South Africa's xenophobic resurgence is a test of our collective conscience

South Africa’s xenophobic resurgence tests Africa’s commitment to unity, human dignity and lawful migration. [File Courtesy]

The resurgence of xenophobic violence in South Africa is more than an isolated security concern. It is a painful reminder that Africa’s enduring dream of unity remains fragile and, at times, elusive. Every attack against a fellow African diminishes not only the victim but also the ideals upon which our continent seeks to build its future.

For decades, Pan-Africanism has embodied the aspiration of a continent united by shared history, mutual respect and collective prosperity. This vision is reflected in the African Union’s Agenda 2063, the African Continental Free Trade Area and the growing commitment among African states to promote trade, investment and the lawful movement of people across borders.

Yet these aspirations cannot be fully realised if Africans continue to fear one another.

Renewed hostility towards foreign nationals in parts of South Africa has once again shaken the conscience of the continent. Businesses have been looted, livelihoods disrupted, families displaced and communities traumatised. Regardless of nationality, violence founded on prejudice has no place in a constitutional democracy governed by the rule of law.

History reminds us that this is not an isolated occurrence. The xenophobic attacks of 2008, followed by further outbreaks in 2015 and 2019, claimed lives, destroyed property and displaced thousands of people. Each episode attracted widespread condemnation and renewed commitments to address the underlying causes. Yet the recurrence of similar violence suggests that those causes remain insufficiently confronted.

South Africa’s socio-economic challenges are undeniable. High unemployment, persistent inequality, poverty and growing frustration continue to place enormous pressure on communities. These realities require serious policy attention. But economic hardship cannot justify violence against people whose aspirations are no different from those of millions of others: to work, pursue education, build businesses and provide for their families.

Throughout history, periods of economic uncertainty have often produced convenient scapegoats. Migrants can become easy targets for frustrations whose origins lie in far more complex structural and governance challenges.

Blaming foreign nationals does not create employment, reduce inequality or improve public services. Instead, it risks weakening social cohesion, discouraging investment and undermining confidence in the rule of law.

There is also an important economic dimension that deserves greater attention.

States have a legitimate right to regulate immigration, secure their borders and enforce immigration laws. Irregular immigration must therefore be addressed through lawful, fair and effective immigration systems. However, immigration status should never become a justification for dehumanisation or violence.

Migrants, including some without regular immigration status, nevertheless participate in the economies in which they live. They work, trade, rent homes, purchase goods and services and contribute to economic activity and the circulation of money. Those in formal employment may also contribute directly through taxation, while their consumption contributes to indirect tax revenues.

Kenya provides an instructive example. In some sectors, including construction, agriculture, domestic work, hospitality, small-scale trading and other low-paid occupations, foreign nationals have taken up jobs that some residents are increasingly reluctant to undertake.

This is not an argument for illegal immigration. It is an argument against the simplistic assumption that an undocumented migrant is automatically an economic burden.

The appropriate policy question should be: What economic role are migrants playing, under what conditions, and how can governments regulate that contribution fairly and lawfully?

Governments should enforce immigration laws while protecting labour rights, preventing exploitation, ensuring appropriate tax compliance and addressing genuine security concerns. A person can violate immigration law and still make an economic contribution. These realities can coexist.

For Kenya, developments in South Africa are of particular concern.

Thousands of Kenyans have established careers, businesses and professional networks there. They work as teachers, healthcare professionals, engineers, entrepreneurs, academics, students, hospitality workers and employees of multinational organisations. Their contribution extends beyond South Africa through investment, remittances, knowledge exchange and stronger commercial and cultural ties between the two countries.

 

Although Kenyans have not consistently been the principal targets of xenophobic violence, hostility towards foreign nationals rarely remains confined to one nationality. Once xenophobia becomes normalised, every African migrant becomes vulnerable.

Kenya must therefore continue strengthening mechanisms to protect its citizens abroad. The Ministry of Foreign and Diaspora Affairs, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, the National Employment Authority and Kenyan diplomatic missions should enhance diaspora registration, bilateral labour agreements, crisis communication, legal assistance and emergency response mechanisms.

South Africa, meanwhile, must ensure that immigration enforcement remains the responsibility of legitimate state institutions and not vigilante groups, criminal gangs or mobs.

Individuals who incite or participate in xenophobic violence should be investigated and prosecuted. The principle is straightforward: a country can enforce its immigration laws without dehumanising immigrants.

Political leadership is equally important. Public rhetoric that portrays migrants collectively as the cause of unemployment, crime or pressure on public services risks transforming legitimate public grievances into prejudice.

If unemployment is the problem, governments must address job creation, skills development and investment. If crime is the problem, law enforcement agencies must pursue criminals regardless of nationality. If public services are under pressure, governments must improve planning and delivery.

Foreign nationals should not become the convenient explanation for failures of governance.

The responsibility also extends beyond South Africa.The African Union, Southern African Development Community, East African Community and other regional institutions should treat recurring xenophobic violence as a continental human security concern. Stronger early warning systems, preventive diplomacy, civic education, information sharing and migrant protection mechanisms are needed to prevent recurring cycles of violence.

Continental integration is not simply about moving goods and capital. It is also about ensuring that Africans can travel, study, work, trade and invest across borders without fear.

South Africa’s own history provides a powerful reminder. During the struggle against apartheid, countless South Africans found refuge across Africa. Countries including Tanzania, Zambia, Botswana and Mozambique offered sanctuary, education and solidarity to those fleeing oppression. That generosity represented some of the highest ideals of African unity.

Today, Africa must ask whether it is prepared to extend that same spirit of solidarity to migrants, students, workers and entrepreneurs who cross its borders in search of opportunity. The philosophy of Ubuntu, expressed through the idea that “I am because we are”, reminds us that our humanity is interconnected. It does not require African states to abandon sovereignty, border controls or immigration laws. It challenges us to exercise those responsibilities without abandoning our humanity.

The answer to unemployment is sound economic policy, not hatred. The answer to crime is effective policing, not collective blame. The answer to irregular migration is effective immigration management and lawful enforcement, not mob justice.

And the answer to inequality is inclusive development, not violence against neighbours seeking opportunity, dignity and hope. South Africa’s xenophobic resurgence is therefore more than a domestic challenge. It is a test of our collective conscience and of whether Pan Africanism is a principle we genuinely believe in or merely invoke when convenient.

The true measure of African unity will not be found solely in declarations adopted at continental summits. It will be found in whether an African trader feels safe in another African country, whether a student can pursue an education without fear, whether a professional can build a career across borders with dignity and whether an immigrant, regardless of status, is treated as a human being while the state lawfully determines their right to remain.

Africa cannot build an integrated economy while allowing hatred to police its borders. If we fail this test, we risk weakening the foundations of continental integration. But if we respond with courage, justice, responsible leadership and compassion, we can reaffirm the values that inspired Africa’s liberation movements and preserve the promise of a peaceful, prosperous and united continent.

South Africa’s xenophobic resurgence is, ultimately, a test of our collective conscience.

The writer is a governance, security and social policy commentator