Xenophobia and Afro-Phobia Cannot Be Disguised as “Anti-Illegal Immigration”

South Africa is once again facing a troubling rise in hostility toward refugees, asylum seekers, migrants and foreign nationals. In recent months, demonstrations associated with groups such as the March and March movement have often been described in parts of the media as “anti-illegal-immigrant protests.” That description is misleading and inaccurate.

What is unfolding in many communities is not a narrowly targeted campaign against undocumented immigration. In practice, foreigners are frequently targeted regardless of their legal status. Refugees, asylum seekers, documented migrants, permanent residents and even South African citizens perceived to be foreign have faced intimidation, harassment and violence.

Only the Department of Home Affairs has the legal authority to determine whether someone’s immigration status is lawful or unlawful. When people are targeted simply because they are foreign nationals — or are perceived to be foreign — the correct terms are xenophobia and, in the South African context where Africans are disproportionately affected, Afro-phobia.

The media therefore has a responsibility to report these developments accurately. Labelling xenophobic actions as “anti-illegal-immigrant demonstrations” risks sanitizing prejudice and normalizing collective punishment.

A Threat to South Africa’s Reputation and Economy

These attacks harm South Africa at multiple levels.

For decades, South Africa has presented itself as a champion of constitutional democracy, human rights and Pan-African solidarity. During apartheid, many African countries provided refuge, training and diplomatic support to South African liberation movements. Yet when foreigners are publicly humiliated, assaulted or blamed for social problems, South Africa increasingly becomes associated with xenophobia and Afro-phobia, weakening its moral authority within the African Union and damaging diplomatic and economic relationships.

The economic consequences are equally important. Public debate about migrants is often shaped more by political rhetoric than evidence. Research on Johannesburg’s informal economy found that fears of migrants “taking over” township businesses are exaggerated, with migrants accounting for only a minority of informal business ownership in Gauteng.

Studies further show that migrant-owned businesses contribute to local supply chains, employment, food accessibility and affordability in township economies. Researchers have also warned that discriminatory measures against foreign-owned businesses can weaken local economies and deepen poverty. Xenophobic violence against informal traders destroys livelihoods, discourages investment and destabilizes already vulnerable communities.

South Africa’s economic challenges — unemployment, poverty, crime and inequality — are real and serious. But migrants did not create corruption, collapse municipalities, loot state institutions or engineer economic stagnation. Blaming foreigners for structural governance failures may produce political slogans, but it does not solve underlying problems.

Populism, Immigration and the Rule of Law

Many South Africans are understandably frustrated by unemployment, crime, corruption and deteriorating living conditions. These grievances are legitimate. However, some political actors increasingly redirect public anger toward migrants and refugees, especially during election periods, creating the impression that foreigners are responsible for crises rooted in governance failures.

Concerns about undocumented migration and border management are legitimate public policy issues. However, immigration enforcement is the responsibility of state institutions, particularly the Department of Home Affairs and law enforcement agencies — not vigilante groups or political movements.

Criminality, regardless of whether it involves citizens or non-citizens, should be addressed through proper policing, investigations and functioning courts. Yet concerns have grown that police responses to anti-foreigner intimidation, harassment and attacks have at times been inadequate or inconsistent, raising questions about the state’s commitment to protecting vulnerable communities and enforcing the rule of law.

The looting and destruction of foreign-owned businesses during anti-foreigner campaigns is particularly dangerous. Theft, vandalism and intimidation remain criminal acts regardless of political grievances. When lawlessness against one vulnerable group is tolerated, it creates a dangerous precedent that gradually erodes constitutional protections for everyone. Today the target may be foreign nationals; tomorrow it may be political opponents, minorities or any group blamed for broader frustrations.

The rule of law cannot function selectively. A state that fails to protect unpopular or vulnerable groups weakens public trust, damages investor confidence and undermines constitutional democracy itself.

Leadership and South Africa’s Future

South Africa urgently needs courageous and principled leadership. True leadership requires confronting difficult truths, not amplifying public anger for short-term political gain. Immigration challenges must be addressed through lawful institutional reform, criminality through effective law enforcement and economic hardship through serious economic policy — not by scapegoating vulnerable communities.

Leaders also have a responsibility to remind South Africans of their own history. During apartheid, many African nations stood in solidarity with South Africans, opened their borders and supported liberation movements in times of hardship. That legacy should not be forgotten.

To their credit, some political leaders have publicly spoken out against xenophobic and Afro-phobic violence despite political pressure and growing anti-foreigner sentiment. In an environment where anti-immigrant rhetoric can attract political support, leaders who reject mob justice and defend constitutional values deserve recognition.

South Africa now faces a critical choice: continue down a path where economic frustration is redirected into hostility toward foreigners, or pursue one grounded in constitutionalism, evidence-based policymaking, Pan-African solidarity and social justice.

A society that normalizes xenophobia ultimately harms itself. Violence against migrants weakens communities, discourages investment, damages South Africa’s reputation and deepens instability. The country’s future depends not on division and blame, but on confronting corruption, inequality and unemployment honestly, lawfully and collectively.

History often remembers leaders not for what they said when it was easy, but for what they defended when it was difficult.

References

1. Gauteng City-Region Observatory (GCRO). International Migrants in Johannesburg’s Informal Economy.

   GCRO – International Migrants in Johannesburg’s Informal Economy

   
   

2. Taylor & Francis Online. Deconstructing ‘the foreign’: The limits of citizenship for explaining price competition in the Spaza sector in South Africa.

   Taylor & Francis – Deconstructing ‘the foreign’

   
   

3. Helen Suzman Foundation. Foreign Nationals in Gauteng’s Informal Retail Sector.

   Helen Suzman Foundation – Foreign Nationals in Gauteng’s Informal Retail Sector

   
   

4. Springer / Urban Transformations. “A foreigner is not a person in this country”: Xenophobia and the informal sector in South Africa’s secondary cities.

   Springer – Xenophobia and the Informal Sector in South Africa’s Secondary Cities