South Africa’s fragile rainbow: migration, memory, and the cycle of xenophobic violence

South Africa is once again grappling with a resurgence of anti-immigrant tensions as self- appointed vigilante groups intensify campaigns against foreign nationals, raiding businesses, assaulting traders, confiscating goods, and issuing ultimatums for immigrants to leave by June 30 or else face unspecified consequences.

The incidents are the latest in a recurring cycle of anti-immigrant violence that periodically shakes Africa’s most industrialized economy, exposing deep-seated tensions over unemployment, crime, and economic inequality.

Although commonly framed as xenophobia, some analysts argue that the violence is more accurately described as Afrophobia, given its apparent focus on migrants from sub-Saharan Africa.

Against this backdrop, foreign nationals are frequently blamed for a range of social ills, while hostile rhetoric continues to intensify. Particularly concerning is the perceived inconsistency or limited visibility of decisive state response, with only a few prominent voices such as former President Thabo Mbeki and opposition leader Julius Malema publicly calling for restraint while also invoking Africa’s historical solidarity during the anti-apartheid struggle.

While such appeals hold limited resonance for a younger generation confronting contemporary socio-economic challenges, historical records show the extensive support African countries provided during anti-apartheid struggles.

Governments – including that of General Idi Amin Dada – committed resources to the liberation effort. The so-called Frontline States – Angola, Botswana, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe – played critical roles in sustaining liberation movements.

Nigeria, though geographically distant, also declared itself a frontline state, going as far as establishing a national relief initiative, popularly known as the ‘Mandela Tax’ for its citizens to contribute financially to the liberation cause.

But history never truly retires. As South Africa transitioned from apartheid, many African leaders who had loudly condemned apartheid in the 1960s onward, faced their own internal political and economic crises.

Against this backdrop, migration patterns intensified across the continent, forming what some have likened to a modern “Mfecane” of economic displacement, with post-apartheid South Africa emerging as a primary destination for those seeking refuge from poverty, instability, and authoritarian governance.

By the late 1990s and early 2000s, it was widely claimed that South Africa hosted millions of foreigners. The centrality of migrant labour to South Africa’s socioeconomic development – and the political tensions surrounding it – has deep historical roots.

Both colonial and apartheid South Africa developed sophisticated systems for recruiting foreign labour, particularly from the late 19th century onwards. Workers were sourced from across Southern Africa, including Mozambique, Malawi, Lesotho, Botswana, Namibia, Swaziland (now eSwatini), Angola, Zambia, and even parts of southern Tanzania.

While some of this labour was absorbed by commercial farms owned largely by Afrikaner settlers, it was the mineral boom – the diamond discoveries in the Northern Cape and the goldfields of the Transvaal (present-day Gauteng) – that generated the greatest demand for migrant workers.

Reliance on migrant labour remained both an economic strategy and a political instrument throughout much of the apartheid era. Economically, it provided a steady supply of low-cost labour to sustain the country’s mining and industrial sectors.

Politically, it helped insulate the apartheid state and the white- controlled economy from labour unrest and organised resistance.

Policymakers feared that a workforce composed predominantly of local South African workers could become a powerful vehicle for political mobilisation, particularly during periods of heightened opposition to apartheid and demands for improved wages and working conditions.

Consequently, the system often looked beyond South Africa’s borders to meet its labour needs. Today, long after apartheid, South Africa continues to exert a powerful attraction for migrant labour from across the continent and beyond.

White employers find themselves in a fix. They prefer to employ migrant labour against the country’s laws, largely because local South Africans are deemed lazy, unruly, yet very demanding in wage remunerations.

They are also feared for easily escalating workflow paralysis through industrial actions and property destruction when labour tensions remain unresolved.

A distinctive feature of foreign nationals arriving at different periods under varying circumstances includes asylum seekers and immigrants searching for economic and educational opportunities.

Even asylum seekers awaiting the determination of their legal status can participate in economic activities. Those with limited formal qualifications participate in the informal economy, operating as street vendors selling groceries and other commodities.

Those with greater financial resources establish small retail enterprises – commonly referred to as spaza shops in townships. Many such businesses are dominated by Ethiopians, Somalis, Bangladeshis, and Pakistanis, typically stocking goods such as maize meal, bread, milk, and peanut butter.

Township liquor trade – historically centered around establishments known as shebeens – is controlled by local South Africans. Professional classes on the other hand establish private businesses such as medical clinics, schools, and other service-oriented enterprises.

A number of Ugandans have developed a niche in founding schools, while those with limited formal qualifications, engage as mechanics, food vendors, salon operators, and traditional herbalists.

Unfortunately, some Ugandans falsely present themselves as traditional healers or Sangomas, exploiting vulnerable members of the public for financial gain. Other professional immigrants seek employment in the public and private sectors.

In South Africa’s contemporary political and economic environment, this often places them in direct contest with local citizens for scarce jobs, a reality that always triggers social and political upheavals as is currently the case.

Ironically, many of the professions now at the centre of these debates – notably teaching and medicine – were once sustained by migrant labour. During the latter decades of apartheid, particularly in the homeland territories, South Africa faced acute shortages of skilled personnel and actively relied on foreign professionals to provide essential services in schools, hospitals, and clinics. Initially, migrant entrepreneurship was often viewed with relative admiration as it reflected adaptation to changing economic realities.

Today, they are blamed for unemployment, crime, drug trafficking, pressure on public services, the displacement of local businesses, and even for “stealing” South African women, spreading disease, and employing fellow foreigners instead of locals.

Even those making genuine contributions to South African society are often regarded with suspicion and dismissively labelled Makwerekwere- a derogatory term used for Africans from outside South Africa.

South Africa’s recurring hostility toward African migrants reflects a contradiction in a country whose economy has long depended on migrant labour. While concerns about unemployment and inequality are legitimate, blaming foreign nationals for these challenges risks misdirecting public frustration.

For over a century, South Africa has attracted migrant workers and will likely continue to do so. The challenge is to manage migration in ways that promote both social cohesion and human dignity.

The writer is a development consultant.

The post South Africa’s fragile rainbow: migration, memory, and the cycle of xenophobic violence appeared first on The Observer Media Ltd.