Many outside the United States saw the Democrats’ midterm victories as a check on Donald Trump and a chance for relations with Washington to improve. But relief has been accompanied by concern: political polarization and uncertainty in US politics could affect support for Ukraine, the security of allies and trade. The vote also tested how resilient American democracy is. Based on reporting by Vot Tak (Russia) and Mail & Guardian (South Africa).
Democrats’ US victory curbs the Kremlin’s calculations
The Democrats’ victory in the US midterm elections on November 3 shifts the balance of power in Washington and narrows the Kremlin’s ability to influence US foreign policy through personal ties with President Donald Trump. This is the conclusion reached by political analyst Abbas Gallyamov in an article for Vot Tak.
The results strengthen Congress’s role as an independent center of power. Democrats gain greater scope to scrutinize the administration, launch investigations, influence budget decisions and limit certain White House foreign policy initiatives. In Gallyamov’s assessment, this is an unfavorable development for Vladimir Putin.
Trump’s return to the White House may previously have seemed to Moscow like a “window of opportunity”: the Kremlin could have hoped for a less hard-line US approach to the war against Ukraine, sanctions and relations with European allies. But the Democrats’ stronger position reduces the likelihood that the US president will be able to implement a Russia-friendly policy on his own.
This matters particularly for future aid to Ukraine. Congress can take part in allocating funds, oversee the implementation of budget decisions and shape the political parameters of US support for Kyiv. At the same time, a Democratic majority—or a stronger Democratic presence in Congress—could provide additional backing for Ukraine and European governments that favor coordinated action against Russian aggression.
The issues also include sanctions, enforcement of restrictions on Russia, and possible negotiations between Washington and Moscow over the war and European security. The stronger Congress’s oversight of the White House, the harder it is for the Kremlin to count on a rapid shift in US policy or on agreements based solely on the president’s position.
In Gallyamov’s interpretation, the election demonstrates the importance of the US system of checks and balances. Russian state rhetoric often portrays Western policy as the product of decisions made by individual leaders, above all the US president. But the American political system works differently: the president is constrained by Congress, budget procedures, partisan conflict and investigations.
For a Russian audience accustomed to a highly centralized model of government, this system may seem chaotic and unpredictable. The article, however, presents it as a mechanism for restraining executive power. Even if the US president were inclined to take a less hard-line approach toward Moscow, his options would be limited by institutions, political rivals and the need to take lawmakers’ views into account.
Thus, the assessment published by Vot Tak is less a neutral analysis of the US election than a political conclusion about its consequences for Russia. The Democrats’ success is framed as a strategic setback for Putin: the Kremlin’s room for maneuver is shrinking, and hopes for a shift in US policy in Moscow’s favor are becoming less realistic.
ANC welcomes Trump’s setbacks but fears loss of AGOA benefits
The Democrats’ midterm victories drew interest in South Africa not only in US politics but also prompted undisguised satisfaction within the ruling African National Congress. ANC Secretary-General Fikile Mbalula said he was “over the moon” about the electoral setbacks suffered by Republicans and President Donald Trump, but also warned that deteriorating relations between Pretoria and Washington could prove costly for South African businesses and workers.
According to Mail & Guardian, Mbalula welcomed the results, which, the publication reports, gave Democrats control of both chambers of Congress. “I’m on cloud nine, I’m happy,” he said, commenting on Trump’s weakened position.
His sharp reaction reflects the ANC’s accumulated grievances over the US administration’s policies. Mbalula said Trump had “been very nasty towards South Africa,” and that there was no point in sugarcoating the state of bilateral relations. At the same time, he acknowledged that even a possible weakening of the president through Congress would not remove the immediate risks: Trump, the ANC secretary-general noted, still has two years left in office.
Pretoria sees the US plan to end South Africa’s participation in the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) trade preference program on January 1, 2027, as the main practical threat. The program gives a number of African countries preferential access to the US market and is significant for South African exporters, manufacturers and workers in export-related industries.
Mbalula stressed that the consequences would extend beyond the government or the ANC. “This will affect a significant number of businesspeople who trade and do business with the US,” he said. In his view, trade restrictions could hurt jobs, production and the private sector, rather than serve as a targeted punishment of the country’s authorities.
Trump’s claims of an alleged “white genocide” in South Africa remain another source of conflict. Mbalula accused the US president of repeating this account despite objections from white South Africans themselves. “He believes that we are killing white people here… even when white people themselves tell him that nothing of the sort is happening,” the ANC secretary-general said.
The issue is particularly sensitive for the ruling party because it touches on land reform, crime, race relations and the legacy of apartheid. The ANC believes that this rhetoric distorts the situation in the country and is used by international conservative groups to put pressure on post-apartheid South Africa.
Mbalula also placed some of the blame on South African political and civic groups that, he argued, promote this agenda in the United States. He criticized Freedom Front Plus leader Corne Mulder and the organization AfriForum, claiming they seek foreign pressure on their own country and then blame the government for its consequences.
The ANC’s response to the US election therefore combines political schadenfreude with economic anxiety. Pretoria sees Trump’s weakened position in Congress as a positive sign, but the possible cancellation of AGOA trade benefits remains a threat that could cause significant harm to South African businesses and the labor market.
