5 September 2008
document
Xenophobia has been described as an intense dislike, hatred or fear of others who are perceived to be strangers. Xenophobia describes attitudes, prejudices and behaviours that reject, exclude and often vilify persons based on the perception that they are outsiders or foreigners to the community, society or national identity.
Dr Romi Fuller from the Centre for the Study of Violence in South Africa was in Namibia last week to present the considerations the recent xenophobic attacks have on the FIFA World Cup of 2010.
Socio-economic Implications for the FIFA World Cup
IN May 2008, South Africa was shaken by the outbreak of a wave of violence characterized by an intensity and fierceness previously unknown in its young democracy and reminiscent of apartheid bloodshed.
According to police statements, 62 migrants were murdered, while hundreds, including women and children, have been attacked, raped, and have had their houses and belongings looted and destroyed.
The most severely affected groups were Africans from neighbouring states, such as Zimbabwe and Mozambique, but migrants from more distant countries, such as Nigeria and Somalia, as well as a few South Africans, were also victims of attacks.
Within the country, up to 40 000 people fled from their homes and had to camp in temporary shelters until refugee camps were established. Thousands more returned to their countries of origin.
For instance, according to the Mozambican authorities, 26 000 people have crossed into Mozambique since the start of the unrest. During the second week of turmoil, President Thabo Mbeki agreed to call the army into the affected areas to assist the South African Police Service, which could not fully contain the riot situation.
While conditions have calmed down in the ensuing months, a new humanitarian crisis has been unfolding as refugees in provisional reception camps struggle with inadequate shelter and supplies and brace themselves for the outbreaks of disease already reported in many areas.
Most recently, a group of foreigners have appealed in the South African courts to keep the refugee camps open for longer than the two months initially set aside for their existence.
Context
In order to assess the socio-economic implications of the xenophobic violence in South Africa for the 2010 World Cup, it is important to contextualise the circumstances in which it happened and analyse some of the more important root causes of the violence.
Firstly, it is important to note that xenophobia in South Africa is not a new phenomenon: it is an ongoing problem and not one that will easily disappear.
In 1977, local hawkers in central Johannesburg attacked their foreign counterparts. The chairperson of the Inner Johannesburg Hawkers Committee was quoted at the time as saying: "We are prepared to push them out of the city, come what may. My group is prepared to let our government inherit a garbage city because of these leeches".
In 1998, gangs of South Africa tried to evict perceived 'illegals' from Alexandra Township, blaming them for increased crime, sexual attacks and unemployment.
The campaign, lasting several weeks, was known as 'Buyelekhaya' ("go back home"). Later that year, three foreigners were killed on a train traveling between Pretoria and Johannesburg in what was described as a xenophobic attack.
In January 2008, acts of violence and foreigners' home-based businesses were vandalised and items stolen in Atteridgeville West. In April, South African nationals looted the shops and burned the homes of foreigners in Mamelodi East.
These material incidents have been supported by the attitudes captured in two nationally representative surveys conducted by the Southern African Migration Project in 1997 and 2006.
In 1997, it was found that 25% of South Africans wanted a total prohibition of migration or immigration and 22% wanted the South African government to return all foreigners presently living in South Africa to their own countries.
Forty-five percent of the sample called for strict limits to be placed on migrants and immigrants and 17% wanted migration policies tied to the availability of jobs. In the same survey, some 61% of respondents agreed that migrants put additional strains on the country's resources.
In 2006, respondents continued to consider foreigners to be a threat to the social and economic wellbeing of South Africa. More than two-thirds said that foreigners use up resources such as water, electricity and healthcare destined for citizens. Two-thirds of respondents felt that foreigners from other African countries commit crimes and close to one half said that foreigners bring diseases such as HIV to South Africa.
Thus, like in the1997 survey, respondents in 2006 appear to continue to have a negative view of the impact of foreigners on the country, and in fact it would appear that their view on certain issues has hardened, with greater percentages saying foreigners take up resources meant for citizens.
Whenever there have been violent attacks on foreigners, many politicians and government officials have tended to downplay the significance of xenophobia, preferring to label such attacks as opportunistic crime and 'conflicts over resources'.
While crime and resource conflicts clearly play a part in provoking these attacks, it is also apparent that the attacks are targeted primarily at black foreigners, which confirms the xenophobic and racist nature of the attacks.
Secondly, even before the collapse of apartheid, South Africa was perceived by the rest of Africa as a country in which to earn a livelihood. Migrant workers have been coming into South Africa for many generations to find work (generally in the form of unskilled or semi-skilled labour) on farms or in the mines.
Post-1994, South Africa has been seen as a land of opportunity for many foreign nationals in economic terms, as well as a haven of peace for those coming from countries torn apart by war, political conflict or ethnic-based violence.
Conversely, as a consequence of apartheid, South Africans still tend to see themselves as separated from the rest of the African continent and, combined with many years of isolation, do not easily identify with other Africans.
Increased migrant and refugee flows to South Africa since 1994 has meant that foreigners are now much more visible, leading to the perception that South Africa is being 'over-run' by millions of poor, illiterate Africans.
Unsubstantiated claims about the presence of five to eight illegal foreigners in South Africa contribute to this popular myth.
Thirdly, a number of current events have added to the tinderbox. The global economic problems have had an impact on the price of food and fuel, while unemployment in South Africa continues to rise.
South Africans have continued to have high expectations of economic and social delivery following the advent of democracy. That these expectations have not been met in terms of the scale and rate at which might have been anticipated, is a fact that has been widely acknowledged. Many South Africans continue to be unemployed and poor, with little or no access to basic social, health and welfare services.
It is also apparent that many migrants and refugees have been able to establish successful small businesses or trading operations; much more so than their South African counterparts.
In the past it was possible to blame poverty and the lack of development on a government that was unrepresentative and illegitimate. This is no longer the case and, as happens in many countries across the world, foreigners are often scapegoated for taking away opportunities from South Africans.
Misperceptions of foreigners, such as their involvement in crime, in spreading disease and in keeping South Africans in poverty, have grown as economic conditions have worsened in South Africa and as media reports have over-emphasised the influx of foreigners.
The perception that South African nationals and foreign nationals are competing over scarce resources has enflamed an already tense situation.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
