U.S. and South African officials quietly agreed in late December to let Washington continue a controversial refugee programme targeting white South Africans, documents show.
The closed-door meeting followed weeks of diplomatic turbulence after South African authorities raided a U.S. refugee processing site in Johannesburg, triggering arrests and sharp protests.
According to an internal summary reviewed by Reuters, Pretoria assured Washington it would not interfere with the programme despite deep disagreements over its premise.
A senior South African official said the government rejected claims of genocide, yet defended every citizen’s right to move freely without state obstruction.
The late-night talks on December 23 brought together senior diplomats seeking to cool tensions and prevent further public clashes.
U.S. charge d’affaires Marc Dillard met Deputy Minister Alvin Botes and acting North America director Thabo Thage during the two-hour discussion.
The summary said South African officials aimed to de-escalate recent strains and improve communication channels strained since President Donald Trump’s return to office.
Those strains intensified after authorities detained contractors and briefly held two U.S. refugee officers during the mid-December raid.
Seven Kenyan contractors were arrested over alleged visa violations, a move Pretoria later described as routine immigration enforcement.
Washington called the events unacceptable, yet said refugee operations continued and Afrikaner arrivals rose sharply in December.
Trump had frozen most global refugee admissions, then launched a focused initiative for white Afrikaners, claiming they faced racial persecution.
The South African government has firmly rejected those allegations, calling them false narratives lacking evidence and harmful to social cohesion.
During the December meeting, officials also debated the online leak of a U.S. refugee officer’s passport image after the raid.
The summary described Pretoria’s response as restrained, with one official questioning links to the government, while another urged closer scrutiny.
South Africa later said it was not negotiating the programme, insisting adherence to law should not be mistaken for policy endorsement.
Behind the scenes, however, both sides appeared to choose calm diplomacy over confrontation, allowing a disputed programme to move forward in uneasy silence.
