In a bold and unexpected revelation during the tense May 21 White House meeting, Democratic Alliance (DA) leader John Steenhuisen told U.S. President Donald Trump that his party had taken the extraordinary step of aligning with the African National Congress (ANC) — not out of ideological alignment, but as a calculated move to block what he called a “dangerous takeover” by Jacob Zuma’s MK Party and Julius Malema’s Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF).
According to insiders present during the closed-door portion of the U.S.–South Africa summit, Steenhuisen made it clear: the DA’s decision to cooperate with its longtime political rival, the ANC, was a “patriotic necessity” aimed at safeguarding South Africa’s democratic future.
“Sometimes the enemy of your enemy is your… temporary ally,” Steenhuisen reportedly quipped.
Blocking the “Radical Threat”
The controversial alliance emerged in the aftermath of South Africa’s 2024 general elections, where neither the ANC nor the DA secured a majority. But the real concern, according to Steenhuisen, was the rising influence of two populist factions: Jacob Zuma’s new MK Party and Julius Malema’s far-left EFF — both of which gained traction with promises of radical land expropriation, nationalization, and a break from constitutional norms.
“We made a decision not for political convenience, but for national stability,” Steenhuisen told Trump, as sources familiar with the exchange described. “Zuma and Malema are not opponents we can afford in government. We needed to close that door before it opened.”
A Coalition of Caution, Not Unity
Though ideologically distant, the DA-ANC partnership is seen by some analysts as a tactical, time-sensitive coalition built more on mutual fear than shared vision. Steenhuisen emphasized that the DA would remain a “watchdog within government,” not a partner in every ANC policy — drawing a hard line between cooperation and surrender.
Yet this pragmatic alliance is not without risk. Critics accuse Steenhuisen of betraying DA voters and weakening the opposition’s identity. Still, supporters argue that the move may have prevented a political shift that could’ve deeply destabilized South Africa’s economy and global standing.
Trump’s Reaction: Cautious Interest
While Trump is known for his hardline stances and skepticism toward political compromise, he appeared intrigued by Steenhuisen’s explanation. According to one source, Trump nodded, saying, “Well, that’s one way to keep the radicals out.”
It remains unclear whether the U.S. administration will formally engage with the new South African coalition arrangement, but the meeting confirmed one thing: South Africa’s political terrain is no longer black and white — it’s a chessboard of strategic survival.
