The Road From Africa’s G20 Summit to Trump’s ‘America First’ Priorities
from Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies
from Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies

The Road From Africa’s G20 Summit to Trump’s ‘America First’ Priorities

World leaders, including South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, react as they attend a family photo event during a G20 Leaders' Summit plenary session at the Nasrec Expo Centre in Johannesburg, South Africa, November 22, 2025.
World leaders, including South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, react as they attend a family photo event during a G20 Leaders' Summit plenary session at the Nasrec Expo Centre in Johannesburg, South Africa, November 22, 2025. Gianluigi Guercia/Reuters

The forum in South Africa shined a light on pressing realities faced by the continent. It may also have laid the groundwork for the G20 summit Trump will host in Florida next year.

November 24, 2025 1:02 pm (EST)

World leaders, including South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, react as they attend a family photo event during a G20 Leaders' Summit plenary session at the Nasrec Expo Centre in Johannesburg, South Africa, November 22, 2025.
World leaders, including South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, react as they attend a family photo event during a G20 Leaders' Summit plenary session at the Nasrec Expo Centre in Johannesburg, South Africa, November 22, 2025. Gianluigi Guercia/Reuters
Expert Brief
CFR scholars provide expert analysis and commentary on international issues.

Heidi Crebo-Rediker is a senior fellow in the Center for Geoeconomic Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

More From Our Experts

When Group of Twenty (G20) leaders met in Johannesburg this past weekend, South Africa claimed its “African moment.” As the first African host, it wrapped its presidency in the slogan “Solidarity, Equality, Sustainability.” This was intended to pull the forum’s focus toward pressing realities of the Global South and specifically Africa: climate shocks, unsustainable debt, inequality, and the continent’s desire to move from mineral exports to capturing greater value. Breaking with tradition, the summit issued a leaders’ declaration despite the United States’ absence and opposition.

More on:

United States

South Africa

Africa

G20 (Group of Twenty)

Trump

The summit was at risk of being overshadowed and defined by leaders who did not show up. President Donald Trump skipped the gathering, leading a U.S. boycott. China’s Xi Jinping and Russia’s Vladimir Putin also stayed away. Argentina and Mexico downgraded their delegations. The United States asked to send a chargé d’affaires at the last minute to collect the gavel at the closing handover ahead of its G20 presidency next year. The request was denied by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, unwilling to accept an insulting gesture. Still, Trump’s absence was anything but silent: during South Africa’s presidency the United States rejected key agreements, criticized South Africa for its alleged persecution of white farmers, and cast Pretoria as anti-American.

Further, Trump’s concurrent ultimatum to Ukraine to accept a highly unfavorable peace settlement divided attention of those Group of Seven (G7) leaders who did attend last weekend.

This mix—Africa’s assertive agenda, half-empty seats at the top, and disruptive U.S. interventions—set the stage as Johannesburg handed the G20 baton to a U.S. presidency with vastly different plans. Expect a marked pivot to America First in 2026 at Trump’s Doral Resort in Florida.

More From Our Experts

But beneath the bluster, there is a twist—the pivot started before the G20 handoff. Several of South Africa’s main priorities actually align with the Trump administration’s agenda, particularly regarding debt sustainability and critical minerals.

On debt, South Africa discussed new approaches to low-income country debt distress. This included moving toward a refinancing approach instead of using current restructuring mechanisms. Options floated included leveraging International Monetary Fund (IMF) special drawing rights (SDRs) or selling IMF gold, while another pitch called for debtor nations to form a borrowers' club. Without a U.S. agreement to specific proposals, there is some consistency with Trump’s Treasury agenda. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has criticized slow-motion workouts and institutional “mission creep” at the IMF distracting from its core mandate, which includes improving sovereign debt resolution mechanisms. Both Pretoria and Washington want something fairer and faster: a clearer, time-bound process that brings Chinese and private creditors to the same table and gets debt-distressed countries back on sustainable paths.

More on:

United States

South Africa

Africa

G20 (Group of Twenty)

Trump

On inequality, South Africa pushed a G20-commissioned report that treated extreme wealth concentration and shrinking fiscal space as macroeconomic risks in their own right. The United States will not embrace that framing. But the underlying dilemma—how to maintain social stability and invest in growth with high debt and high interest rates—is now a North–South problem, not just an African one.

Strategically, South Africa elevated Africa’s centrality in critical minerals. The message could not be clearer: the continent sits on a huge share of global reserves of cobalt, manganese, platinum-group metals, and rare earths, yet benefits little from value-added processing. South Africa used the G20 spotlight to call for more investment in African exploration, processing, and manufacturing—not just shipping ore to China.

That should sound familiar in Washington. The Trump administration certainly does not frame critical minerals in the language of just energy transition, but it does care about resilience and secure supply chains. The United States is already negotiating mineral deals bilaterally across Africa. The destination is similar: a world less dependent on Chinese choke points for inputs that power clean energy, defense, and advanced manufacturing. Diversifying supply means new mines, refining and processing capacity in friendly jurisdictions. Africa is not optional on that map—and Johannesburg just spotlighted that on the G20 stage.

All of this feeds into Trump’s G20 at Doral next year. Expect the Florida conversation to be more about deregulation, fossil fuel driven “energy abundance,” and an America First framing of trade and investment. Many of the same ministers who debated climate risk in 2025 will arrive in Miami to hear a different sermon: cut red tape and unleash hydrocarbons.

Even the format will likely change. An administration willing to block consensus abroad won’t spend much political capital crafting balanced communiqués at home. Doral could become less a traditional summit, and more an arena for mini-laterals: focused coalitions that work on debt sustainability reform, critical minerals, supply chains, digital rules, and migration. Given shifting geopolitical dynamics with China and Russia, it is anyone’s guess today whether Trump will want those countries in the room for any or all of these conversations.

Attendance will become a pressure point. Johannesburg showed how quickly leaders can politicize presence and absence. Some will face domestic backlash if they are seen smiling for the cameras at a Trump-branded resort. Others will see Doral as too important a venue for face time with Washington to skip. The G20’s legitimacy will be read not only in pages of agreements or negotiated text but also in the guest list.

The irony is that under the surface, South Africa’s G20 has laid groundwork on a few issues Trump claims to care about: fixing a broken sovereign debt system and securing more resilient critical mineral chains. The road from South Africa to Doral will decide whether the United States builds on that foundation—or buries it under America First, undermining the value of the forum itself.

This work represents the views and opinions solely of the author. The Council on Foreign Relations is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher, and takes no institutional positions on matters of policy.

Creative Commons
Creative Commons: Some rights reserved.
Close
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
View License Detail
Close

Top Stories on CFR

Venezuela

The opposition and the Maduro regime will face a new variable at the negotiating table: the United States and its heavy military presence off Venezuela’s coast. As a direct party, the Trump administration now has an opportunity to learn the lessons of the past to bring a potential conflict to a close. 

Taiwan

Assumptions about how a potential conflict between the United States and China over Taiwan would unfold should urgently be revisited. Such a war, far from being insulated, would likely draw in additional powers, expand geographically, and escalate vertically.

United States

Three CFR experts discuss President Donald Trump’s decision to allow Nvidia to sell advanced AI chip sales to China and what implications it could have for the future of AI, U.S. national security policy, and Chinese relations.