 |
| Ai-generated Image |
In March 2026, hundreds of South Africans marched through the streets of Durban, joined by groups such as Operation Dudula, March and March, and political parties including ActionSA. They demanded stricter border controls, mass deportations of undocumented foreigners, and relief for overburdened public services. Protesters specifically highlighted nationals from Nigeria, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and other countries, blaming uncontrolled inflows for job losses and rising crime. Police used rubber bullets and teargas to disperse the crowds after some incidents of harassment and looting. Nigeria’s high commission urged its citizens to exercise caution.
While the violence is unacceptable, the underlying
grievances reflect a fundamental truth of governance: nations have the
sovereign right—and responsibility—to manage immigration in the interest of
their citizens. South Africa’s official unemployment rate stood at 31.4% in the
fourth quarter of 2025, among the highest in the world, even after a modest
decline. Data from Statistics South Africa show that foreign-born individuals
have significantly higher employment absorption rates (around 64% in earlier
measurements) compared to South African-born citizens (around 32%). Their
unemployment rate has been notably lower (e.g., 18% versus 31% for locals in
referenced periods). This disparity raises legitimate concerns about labor
market displacement, particularly in informal sectors where migrants often
accept lower wages or precarious conditions without strong union protections.
Additional pressures include strain on housing, healthcare,
and education systems already struggling with service delivery failures. Public
concerns about links between some undocumented migration and criminal
activities further intensify tensions. These issues are not unique to South
Africa; they mirror debates occurring across the globe. In the Americas, the
United States under President Trump in 2025–2026 dramatically intensified
border enforcement. Policies included expanded physical barriers, revived
“Remain in Mexico”-style measures, tightened asylum rules, and a surge in ICE
operations. The administration reported over 600,000 deportations alongside an
estimated 1.9–2.2 million self-deportations in the first year, citing threats
to public safety, wages, and sovereignty from record irregular crossings and
cartel-linked activities. Interior enforcement saw arrests increase more than
fourfold in some metrics, supported by substantial new funding (including $170
billion over four years via legislation for detention and barriers). Mexico has
cooperated on returns, acknowledging the limits of absorbing unchecked flows.
Europe provides equally robust examples. In 2025–2026,
multiple Schengen countries—including Germany, France, and Italy—extended or
reintroduced internal border controls, citing irregular migration, smuggling
networks, and security risks. The EU advanced its Migration and Asylum Pact,
effective from mid-2026, which emphasizes faster deportations, offshore
processing/“return hubs” in third countries, and burden-sharing mechanisms.
Deportation orders reached over 240,000 in the first half of 2025 across the
Schengen area, with actual returns rising (e.g., France reporting increases of
over 25% in prior data). The UK pursued returns agreements and workplace
enforcement. Italy expanded external processing deals (e.g., with Albania), while
Germany and others eased rules for deporting criminal offenders and rejected
asylum seekers. Reasons cited include overwhelmed welfare systems, integration
failures, youth crime concerns, and strain on public services—issues persisting
despite some decline in irregular arrivals.
South Africa faces parallel realities. Gratitude for
international solidarity during the anti-apartheid era should not obligate open
borders or uncontrolled inflows today. Nigeria played a leading role in that
struggle, contributing an estimated US$61 billion overall (including government
efforts to isolate the regime, sanctions advocacy, and scholarships) and
establishing the Southern Africa Relief Fund, through which ordinary
Nigerians—including civil servants—donated portions of their salaries. Other African
and global actors provided diplomatic, financial, and moral support that helped
end institutionalized racial oppression—an historic achievement.
Yet apartheid was a system of legalized racial hierarchy and
exclusion based on skin color. Uncontrolled immigration today is a separate
policy challenge involving capacity, legality, economic fairness, and social
cohesion in a democratic South Africa with 31.4% unemployment. Past alliances
do not create an open-ended entitlement to residency or resources. Every
sovereign state weighs compassion against its ability to integrate newcomers
without harming citizens’ prospects. Expecting South Africa to do otherwise
sets a double standard not applied to the US, Germany, France, Italy, or the
UK. Responsible border management—through expedited deportations of
undocumented individuals, targeted enforcement against criminal networks, and
legal channels for skilled migrants who demonstrably fill gaps—aligns with
global norms. Peaceful protests that highlight policy failures contribute to
democratic accountability. Vigilantism and violence undermine the very rule of
law South Africa fought to establish. In an age of heightened global migration,
prioritizing citizens’ interests through orderly, enforceable immigration
policy is not xenophobia. It is basic statecraft practiced by nations
worldwide. South Africa has every right to do the same.
