldwide.
Second, for the wider African continent, the move may erode investor confidence. Countries that had begun aligning manufacturing and export strategies with the promise of consistent U.S. market access may now reconsider. This could stall or even reverse recent progress in trade diversification away from raw commodities toward value-added manufacturing.
Third, the political message is unmistakable: trade is no longer only about economics. It is increasingly a tool of leverage, a means through which major powers exert influence, enforce compliance, or signal displeasure. Such dynamics may drive African economies to pivot toward other markets, Asia, Europe, or intra-African trade, but that transition will not be instantaneous and comes with new challenges.
Uncertainty, Reform or Realignment?
As Congress considers amendments to the AGOA extension bill, and as Washington signals willingness to treat South Africa differently, several scenarios emerge.
In one possible outcome, South Africa concedes to demands: reduces tariffs, lifts trade barriers, and secures its place within AGOA. This would allow Pretoria to preserve access to U.S. markets, safeguard jobs tied to exports, and maintain some semblance of normalcy in its economic positioning. It would also be a demonstration of pragmatism in the face of external pressure.
Another scenario: South Africa stands firm and rejects what it perceives as unfair conditionality. In that case, exclusion could push the country and perhaps others to seek alternate trade partnerships, intensify intra-continental trade, or lean more heavily toward regions less subject to political-economic leverage from Washington.
Finally, Africa as a whole may approach trade policy more cautiously. Governments and businesses may ask: how durable are trade deals when political winds shift? The result could be a renewed focus on diversifying export markets and reducing dependency on a single economic powerhouse.
Trade’s Fragile Promise in a Divided World
The current push by the United States to extend AGOA while potentially excluding South Africa shines a harsh light on the fragility of trade agreements in an era of geopolitics and economic nationalism. What was once hailed as a bridge for Africa’s integration into global markets may now feel like a tightrope, where missteps can lead to exclusion, tariff barriers, and economic distress.
For African exporters, the window to the U.S. remains open but uncertain; for South Africa, the pressure to reform or realign intensifies; for the continent, the moment demands strategic reflection. As AGOA’s fate unfolds, the real question is not only whether South Africa remains in, but whether Africa as a whole can adapt trade relationships in a world where markets are increasingly tethered to power and politics.
