Land reform has been the Achilles heel of many post-colonial governments in Africa. The promise of freedom from the colonial masters came with the concomitant promise for the redistribution of land. This was one of the important aims of many liberation movements across Africa. However, post-independence, many African states received social and political freedom, without economic independence. This entailed that the factors of production, including land ownership, remained in the hands of the white minority. As a result, it has become difficult for most African governments to deal with the problem of inequality and poverty. This has led to a growing sense of discontentment amongst the ordinary citizens. Initiatives such as the willing-buyer willing-seller programmes which were attempted in many African countries were not successful, as there were no willing sellers. Where land could be sold, the owners sought to sell it at a market value that was unaffordable for most countries, without external funding. A case in point is the Zimbabwe’s government attempt to circumvent these difficulties through land grabs. The government attempted to sanitise this with ex post facto amendment of the law. However, the international community was not deceived by this. In response, there was significant capital flight from the country, along with the imposition of sanctions. These actions were motivated by political violence and human rights abuses, leading to economic collapse. South Africa is considering land redistribution and has introduced the Expropriation Bill (B23-2020). This has been met with mixed feelings by foreign investors. Given this background, this chapter explores the question of whether the differences between foreign investors and governments seeking to redistribute land in Africa can be reconciled.