South Africa

India’s women post 298-7 in Navi Mumbai before bowling South Africa out for 246 to claim the 2025 Cricket World Cup.

India’s women have lifted the Cricket World Cup for the first time after beating South Africa by 52 runs in Navi Mumbai, India.

Reaching the final for a third time, Harmanpreet Kaur’s side dominated the contest from the off at DY Patil Stadium on Sunday, although South Africa captain Laura Wolvaardt did her best to spoil the hosts’ party in the run chase.

Replying to India’s 298-7, Wolvaardt led from the off and totalled 101 off 98 when she was eventually caught in the deep off the bowling off Deepti Sharma, who finished with 5-39.

The support was not there for Wolvaardt, unlike that enjoyed throughout a team effort with the bat by India, as South Africa regularly lost wickets at the other end before being bowled out for 246 in the 46th over.

Wolvaardt’s heroic effort added to the century she scored in the semifinal win against England on Thursday. She is only the second player to achieve the feat of the back-to-back centuries at this stage of the competition after Alyssa Healy did so in Australia’s victorious run in the 2022 edition.

Neither team has lifted the trophy; indeed, this was South Africa’s first final.

India had come close twice before, reaching the final in 2005 and 2017, losing to Australia and England, respectively.

This was also the first women’s World Cup final that did not involve either Australia or England, the former being the record winners with seven victories to their name.

Having been put in, after a long delay due to rain, India posted the second-highest total in a women’s World Cup final. But they will feel they should have comfortably cleared 300, having reached 151-1 at the halfway stage of their innings.

Opener Smriti Mandhana’s 45 meant the India batter finished with 434 runs for the tournament.

It puts her top of India’s list of run scorers at a World Cup ahead of Mithali Raj, who registered 409 in the 2017 edition.

The limelight on the day belonged to her opening partner, however, as Shafali Verma struck 87 off 78.

Deepti Sharma’s run-a-ball 58 kept the momentum going through the middle over, while Richa Ghosh thumped two sixes in an innings of 34 off 24 late on that marked the best strike-rate of the innings.

South Africa started the chase solidly enough, the opening pair bringing up the fifty partnership in the 10th over. The loss of Tazmin Brits, run out by a brilliant piece of fielding by Amanjot Kaur for 23, started a wobble, though.

Anneke Bosch pushed back a painful six-ball duck before being trapped LBW by Sree Charani.

Verma then came to the party with the ball, picking up Sune Luus and Marizanne Kapp to leave South Africa reeling on 123-4 in the 23rd over.

When Sinalo Jafta fell in the 30th with her side 148-5, it was difficult to see a way back for a team hoping to be the first senior side from their country to lift a major International Cricket Council (ICC) title.

By the time Wolvaardt’s innings was done, India’s women knew they were about to go one better than their male counterparts, who similarly hosted the 2023 edition only to be denied by Australia in the final.

Follow our live build-up, team news, score and text commentary stream from the final in Navi Mumbai at 09:30 GMT.

JOHANNESBURG — South Africa’s government on Friday criticized the U.S. refugee policy shift that gives priority to Afrikaners, the country’s white minority group of Dutch descent.

The Trump administration on Thursday announced a ceiling of 7,500 refugees to be admitted to the United States, a sharp decrease from the previous 125,000 spots and said Afrikaners would be given preference over other groups.

U.S. President Trump has claimed that there is a “genocide” against Afrikaners in South Africa and that they are facing persecution and discrimination because of the country’s redress policies and the levels of crime in the country.

It’s one of the contentious issues that has seen diplomatic relations between South Africa and U.S. hit an all-time low, with Trump suspending all financial aid to South Africa and setting one of the highest tariffs for the country’s exports to the U.S.

The South African government’s international relations department said Friday that the latest move was concerning as it “still appears to rest on a premise that is factually inaccurate.”

“The claim of a ‘white genocide’ in South Africa is widely discredited and unsupported by reliable evidence,” spokesman Chrispin Phiri said.

Phiri said that a program designed to facilitate the immigration and resettlement of Afrikaners as refugees was deeply flawed and disregarded the country’s constitutional processes.

“The limited uptake of this offer by South Africans is a telling indicator of this reality,” Phiri said.

The U.S. notice, which signifies a huge policy shift toward refugees, mentioned only Afrikaners as a specific group and said the admission of the 7,500 refugees during the 2026 budget year “justified by humanitarian concerns or is otherwise in the national interest.”

Trump’s asylum offer for Afrikaners has sparked divisive debate in South Africa, but has been largely rejected even by many in the Afrikaner community.

This week, a group of prominent Afrikaners including politicians, activists, writers and businesspeople penned an open letter rejecting the notion that Afrikaners needed to emigrate from South Africa.

“The idea that white South Africans deserve special asylum status because of their race undermines the very principles of the refugee program. Vulnerability — not race — should guide humanitarian policy,” they wrote in the widely publicized letter.

However, some Afrikaner groups continue to be very critical of the South African government’s handling of crime and redress policies even though they reject the “white genocide” claim.

An Afrikaner lobbyist group, Afriforum, on Thursday said that it doesn’t call the murder of white farmers a genocide, but raised concerns about white people’s safety in South Africa.

“This does not mean AfriForum rejects or scoffs at Trump’s refugee status offer — there will be Afrikaners that apply and they should have the option, especially those who have been victims of horrific farm attacks or the South African government’s many racially discriminatory policies,” AfriForum spokesman Ernst van Zyl said.

While it’s unclear how many white South Africans have applied for refugee status in the U.S., a group of 59 white South Africans were granted asylum and were received with much fanfare in May.

Magome writes for the Associated Press.

South Africa, Nigeria, Mozambique, Burkina Faso removed from Financial Action Task Force’s financial crimes list.

A global money-laundering watchdog has taken South Africa, Nigeria, Mozambique and Burkina Faso off its “grey list” of countries subjected to increased monitoring.

The Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF), a financial crimes watchdog based in France, on Friday said it was removing the four countries after “successful on-site visits” that showed “positive progress” in addressing shortcomings within agreed timeframes.

The FATF maintains “grey” and “black” lists for countries it has identified as not meeting its standards. It considers grey list countries to be those with “strategic deficiencies” in their anti-money laundering regimes, but which are nonetheless working with the organisation to address them.

FATF President Elisa de Anda Madrazo called the removal of the four “a positive story for the continent of Africa”.

South Africa revamped its tools to detect money laundering and terrorist financing, she said, while Nigeria created better coordination between agencies, Mozambique increased its financial intelligence sharing, and Burkina Faso improved its oversight of financial institutions.

Nigeria and South Africa were added to the list in 2023, preceded by Mozambique in 2022 and Burkina Faso in 2021.

Officials from the four countries – which will no longer be subject to increased monitoring by the organisation – welcomed the decision.

Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu said the delisting marked a “major milestone in Nigeria’s journey towards economic reform, institutional integrity and global credibility”, while the country’s Financial Intelligence Unit separately said it had “worked resolutely through a 19-point action plan” to demonstrate its commitment to improvements.

Edward Kieswetter, commissioner of the South African Revenue Service, also cheered the update but said, “Removing the designation of grey listing is not a finish line but a milestone on a long-term journey toward building a robust and resilient financial ecosystem.”

Leaders in Mozambique and Burkina Faso did not immediately comment, though Mozambican officials had signalled for several months that they were optimistic about being removed.

In July, Finance Minister Carla Louveira said Mozambique was “not simply working to get off the grey list, but working so that in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing, when the FATF makes its assessment in 2030, it will find a completely different situation from the one detected in 2021,” MZ News reported at the time.

More than 200 countries around the world have pledged to follow the standards of the FATF, which reviews their efforts to combat money laundering, as well as terrorist and weapons financing.

The FATF’s black or “high-risk” list consists of Iran, Myanmar and North Korea.

Maharaj, Harmer star with the ball as hosts are bowled out for 138, setting South Africa 68 to win the second Test.

South Africa have romped to an eight-wicket win over Pakistan on the fourth day of the second cricket Test in Rawalpindi, claiming victory before lunch to level the two-match series.

The home side were dismissed cheaply in the opening hour, collapsing from 94-4 overnight to be all out for 138 on Thursday.

South Africa then took 12.3 overs to reach the 68-run target with captain Aiden Markram scoring 42 before being trapped leg before wicket by Noman Ali, four runs from victory.

Tristan Stubbs was caught in the slips in the same over without scoring, leaving Ryan Rickelton (25 not out) and Tony de Zorzi, who did not face a ball, to complete the job.

It was the 11th win in 12 Tests for South Africa, with the only blemish their 93-run loss to Pakistan in last week’s first match of the series in Lahore.

“There were moments where guys had to put their hands up and stand up for the team and they really did that and excelled in that. It took a lot of confidence and a lot of belief from wins, but when your character’s tested and you managed to come out on the right side, I think that means quite a bit more,” said Markram.

Simon Harmer took 6-50 as Pakistan collapsed with fellow spinner Keshav Maharaj adding two more wickets to the seven he took in the first innings.

Pakistan lost their last six wickets for 44 runs to continue their trend of lower-order slumps despite starting the day with high hopes.

They needed a major contribution from star batsman Babar Azam, whose appearance at the stumps throughout the series saw a sudden spike in spectators and a noticeable increase in excited noise from the stands.

Babar, however, has not scored a century in his last 15 Tests since 161 against New Zealand in Karachi in December 2022.

He was on 49 overnight, sharing a 34-run partnership with Mohammad Rizwan that held out promise of getting Pakistan back into the contest with six wickets in hand and a 23-run lead.

But after going to his 50 with a single off the second ball of the morning, the 31-year-old Babar was trapped leg before wicket by Harmer in the first over.

After that, the home innings came tumbling down like a pack of cards as the 36-year-old Harmer, who has had a long career in county cricket in England but only 12 test appearances, bagged his first five-wicket haul in test cricket.

He had Rizwan caught at short leg for 18 and then Noman Ali nicked behind without scoring to mark a 1,000th first-class wicket.

“We have a lot to work on,” said home captain Shan Masood, “when it comes to lower order batting, when it comes to finishing the innings off, when it comes to the third innings of batting, also when it comes to the first innings where we could have posted something north of 400 but we didn’t.”

As the Group of 20 leaders gather in Cape Town, clean air features on the agenda as a standalone priority for the first time in the forum’s history. The reality, however, is stark. Outdoor air pollution claims 5.7 million lives each year, and a report released last week highlights the lack of international development finance for clean air. Only $3.7bn was spent globally in 2023, representing barely 1 percent of aid, with only a fraction reaching Africa.

As the minister chairing the G20’s environment workstream this year, I am proud to have worked with member countries and international organisations to place air pollution firmly on the agenda. When Japan held the presidency in 2019, the focus was on marine plastics. Last year, under Brazil’s leadership, the G20 prioritised finance for forests. This year, we sought to treat the right to breathe clean air with the urgency it deserves.

In South Africa, our Constitution guarantees every person the right to an environment that is not harmful to their health or wellbeing. That principle guides our domestic policy and informs our leadership of the G20’s discussions.

This is the first G20 presidency on African soil, a fitting setting to confront this crisis. Africa is the fastest urbanising continent on Earth, and the choices we make today in how we power our homes, move our people, and build our cities will shape health, climate, and economic outcomes for decades to come. The burden of air pollution is already visible in hospital admissions, school absenteeism, and productivity losses across the continent. According to the World Bank, outdoor air pollution causes global economic losses equivalent to nearly 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) each year.

This reality is now reshaping the global debate. In May, governments adopted the world’s first global goal on air quality at the World Health Organization’s World Health Assembly, which aims to halve deaths caused by poor air by 2040. It was a landmark step, but without finance to match ambition, such commitments risk remaining words on paper.

Our G20 deliberations identified four barriers to cleaner air. The first is limited institutional capacity. The second is inadequate monitoring and data, leaving policymakers and citizens without reliable information. The third is weak cooperation across borders. The fourth is the shortage of finance relative to the scale of the problem.

The Clean Air Fund’s recent report makes this plain. In 2023, support for outdoor air quality in sub-Saharan Africa fell by 91 percent to only $11.8m. Globally, just 1 percent of aid was spent on clean air, and only 1 percent of that reached sub-Saharan Africa. In other words, less than one-10,000th (1/10,000) of global development funding supports clean-air efforts in one of the regions most in need.

That is not only inequitable; it is also economically short-sighted. Clean-air action reduces healthcare costs, boosts productivity, and supports the transition to more resilient economies.

South Africa’s own experience demonstrates what is possible. Through the National Air Quality Framework and the National Environmental Management Act, we have built a foundation for accountability and transparency in monitoring air quality. We have strengthened coordination between national and municipal governments, introduced targeted interventions in the Highveld and Vaal Triangle, and expanded our air-quality monitoring network so that communities can access real-time data. These measures are supported by our broader Just Energy Transition, which directs investment towards cleaner transport, renewable power, and improved waste management.

The lesson is that progress requires both political will and predictable finance. Domestic measures alone are not enough. International financial institutions and development banks must embed clean-air objectives within climate and development portfolios.

This year’s G20 discussions also underscored the importance of data. You cannot manage what you cannot measure. Expanding reliable air-quality monitoring networks in low-income countries is one of the smartest investments the international community can make. It empowers local decision-makers, supports innovation in clean technologies, and strengthens accountability.

The message from Cape Town is clear: clean air belongs at the top table. That recognition must now be matched by sustained progress to deliver measurable outcomes. In practice, this means embedding clean-air objectives at the heart of development finance and prioritising regions that have been left behind, especially across Africa, where pollution levels are high but funding remains negligible.

Clean air is not a peripheral issue; it is central to achieving climate goals, health targets, and sustainable growth. The science is clear: the same pollutants that harm human health also warm the planet. Tackling them together delivers faster and more cost-effective results.

We therefore call for a collective effort among governments, development partners, and the private sector to ensure that clean air becomes a central measure of success in the global transition. The right to breathe clean air is universal. Delivering it requires fairness, commitment, and finance that match ambition.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

From the air, it looks like a city erased. Entire neighbourhoods have vanished from the map two years since Israel’s relentless bombardment of Gaza began. What were once homes, schools, hospitals, factories and power plants have been reduced to debris and dust. Thousands of Palestinians are now returning to ruins or rubble in a place that has lost the very fabric of daily life.

Economists estimate the cost of rebuilding at tens of billions of dollars – far beyond the capacity of Gaza’s shattered economy.

What is behind the $20bn lifeline to Argentina?

Plus, the European Union invests $13bn in South Africa.

The latest round of qualifiers around the globe for the FIFA World Cup 2026 has seen the number of entrants rise to 28.

Al Jazeera Sport takes a look at some of the best photos from the nations that confirmed their qualification on Wednesday for the FIFA World Cup 2026.

The bus, travelling from the Eastern Cape to Zimbabwe and Malawi, tumbled down a steep embankment.

A bus has crashed in a mountainous region in the north of South Africa, killing at least 42 people.

The vehicle veered off a steep mountain road on the N1 highway near the town of Makhado in Limpopo province on Sunday evening, before tumbling down an embankment and landing upside down.

The vehicle was travelling from Gqeberha in South Africa’s Eastern Cape province to Zimbabwe and Malawi.

Emergency crews worked through the night to pull victims from the wreckage and transport survivors to nearby hospitals.

More than 30 injured passengers received medical treatment. Authorities said some people may still be trapped inside the overturned bus.

According to public broadcaster SABC, the dead included 18 women, 17 men and seven children.

A 10-month-old baby was among the victims, Violet Mathy, a transport official for the Limpopo province, told Newzroom Afrika.

The road, a major highway connecting South Africa to Zimbabwe, remained closed in both directions on Monday as rescue operations continued.

Limpopo Premier Phophi Ramathuba visited the crash site before meeting survivors in hospital.

“Losing so many lives in one incident is painful beyond words,” she said, offering condolences to families in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Malawi.

Authorities are investigating what caused the driver to lose control, with initial assessments pointing to possible fatigue or mechanical failure as potential factors.

The provincial government is providing counselling support to survivors while working with diplomatic missions from Zimbabwe and Malawi to assist bereaved families.

South Africa’s roads are among the most dangerous in the world, with thousands of people dying in crashes each year.

Long-distance buses carrying migrant workers between countries in Southern Africa are frequently involved in serious accidents on the region’s highways.

STRICTLY Come Dancing judge Shirley Ballas has released a heartfelt statement following the death of beloved former star Michael Wentink.

The judge shared the emotional message on social media, saying “he was like family”.

2

2

Michael Wentink was a star judge on Strictly Come Dancing South Africa and was just 46 years old when he died.

Shirley said: “Michael wasn’t just part of my life, he was like family”.

“He wasn’t just an incredible dancer, he was a kind, caring soul who brought so much joy, warmth and laughter into our lives.”

She continued on, saying: “His loyalty and love were unmatched, and his smile was irreplaceable.

He spent many days at my house; he loved the children and would forever be checking in,” she said.

“One of the kindest souls I’ve had the pleasure of crossing paths with.”

Shirley said she would “never forget suggesting this aqua suit to Michael, and he just laughed saying ‘let’s give it a go Shirls'”.

“Michael and Beata danced magnificently and won,” Shirley continued.

“That’s a day I’ll carry with me forever.

“You touched so many lives, Michael, and I’m blessed to have been one of them.”

Shirley finished off the heartbreaking message, saying: “With a heavy heart, I’ll miss you deeply.”

“Rest in peace, my friend, alongside your beautiful Beata. Forever in our hearts. X.”

Alongside her heartbreaking farewell, Shirley shared pictures of Michael.

The snaps and videos included the pair performing together, as well as a solo picture of Michael.

Tributes for the beloved star poured into Shirley’s comments, including from former Pussycat Dolls singer Ashley Roberts.

“Sending love. Love watching you dance,” she commented with a broken heart emoji.

Fellow professional dancer Vadim Garbuzov said: “Him and Beata were the first professional showcase I have ever seen live”.

“It was in Kyiv in 2001, it was fantastic.

“Rest in peace, what a great influential champion he was,” Garbuzov finished.

More to follow… For the latest news on this story keep checking back at The Sun Online

Thesun.co.uk is your go-to destination for the best celebrity news, real-life stories, jaw-dropping pictures and must-see video.

Like us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/thesun and follow us from our main Twitter account at @TheSun.

A MAJOR update in the hunt for a missing British hiker has come just a week after the search kicked off.

British tourist Elaine McSorley vanished after embarking on a self-guided hike from her South African hotel last week.

4

4

But the search for the missing 71-year-old has been called off with no trace of her, according to local media outlet The Witness,

The major update comes after Elaine was reported missing on Saturday, September 27.

After an extensive six day search undertaken by local police, search and rescue teams, K9 units, and volunteers from security companies, local communities, the Community Policing Forum (South Africa’s neighbourhood watch), and nearby game reserves, the search has come to an end.

Investigators used all means possible, with drones, helicopters and fixed-wing aircrafts in an attempt to find the missing woman.

Despite the extensive efforts, no trace of Elaine has been found.

South African police said the investigation will continue, with hopes of narrowing down to a smaller search area.

She had set out with her husband Leon, 81, to hike from the Ghost Mountain Inn and Safari Lodge in eMkhuze.

Leon had turned back earlier due to the heat, while Elaine continued walking to a lake.

Leon raised the alarm three hours later when she later failed to return.

He has since checked out of the Ghost Mountain Inn and police do not know where he is.

Police said earlier in the week that they suspect a crocodile took Elaine, or foul play — but have no evidence of either.

Lieutenant Colonel Paul Magwaza said: “The British couple checked into the Ghost Mountain Inn at 1pm and went for a walk at 2pm.

“According to the husband, during the walk to the lake, he decided to turn back and returned to the hotel, but when she did not return, he raised the alarm.

“We have been searching day and night but there is no sign of her. It is like she has vanished into thin air. The dogs have picked up no traces either.

“If she had simply collapsed and died we would have found her by now. There are theories as to what happened but I am not going to speculate.”

A police forum member said: “We’re starting to look at whether she was dev­oured.

“There’s no sign of crime.”

4

4

Elaine’s disappearance comes after a fisherman disappeared while trying to catch sardines.

Fears the man had been taken by sharks surfaced after friends of the missing 37-year-old rushed to the spot where he vanished – but retreated when the fins of two other beasts suspected to be Bronze Whalers headed for them.

The horror attack on July 6 happened on a beach popular with divers and surfers at Mfazazana, Kwa-Zulu Natal province, 60 miles south of Durban.

A National Sea Rescue Institute spokesman confirmed that a 37-year-old local man had been reported missing “following a shark incident that involved 3 local fishermen”.

They said: “We and the SA police and the Water Policing and Diving Services unit were told a man disappeared under the water after a shark surfaced where he was netting.

“It appears that at least one friend attempted to intervene but it is believed that he was confronted by at least 2 sharks in the surf and he retreated to the shoreline.

“It is believed the sharks were feeding on a school of sardines at the time. A large scale search is underway but so far no sign of the missing man has been found”.

In the last 25 years, 37 people have been killed by sharks off the coast of South Africa – with the last being restaurateur Kimon Bisogno, 39, in September 2022.

South African Ambassador Nkosinathi Emmanuel “Nathi” Mthethwa was found dead outside of a high-rise hotel in Paris. Police are investigating the cause of his death.

Brazil now joins Spain, Ireland, Mexico, Turkiye and others who have signed on to the case.

Brazil has formally joined the case launched by South Africa at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that alleges Israel is committing “genocide” in the Gaza Strip.

The Hague court confirmed in a statement on Friday that Brazil invoked Article 63 of the ICJ statute, filing a declaration of intervention in the case.

The article gives any United Nations member state the right to intervene in a case when the interpretation of a treaty to which it is a party is in question. Brazil used the article to formally recognize that Israel is violating the Genocide Convention of 1948.

South Africa and Israel are now invited to “furnish written observations on the declaration of intervention”, the World Court said.

The Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in July it intended to join the case, citing “impunity” that undermined international law as it denounced Israeli aggression in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

Brazil now joins Spain, Ireland, Mexico, Turkiye and others who have intervened in favor of South Africa to join the case against Israel over the genocidal war, which has killed more than 65,000 Palestinians in Gaza since October 2023.

COMMUNIQUÉ : le Brésil, se référant à l’article 63 du Statut de la #CIJ, a déposé une déclaration d’intervention en l’affaire #AfriqueduSud c. #Israël.

Lien vers le communiqué : https://t.co/7UW0uUrP8o pic.twitter.com/wGoQwUNRqC

— CIJ_ICJ (@CIJ_ICJ) September 19, 2025

The ICJ’s final verdict could still take several years to come, but the court issued an interim order in January 2024 that obliged Israel to take action to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza and allow for unimpeded access to humanitarian aid.

The court also ruled that Israel’s presence in occupied Palestinian territory is unlawful, and that its policies amount to annexation .

Ignoring those rulings, as well as mounting international condemnation of its conduct, Israel has since then destroyed far more of Gaza and West Bank, and is quickly advancing with plans to sixteen much of the Palestinian territory.

The United States and the European allies of Israel continue to arm and fund Israel, even as credible international bodies are increasingly recognizing that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza .

Washington has also rejected the merits of the ICJ case, and US legislators have directed threats and criticism against South Africa. The US has also issued unprecedented sanctions of members of the International Criminal Court (ICC), who have issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

For decades, men in many countries were expected to spend two or even three months’ salary on a diamond engagement ring. This notion – and the iconic status of this gem – did not come about by accident.

The story goes back to 1870, when an Oxford University dropout named Cecil Rhodes set off to try his luck in the Cape Colony – modern-day South Africa, then a key British domain.

Seeing the burgeoning diamond mining sector there, he began renting water pumps to diamond prospectors to prevent flooding of the mines. Then, over the next 20 years, Rhodes and his partner Charles Rudd proceeded to buy out hundreds, and then thousands, of small mines and “claims” – landholdings believed to contain diamonds – often for a pittance when their owners faced bankruptcy. Most miners were small operators, and Rhodes and Rudd had access to serious financial capital – notably the Rothschild banking empire – through their connections in London. As the two partners combined claims into larger mining units, overhead costs were reduced, and operations became more profitable.

The partners incorporated as De Beers Consolidated Mines, De Beers being the name of one of the mines they took over. By 1888, the company had a near-monopoly of South African claims and active diamond mines. With diamonds making up more than 25 percent of South African exports in 1900, De Beers became a powerhouse of the country’s economy, controlling some 90 percent of the world’s total diamond supply. Rhodes himself became a leading imperial figure, serving as prime minister of the Cape Colony from 1890 to 1896.

De Beers was founded upon the racist policies of South Africa, which at the time was ruled by a white minority. The diamonds were extracted by Black miners earning subsistence wages, while De Beers’s white, European-origin shareholders enjoyed the profits.

Following Rhodes’s death in 1902, control of De Beers ultimately passed to German-born entrepreneur Ernest Oppenheimer. Oppenheimer used a combination of financial incentives, strategic pressure, and diplomacy to persuade diamond suppliers in other countries to sell exclusively through the London-based and De Beers-owned “Central Selling Organization” (CSO), which in the 1930s became the unified sales channel for virtually all the world’s pre-cut diamonds. This enabled De Beers to stockpile diamonds, strictly control the release of stones to the global market, and effectively control prices – thereby creating an illusion of diamond scarcity worldwide.

Meanwhile, De Beers sought to enhance global demand for diamonds. In 1946, the company hired NW Ayer, a Philadelphia-based advertising agency, which one year later came up with the legendary slogan, “A diamond is forever”. This reframed the diamond and, specifically, the diamond engagement ring, as a symbol of “eternal love”. Through mass advertising, product placements in films, and celebrity PR – for example, lending jewellery to actors for major events – the campaign transformed the diamond market in the US, Europe and Japan.

Lasting 64 years, until 2011, this campaign was an astounding global success, with Ad Age magazine naming “A diamond is forever” as the top advertisement slogan of the 20th century. De Beers had manufactured a social norm, with the diamond engagement ring becoming almost mandatory in every developed market. While previously, a fiance might give a locket, a string of pearls, or a family heirloom to his intended, the number of American brides with a diamond ring climbed from 10 percent in 1940 to some 80 percent in 1980. In Japan, this figure rose from less than 5 percent in 1960 to 60 percent by 1981.

By the early 1950s, a diamond ring typically cost about $170 – about $2,300 in today’s money. De Beers advertisements initially suggested spending one month’s salary on an engagement ring, but by the 1980s, they were posing the question: “How can you make two months’ salary last forever?” Consumers appeared undeterred by the fact that a diamond’s resale value was typically just 50 percent of its original retail price (in contrast to gold, which has an “official” benchmark price set twice-daily).

By the time Marilyn Monroe sang “Diamonds are a girl’s best friend” in 1953 and the James Bond film “Diamonds Are Forever” was released in 1971, the diamond had become an icon.

‘Cartel behaviour’

By the late 1970s, De Beers was annually distributing some 50 million diamond carats, with sales of more than $2bn in the US alone.

But as the 1980s rolled around, problems started to emerge for the company.

De Beers came under increasing scrutiny as the anti-apartheid movement gained momentum in Europe and the United States. Reports of its working conditions were shocking: low pay for mineworkers, minimum safety training and crowded dormitory housing surrounded by barbed wire and security checkpoints. This negative publicity put De Beers firmly in the spotlight as one of the prime beneficiaries of apartheid.

De Beers had already fought off allegations of “cartel behaviour” from the US Department of Justice. But in 1994, the company was indicted by a US grand jury on price-fixing charges. The company was barred from doing business in the US, where its executives could no longer set foot for fear of arrest.

In the late 1990s, reports that the diamond trade was financing brutal civil wars in Angola, Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of Congo further soured consumer sentiment.

Rebel groups targeted “alluvial” diamond mines – relatively easy-to-extract surface deposits, often in riverbeds – selling stones into the informal “grey” market and using the profits to buy weapons. The phrase “blood diamonds” entered the lexicon as investigative articles depicted enslaved children with pickaxes and shovels. De Beers was accused of turning a blind eye, if not outright complicity. The company’s sales declined more than 20 percent in two years, from about $5.7bn in 1999 to $4.45bn in 2001, with other diamond suppliers such as Angola’s Endiama and Russia’s Alrosa equally affected.

But since the early 1990s, changes had been afoot at De Beers. Facing pressure from South Africa’s newly elected African National Congress (ANC), it had introduced better conditions and wages for its mainly Black mineworkers. At the same time, Black South Africans also began to occupy some management roles.

Meanwhile, the US indictment meant the company had no choice but to terminate its CSO in 2000, ushering in competition from other producers. Diamond prices, no longer set and dictated by the CSO, became more volatile, subject to fluctuating demand, economic cycles, and geopolitical conditions.

To counter the blood diamond backlash, De Beers helped implement the “Kimberley Process” in 2003, through which diamond dealers can trace the origin of diamonds and authenticate “clean’’ diamonds with a microscopic stamp.

Not forever?

Today, natural diamonds may have lost some of their allure with the rise of “lab-grown” stones and “diamond simulants” such as cubic zirconia, which are up to 90 percent cheaper than the mined variety and often distinguishable from the real thing only by experts using specialised equipment.

Over the past two years, the diamond industry has been hit by a “perfect storm” of cheaper synthetic stones, weak consumer demand in the US and China, sanctions against Russia and, more recently, high US tariffs. This has had a widespread adverse impact: the Antwerp World Diamond Centre (AWDC) reported that rough diamond imports dropped 35 percent in 2024, with overall trade declining by 25 percent year-on-year (from $32.5bn to $24.4bn) – and in the Indian gem processing hub of Surat, at least 50,000 diamond workers were rendered jobless in 2024. At least 80 diamond workers in India have died by suicide in the past two years.

In 2011, the Oppenheimer family sold its interest in De Beers to the London-based mining corporation Anglo American, another major shareholder, for just over $5bn. De Beers is now once more up for sale, again with a $5bn price tag, as Anglo American seeks to exit the declining diamond market in favour of copper, iron ore and rare earth minerals.

Despite the volatile market conditions, total global consumer diamond sales were valued at approximately $100bn in 2024, with the average price of $6,750 for a diamond ring in the US, according to the Natural Diamond Council – about 1.3 months’ standard wage in the United States, but about eight months’ worth of the global median income. For those of greater means, London’s Harrods reportedly has a 228.31 carat, pear-shaped diamond available to view by private appointment – with a price estimated to be in excess of $30m.

This article is part of “Ordinary items, extraordinary stories”, a series about the surprising stories behind well-known items. 

Read more from the series:

How the inventor of the bouncy castle saved lives

How a popular Peruvian soft drink went ‘toe-to-toe’ with Coca-Cola

How a drowning victim became a lifesaving icon

How a father’s love and a pandemic created a household name

How Nigerians reinvented an Italian tinned tomato brand

How a children’s chocolate drink became a symbol of French colonialism

Who: South Africa vs Nigeria
What: CAF qualifiers for FIFA 2026 World Cup
Where: Free State Stadium in Bloemfontein, Free State province, South Africa
When: Tuesday at 6pm (16:00 GMT)

How to follow: We’ll have all the build-up on Al Jazeera Sport from 13:30 GMT in advance of our live text commentary stream.

Nigeria travel to South Africa looking to get their FIFA World Cup 2026 Confederation of African Football (CAF) qualifying chances back on track against the Group C leaders.

Nigeria, the three-time African champions, are currently third in the group, but they could move as high as second with a victory on Tuesday in Bloemfontein and keep alive their country’s qualifying hopes.

Making the Super Eagles’ task all the harder is that South Africa are unbeaten at home during the group phase with victories against Benin (2-1), Zimbabwe (3-1) and Lesotho (3-0).

Here is all to know about the high-stakes matchup between two of Africa’s most high-profile footballing nations:

Where do South Africa and Nigeria currently stand in Group C?

After seven matches, South Africa have opened up a wide points gap between themselves and the five other teams in the group:

1. South Africa: 16 points (+8 GD)
2. Benin: 11 points (0 GD)
3. Nigeria: 10 points (+2 GD)
4. Rwanda: 8 points (-1 GD)
5. Lesotho: 6 points (-4 GD)
6. Zimbabwe: 4 points (-5 GD)

How many African teams will qualify for the FIFA World Cup 2026?

African World Cup qualifying is arranged into nine groups of six nations.

The nine CAF group winners secure direct entry to the World Cup 2026 while the four best runners-up will participate in an intercontinental playoff for the possibility of securing a 10th spot at the tournament.

Of the nine African groups, only Morocco have already qualified for next year’s World Cup finals in North America.

CAF World Cup 2026 qualification dates:

• First round (November 15, 2023, to October 14): Group stage features 54 teams.
• Second round (November 10-18): Four best group runners-up play in semifinal-final format. Winners compete in interconfederation playoff for potential 10th African World Cup spot.

Could Nigeria still qualify for the FIFA World Cup 2026?

Nigeria could still reach the World Cup finals, but they will be dependent on other teams to finish top of their group.

They need to win against leaders South Africa (Matchday 8), then secure victories in their final two matches (Matchday 9 and 10) against Lesotho and Benin and hope South Africa lose one of their final two games to even have a mathematical chance of directly qualifying as the Group C winners.

If South Africa was to lose one of their final two matches and Nigeria wins both, the teams would be tied on 19 points at the end of the first round with the group winner being decided on goal difference. If they are tied on goal difference, then the two teams’ head-to-head record would be a factor in deciding the group winner.

If Nigeria finished second in Group C, they could potentially qualify as one of the four best runners-up for the intercontinental playoff. If they won the playoff, they would be admitted to the World Cup finals as the 10th African team.

Team news: South Africa

Head coach Hugo Broos will be without his first team defenders Nyiko Mobbie and Thabo Brendon Moloisane after both were injured against Lesotho on Friday. Kaizer Chiefs’ Thabiso Monyane has been called up as a possible replacement for Mobbie against Nigeria.

Burnley forward Lyle Foster, who scored and assisted in the 3-0 home win over Lesotho, is again expected to lead the line against Nigeria.

Team news: Nigeria

Head coach Eric Chelle will be without his talismanic striker Victor Osimhen, who was ruled out of the South Africa fixture after suffering a chin bruise during a 1-0 win over Rwanda on Friday.

Osimhen, who plays for the Turkish side Galatasaray, was considered the biggest goal threat for the Super Eagles, and his absence creates a selection dilemma for Chelle, who is tipped to go with Tolu Arokodare to lead the line, although Cyriel Dessers and Samuel Chukwueze would also be in contention.

In Osimhen’s absence, Moses Simon, Ademola Lookman and Alex Iwobi could all be deployed further forward to add attacking punch to the lineup.

When did South Africa last qualify for the FIFA World Cup finals?

South Africa have appeared in the FIFA World Cup finals on three occasions: 1998, 2002 and 2010.

The last time the Bafana Bafana successfully qualified for the World Cup through the CAF qualifiers was in 2002. In 2010, they were awarded automatic entry as the tournament hosts.

How many FIFA World Cup finals have Nigeria reached?

Nigeria have been to six FIFA World Cup finals but missed out on the most recent tournament in Qatar in 2022.

When was the last time the two sides met in South Africa?

The last time South Africa and Nigeria met in Bloemfontein was during a competitive fixture at the 2019 AFCON qualifiers with the Super Eagles winning the away fixture 2-1.

Possible starting lineups:

South Africa: Williams (goalkeeper); Mdunyelwa, Ndamane, Monyane, Modiba; Mokoena, Mbatha; Nkota, Mbule, Appollis; Foster

Nigeria: Nwabali (goalkeeper); Aina, Fredrick, Bassey, Onyemaechi; Onyedika, Ndidi, Iwobi; Simon; Lookman, Arokodare

Head-to-head

South Africa and Nigeria have played 13 times since 2004.

Nigeria have won six times while South Africa have only one victory.

The sides have played out six draws.

Last five matches:

South Africa

W-W-W-W-W (all competitions, last result on the right)

Nigeria

D-W-D-D-W

The US has taken a stake in Intel chipmaker as part of a push to secure domestic production and reduce reliance on China. The acquisition is the most significant intervention in private business since the 2008 financial crisis. Supporters call it a smart industrial policy that will protect jobs and national security. But critics warn that this could mark a shift in the relationship between government and private companies, raising concerns about how much control a president should have over business.

Also, Bangladesh warns it can no longer bear the cost of sheltering Rohingya refugees.

Plus, meat prices are at an all-time high.

South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa wants people to come together and talk.

He has launched a national dialogue process – billed as citizen-led – for South Africans from all walks of life to decide how to deal with challenges from crime and corruption to poverty and inequality.

But critics say his party, the African National Congress (ANC), has had 30 years in power to do just that.

So, can a conference help to solve longstanding problems in the country?

Will the talks address the divisions in the ANC?

And what’s the next chapter for South African politics?

Presenter: Adrian Finighan

Guests:

Lindiwe Zulu – Member of the National Executive Committee of the African National Congress

Imraan Buccus – Senior research associate at the Auwal Socio-Economic Research Institute

William Gumede – Associate professor at the University of the Witwatersrand’s School of Governance

South African Army Chief General Rudzani Maphwanya is facing backlash in his home country following the release of alleged comments he made during an official visit to Iran, which analysts say could further complicate the already turbulent relations between South Africa and the United States.

The comments, which appeared to suggest that Iran and South Africa have common military goals, come at a time when Pretoria is attempting to mend strained relations with US President Donald Trump to stabilise trade.

Last week, a 30 percent trade tariff on South African goods entering the US kicked in, alarming business owners in the country. That’s despite President Cyril Ramaphosa’s attempts to appease Trump, including by leading a delegation to the White House in May.

Here’s what to know about what the army chief said and why there’s backlash for it:

What did the army chief say in Iran?

Meeting with his Iranian counterpart, Major-General Seyyed Abdolrahim Mousavi in Tehran on Tuesday, Maphwanya is reported to have stated that the two countries had close ties, according to Iran’s state news agency, Press TV and the Tehran Times.

“Commander Maphwanya, recalling Iran’s historical support for South Africa’s anti-apartheid struggle, stated that these ties have forged a lasting bond between the two nations,” the Press TV article read.

According to Tehran Times, he went on to say: “The Republic of South Africa and the Islamic Republic of Iran have common goals. We always stand alongside the oppressed and defenceless people of the world.”

Maphwanya also reportedly condemned Israel’s “bombing of civilians standing in line for food” and its “ongoing aggression in the occupied West Bank”, Tehran Times reported.

His visit, the publication quoted Maphwanya as saying, “carries a political message”, and comes “at the best possible time to express our heartfelt sentiments to the peace-loving people of Iran”.

On the other hand, General Mousavi hailed South Africa’s genocide case against the “Zionist regime” at the International Court of Justice, and said that the effort was aligned with Iran’s policies, according to Press TV.

He also condemned the US and Israel’s military and economic actions against Iran as “violations of international laws and norms”. He added that Iran’s army is prepared to deliver “a more decisive response in the event of renewed aggression”, Press TV reported.

How has the South African government reacted?

President Cyril Ramaphosa’s office on Thursday clarified that the president was not aware of General Maphwanya’s visit to Iran, although such a trip would normally be approved by the Ministry of Defence, not the president’s office.

Ramaphosa appointed Maphwanya as army chief in 2021. The general, in apartheid-era South Africa, served in the army wing of the African National Congress (ANC), which started as a liberation movement, and commanded a parliamentary majority until 2024.

Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya, at a press briefing, said the general’s decision to visit Iran was itself badly timed.

“At this period of heightened geopolitical tensions and conflict in the Middle East, one can say the visit was ill-advised, and more so, the general should have been a lot more circumspect with the comments he makes.”

He added, “We are in the delicate process of resetting political relations with the US, but more importantly, balancing the trade relationship in such a manner that the trade relationship is mutually beneficial.”

Similarly, the Ministry of International Relations and the Defence Ministry dissociated the government from the army chief’s alleged comments.

“It is unfortunate that political and policy statements were reportedly made…The minister of defence and military veterans [Matsie Angelina Motshekga] will be engaging with General Maphwanya on his return,” a statement by the Defence Ministry on Wednesday read.

Meanwhile, the Democratic Alliance (DA) party, one of the four parties that form the South African coalition government, is calling for the army chief to be tried in a military court on grounds of “gross misconduct and a flagrant breach of the SANDF [South African National Defence Force] Code of Conduct.”

“According to Iranian state media, General Maphwanya went far beyond his constitutional and professional mandate, pledging ‘common goals’ with Iran, endorsing its stance on Gaza, and calling for deeper strategic alignment,” the DA said in a statement on Thursday.

“Such political statements are explicitly prohibited for serving officers, violate the SANDF’s duty of political neutrality, and undermine the constitutional principle of civilian control over the military,” the party added.

The US and South Africa’s relations are at their lowest in decades, making this a particularly sensitive time, analysts say, as it follows June’s 12-day war between Iran and the US-Israel coalition.

President Trump slapped a 30 percent tariff on South African goods entering the US as part of his wide-ranging reciprocal tariff wars in April. The US is a major destination for South African goods such as cars, precious metals and wine.

Trump’s main gripes with Pretoria include South Africa instigating a genocide case against Israel, the US’s ally, at the International Court of Justice, amid the ongoing war in Gaza. He earlier accused South Africa of strengthening ties with Iran.

Trump has also wrongly claimed that white South Africans are being persecuted in the country under the majority Black leadership of the ANC, the country’s main political party to which President Ramaphosa belongs. He also claims South Africa is confiscating land belonging to whites.

White South Africans are a wealthy minority and largely descendants of Dutch settlers. Afrikaner governments controlled the country under the racist apartheid system until 1990.

South African wealth, particularly land, continues to be controlled disproportionately by the country’s white population. In recent times, fringe, extremist Afrikaner groups claiming that whites are being targeted by Black people have emerged, pointing to cases of white farmers being attacked by criminals on their farmland.

Elon Musk, Trump’s one-time adviser before their public fallout in June, had also made claims of white persecution and claimed that the South African government’s business laws were blocking his internet company from operating in the country.

He was referring to laws requiring that foreign businesses be partly owned by Blacks or other historically disadvantaged groups, such as people living with disabilities.

The South African government denied Musk’s accusations.

In early May, Trump’s government admitted 59 white “refugees” in a resettlement programme meant to protect them.

Previously, the US, under former President Joe Biden, was at loggerheads with South Africa over its close ties with Russia and its vocal criticism of Israel.

The latest incident echoes a 2022 scandal when a sanctioned Russian cargo ship called the Lady R docked at Simon’s Town Naval Base in the Western Cape, said analyst Chris Vandome of think tank Chatham House. The US alleged at the time that South African military supplies were loaded onto the ship and used in the Ukraine war, claims South Africa denied.

“It lies with South African foreign policy formation and the lack of clarity and consistency around it that has created this confusion whereby people think they are saying things in line with what the nation thinks,” he said.

How has South Africa tried to appease the US?

On May 21, President Ramaphosa led a delegation to the White House in a bid to “reset relations” with Trump and hopefully secure lower tariff deals.

At the heated meeting, however, Trump refused to back down from his claims of white persecution, despite Ramaphosa clarifying that South Africa was facing widespread crime in general, and that there was no evidence that whites in particular were being targeted.

South Africa, during the meeting, offered to buy US liquefied natural gas and invest $3.3bn in US industries in exchange for lower tariffs. The delegation also agreed to a review of the country’s business ownership laws.

However, Trump’s 30 percent tariffs went into effect last week. Analysts say it could put up to 30,000 South African jobs at risk, particularly in the manufacturing and agricultural sectors.

Meanwhile, Ramaphosa’s government promised to take further action to ease the burden on manufacturers and exporters. On Tuesday, Trade Minister Parks Tau told reporters that South Africa has submitted a revised proposal to Washington, without giving details.

General Maphwanya’s pronouncements this week, therefore, “couldn’t have come at a worse time” for South African diplomatic ties with the US, security analyst Jakkie Cilliers of the International Security Institute said, speaking to South African state TV, SABC.

“For the chief of the national defence force to pronounce so clearly and so unequivocally at this time is remarkably politically sensitive,” Cilliers said, adding that the general could be asked to resign upon his return.

What has General Maphwanya said?

Maphwanya, who the presidency said has returned to the country, has not put out public statements on the controversy. It is unclear how the government might sanction him. President Ramaphosa is set to meet with the army chief for briefings in the coming weeks, a presidency spokesperson said.