Flooding the Zone with Shit: it was time for SA
After two weeks of intense discussions in the U.S. on South Africaās relations with Washington, I thought Iād have one last quiet evening to reflect. Instead, as I prepared to head back to Joburg/Pretoria from NY, the news brokeāMarco Rubio had declared South African Ambassador Ebrahim Rasool persona non grata, calling him a "race-baiting politician who hates America."
After days of conversations filled with concern, confusion, and even quiet apologiesāāSorry we/theyāre putting you through thisāāseeing it unfold in real time was surreal. Not because it was unexpected, but because it confirmed what I had heard repeatedly: this isnāt just about race or South Africaās ICJ case against Israel. Itās about punishing any dissent and rejecting international mechanisms that challenge U.S. interests. The U.S. no longer seeks global legitimacyāit believes it can battle the world on all fronts. Expelling Rasool isnāt just erraticāitās part of an order-transforming process.
For decades, the U.S. was both architect and enforcer of the international system, balancing its role as guarantor, enforcer, and disruptor. But when it abandons the very institutions it once led, this isnāt just a shift. The mask hasnāt slippedāitās been ripped off by the US itself.
It would be easy to dismiss Rasoolās expulsion as another tense moment in U.S.-South Africa relations. But the real issue is precedent. No Global South country can be allowed to successfully use international law against a U.S. ally, especially being one of the few left. This isnāt about Pretoria. Itās about who might be next.
The irony is glaring. Washingtonās accusations of ārace-baitingā against South Africa feel like projection. This isnāt about racial divisionāitās about burying the ICJ case in controversy. The strategy is clear: distract, discredit, and divert. But the bluntness exposes its weakness.
Over the past two weeks, Iāve spoken to diplomats, policymakers, and academics. Many are disillusioned. Some joke about quitting international affairs altogether, retreating to the private sector. Others are anxious, wondering if theyāll be next. The frustration is real, but exhaustion runs deeperāwatching institutions they believed in be hollowed out by power politics.
The real question isnāt about multipolarity or U.S. decline. Itās about power. The U.S. still dominates financially, militarily, culturally. But now, it is throwing away the ressemblance of legitimacy that once made its dominance tolerable. Abandoning the structures that gave you influence doesnāt just erode controlāit creates a void.
And voids donāt stay empty for long.
This isnāt just a policy shift. Itās a strategyāone built on disruption, making global governance impossible. Steve Bannon called it āflooding the zone with shitāāoverwhelming the system with chaos so no one can process whatās happening. Thatās no longer just a domestic tactic. Itās defining international relations.
So where does that leave us? At a crossroads. The U.S. is walking away from the system it built. The message is clear: āDeal with your own mess.ā Maybe itās time we do just that. Not through bureaucratic tweaks, but by redefining global governance itself. The longer we wait, the harder the hit will be.
Rasoolās expulsion might seem minor in global politics. But small moments add up. And sometimes, they trigger something bigger. This feels like one of those moments. The rules we thought governed international relations? They were never absolute, we knew it. Now, we have to decide what comes next.