In a world where armed conflict continues to cost lives daily — from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) to Ukraine and Gaza — the pursuit of peace is no longer just a humanitarian ideal; it is a strategic imperative. That was the unspoken yet dominant theme of the recent White House Working Visit, where South African President Cyril Ramaphosa met with US President Donald Trump for a bilateral meeting and working lunch.
Both leaders used the meeting not only to affirm the strength of bilateral ties, but also to present themselves as committed to global stability: Trump, as a results-driven, dealmaker but also a self-declared peacemaker with a mission to prevent endless wars, and Ramaphosa, as a rational peacebuilder. Together, they framed peace not as the absence of force, but as its intelligent application — a tool of strategy, statecraft, and sovereignty.
At a time when international cooperation is increasingly shaped by ideology, unpredictability, and strategic rivalries, the discussions held in Washington demonstrated how South Africa and the United States are navigating global turbulence with grounded realism. Ramaphosa’s self-characterization as a “rational” actor foreshadowed an approach that emphasized clarity, consistency, and engagement. Likewise, Trump’s emphasis on “smart engagement” — diplomacy rooted in outcomes rather than optics — aligned the meeting around results.
The international relations concept of the “rational actor model” assumes that states make decisions logically to maximize national interests. Ramaphosa’s tone throughout the visit reflected that mindset. Despite ongoing internal challenges with tackling crime, South Africa came to Washington seeking to position itself not as a recipient of security support, but as a credible contributor to peacebuilding.
This framing was tested in a high-stakes Oval Office Bilateral Meeting and video montage that quickly turned to issues of violence in South Africa. Ramaphosa was unequivocal: the country does not support racism or political violence, and its democratic institutions remain committed to the rule of law. Trump reasserted that a response to the issues is required.
While Ramaphosa reiterated South Africa’s broader foreign policy vision — one based on regional peacebuilding, nonalignment, and multilateralism — Trump pointed to recent US diplomatic efforts as proof that peace, when pursued deliberately, can be achieved. One such example was the fragile ceasefire between the DRC and Rwanda.
The ceasefire, brokered in part by US diplomatic channels earlier this year, was raised as an example of what Trump called smart engagement — where America leads not just with military might, but with influence, mediation, and leverage; achieving “peace through strength.”
While critics may debate the motivations behind such initiatives, Trump’s emphasis on peace as a strategic deliverable rather than a rhetorical talking point appeared to mark a clear continuation of his broader foreign policy philosophy. Supporters argue this is part of a nontraditional but results-oriented model: one that seeks to avoid prolonged conflicts while using leverage, partnerships, and economic tools to maintain order.
Ramaphosa, for his part, welcomed US involvement in regional peace efforts, particularly in the DRC. “We see the value of the United States being engaged,” he said during.
Though defence cooperation was not formally on the agenda, security remained in the background throughout the visit. Ramaphosa addressed related questions at a post-meeting press briefing at the Ritz-Carlton in Washington, where he was asked about South Africa’s aging C-130 fleet and whether US defence support had been discussed — especially given the presence of US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth at the working lunch.
Ramaphosa responded with clarity: “They [the US] delivered C-130s to other countries. We still have a C-130. We have two or three C-130s — one serviceable. They are magnificent. And they’ve served us very well for the longest time.”
He clarified, however, that defence procurement was not a central theme during the visit: “Did we have any discussions regarding the Pentagon? No. Although the Secretary of Defence was there, discussions never veered toward issues of security in that sense. It was more about security or criminal activities that we need to really advocate. And it’s good sometimes to share thoughts or views with various other leaders — we’ve done the same thing with the Chinese, with the Europeans — and they would like to see us doing much more.”
Ramaphosa’s statement suggests a measured openness to deeper cooperation, without rushing into procurement discussions. It also reflects South Africa’s preferred posture as a sovereign but collaborative player in global security dialogue.
Beyond hard diplomacy, the working lunch included figures who symbolize both nations’ soft power: Secretary Hegseth, senior advisors, and South African-born tech magnate Elon Musk, now a central figure in US innovation and defence-adjacent technology. Their presence reinforced how both sides recognize the role of non-state actors and innovation in shaping modern geopolitical influence.
Ramaphosa noted the convivial tone of the closed-door lunch meeting: “It was a three-course meal. I usually don’t eat dessert, but it looked good — and it was delicious.”
Such moments of warmth — while symbolic — hinted at deeper efforts to reset tone and build trust.
Despite the rain that soaked Washington that morning, by the time Ramaphosa departed the White House, the skies had cleared — a moment both literal and metaphorical. Both leaders appeared publicly satisfied with the outcomes of the visit.
Pearl Matibe is a Washington, DC-based geopolitical analyst and correspondent with expertise in foreign policy and international security, regularly covering the State Department, Pentagon, and White House. Follow her on X (Twitter): @PearlMatibe
The post Peace and pragmatism: What the Trump-Ramaphosa meeting signaled to a turbulent world appeared first on defenceWeb.
