Elon Musk’s South African citizenship is under scrutiny after his criticism of the country’s economic policies, sparking political debate as EFF leader Julius Malema questions his status, while South African authorities and U.S. political ties add further complexity to the controversy.

In a surprising turn of events, the citizenship status of billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk has become the center of political debate in South Africa.

Known for his ambitious ventures in space exploration, artificial intelligence, and electric vehicles, Musk has now found himself entangled in a dispute that goes beyond technology—one that questions his national identity and his influence on global politics.

The controversy erupted after Musk made bold claims about South Africa’s policies, particularly the country’s Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) regulations.

These laws, designed to address economic disparities from the apartheid era, require businesses to meet certain Black ownership criteria.

Musk alleged that these regulations prevented his satellite internet company, Starlink, from operating in South Africa, stating that it was not allowed because he is “not Black.”

His remarks ignited widespread debate, drawing both support and criticism from various political figures.

Among Musk’s critics is Julius Malema, the outspoken leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), a leftist party known for its radical stance on land redistribution and economic justice.

Malema has publicly questioned whether Musk still holds South African citizenship and whether his status should be revoked, given his criticism of the country and his close ties to U.S. political figures.

Malema’s inquiry has placed the spotlight on South Africa’s Home Affairs Department, which manages citizenship records.

In response, South African Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber refused to disclose Musk’s citizenship status, citing privacy laws that protect individual records.

However, Schreiber did not hold back in his criticism of Malema, accusing him of using the government department to wage political battles.

Schreiber dismissed the notion of targeting Musk, stating that South Africa does not strip people of their citizenship simply for having political opinions.

Musk, for his part, has distanced himself from the debate. In a recent social media post, he stated that he considers himself “simply an American,” further fueling speculation that he no longer identifies with South Africa.

Musk, who was born in Pretoria in 1971, left the country as a teenager and eventually became a U.S. citizen.

While his South African roots remain a key part of his early story, he has rarely engaged in direct political discourse regarding his home country—until now.

The situation took an even more dramatic turn when former U.S. President Donald Trump announced a decision to suspend foreign aid to South Africa.

Trump cited concerns over the country’s land expropriation policies, which involve redistributing land without compensation—a move he claimed disproportionately affects white farmers.

This decision aligned with Musk’s criticisms of the South African government, further raising suspicions about whether Musk had played a role in influencing U.S. policy on the matter.

President Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa responded swiftly, defending the land reforms and denouncing any attempts to undermine the nation’s sovereignty.

Ramaphosa stated that the reforms are being carried out within legal and constitutional frameworks to address historical injustices.

He also dismissed Trump’s claims of discrimination against white farmers, asserting that the policy is about economic justice rather than racial retribution.

As tensions rise, Musk’s role in this unfolding drama raises larger questions about the responsibilities of high-profile expatriates in global politics.

While Musk is no longer a resident of South Africa, his influence is undeniable. His business empire stretches across multiple continents, and his words carry weight in political and economic circles.

Whether his comments about South Africa were a reflection of genuine concern or a calculated move to advance business interests remains a topic of debate.

Additionally, the controversy has reignited discussions about South Africa’s economic policies and the effectiveness of initiatives like BEE.

Supporters argue that such policies are necessary to correct past inequalities and provide opportunities for historically disadvantaged communities.

Critics, however, claim that the policies can discourage foreign investment and create unnecessary bureaucratic barriers for businesses.

Beyond politics, Musk’s comments have also drawn attention to the challenges facing Starlink’s expansion into Africa.

While Starlink has been successful in bringing internet access to remote areas in many parts of the world, regulatory hurdles remain a significant obstacle in countries with strict telecommunications laws.

Some analysts believe that Musk’s frustrations with South Africa stem from his inability to fast-track Starlink’s entry into the market without complying with existing regulations.

With so many moving pieces, the situation is far from settled. Malema continues to push for further scrutiny of Musk’s citizenship, while Schreiber insists that the government will not be drawn into political games.

Meanwhile, Musk remains silent on whether he plans to take any action regarding his ties to South Africa.

This debate is not just about one man’s citizenship—it’s a reflection of broader issues surrounding identity, political influence, and economic policy.

Musk may be one of the most famous South Africans in the world, but as this controversy unfolds, the question remains: Does South Africa still see him as one of its own?