During apartheid, South Africans preferred Afrikaners because we knew where we stood with them. If they did not like someone, they made it clear, unlike English-speaking white people who were perceived as masking prejudice behind politeness, their grins being one of the most commonly cited examples of their deceitfulness.
The “foreigners must go” campaign seems to be characterised by a similar confusion to the one experienced with English-speaking white people. The narrative is framed in several ways: “foreigners must go”, “undocumented foreigners must go”, “foreigners involved in crime and drug trading must go” and so on. The lack of clarity about which foreigners must go has translated into the victimisation of some who are not targets, including South Africans who look like those who are unwelcome.
The narrative is reminiscent of the “settlers must go” statements used by the Pan Africanist Congress, among others. Ironically, the foreigners-must-go statement is also used by some white people.
During apartheid, when amenities were demarcated for “Europeans only” and “Africans only”, it was clear who Africans and non-Africans were. Today, some of those who used the “Europeans only” amenities are also joining the foreigners-must-go rhetoric.
Does this mean those who had always been aware that they were Europeans have suddenly become Africans and that Africans from outside South Africa are now foreigners? A foreigner is a person who comes from a different country or who is not a citizen of the country.
Many non-Africans from Europe, Asia and other parts of the world have been coming legally and illegally into South Africa, some pushing property prices so high that many Africans cannot afford them. Hence, many Africans continue to be squeezed into tin houses, commonly called shacks, and other small houses across townships, while non-Africans enjoy the best the country has to offer.
The foreigners do not seem to attract the same level of anger and rejection as those from elsewhere in Africa. While some have framed this as self-hatred among Africans, I do not believe this is the case. An African rejecting another African while not displaying the same level of rejection towards foreigners from other continents is not necessarily an expression of hatred towards non-South African Africans.
Given that the rejection is mostly displayed by those directly affected by competition for public resources, framing this as an economic issue would be closer to the truth than the self-hatred narrative. The competition for public resources is mostly felt by those who cannot afford medical aid, private schools, private security and private transport.
The hambhokudla-kini (go-and-eat-at-your-home) attitude displayed by children when a friend threatens their share of food aptly reflects the attitude of many South Africans towards non-South Africans who compete with them for public resources.
The understanding of a foreigner therefore requires clarification. No African can be a foreigner in Africa if Europeans, Chinese, Indians and others are not labelled with the same stigma. Africa is a continent and not a country. As such, Africans outside their countries of birth are foreigners in other African countries, in the same way clan members are part of one’s family but do not enjoy the same rights and privileges in a household as a spouse and children.
Although the hambhokudla-kini attitude is understandable because South Africa does not have infinite resources, it is hypocritical when it singles out non-South African Africans while allowing foreigners from Europe, Asia and elsewhere to enjoy South Africa without attracting the same scrutiny.
If this is a socio-economic issue, then it must be dealt with as such. The conflation of issues has made the real problem unclear, akin to the grinning of the English-speaking whites during apartheid.
While the misdeeds of some Africans from other countries should be condemned, it is important to consider the possibility that the anger is misdirected. Perhaps the failure of the settlers-must-go objective is resurfacing, redirected as “foreigners must go”. If this is correct, it would lend support to Mbongeni Ngema’s song African Solution, particularly the line: Nenzani madoda uma nixabana nodwa, nesaba abelungu (Why are you quarrelling among yourselves when you fear white people?).
The foreigners issue is partly attributed to the end of apartheid, which brought, among other changes, the freedom for fellow Africans to relocate to South Africa for various reasons, including conflict and poverty in some African countries.
This has placed significant pressure on resources such as water, electricity, healthcare, education, housing and roads. Consequently, their presence is increasingly becoming unwelcome among many South Africans.
The solution lies with Africans themselves. Africans must unite, not against the settlers but to address socio-economic challenges. While African unity might take different forms, it should be centred on stronger economic cooperation, coordinated industrialisation, harmonised regulations and greater trade integration.
The sooner South Africans realise that it is difficult to live in relative peace and prosperity while fellow Africans experience conflict and poverty, the better. Non-South African Africans also need to work harder to identify the real causes of conflict in their countries and eliminate them. African unity should involve identifying the causes of conflict and underdevelopment and addressing them decisively.
Since South Africa has not yet dealt with the underlying causes of poverty, inequality and unemployment, including land redistribution, it might be only a matter of time before poverty drives South Africans to seek opportunities elsewhere on the continent.
South Africans also need to recognise that, under current global realities, they must coexist with people from different races and countries. All this must happen under the rule of law. It is unfortunate that law enforcement appears to be failing in this regard, contributing to public anger.
There must also be consistency in both the rejection of illegal conduct and the enforcement of the law, so that efforts do not target African foreigners while overlooking foreigners from Europe, Asia and elsewhere. Strengthening law enforcement should include the introduction of a safe, accessible and effective tip-off line for reporting illicit activities such as drug trafficking.
Poverty and a lack of opportunities are among the drivers of migration, therefore African countries could expand opportunities through stronger continental cooperation, including support for a “Buy African” procurement policy. In South Africa, this would expand the “buy local” advocacy. Preferential procurement could then be extended to goods and services sourced from other African countries. Beyond strengthening collaboration across Africa, this could boost job creation across the continent, thereby reducing some of the economic pressures that drive migration.
The abundance of valuable natural resources in some African countries has become a curse because external actors often benefit from instability, while greed fuels corruption and weakens state institutions. Addressing this requires a multipronged strategy that exposes and neutralises external forces that benefit from instability while strengthening local accountability mechanisms.
Dr Thembinkosi T Twalo is a chief research specialist at the Human Sciences Research Council. He writes in his personal capacity.
The lack of clarity about which foreigners must go has translated into the victimisation of some who are not targets, including South Africans who look like those who are unwelcome
