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.
The political and economic crisis in Zimbabwe has been an additional factor.
The political violence, torture and intimidation, in combination with the economic meltdown of the country, have resulted in an increase in the number of Zimbabweans fleeing their own country for the relative safety of South Africa.
Feelings of xenophobia in South Africa are not helped by the South African government's response to the situation in Zimbabwe. President Thabo Mbeki's statement that there is 'no crisis' across the border paints those fleeing the violence and repression as purely economic migrants with no 'real' or legitimate reason for being in South Africa.
Fourthly, the Southern African Migration Project's survey results show that, while South Africans still tend to hold negative views about each other, the nation-building project has had some impact on their collective views towards foreigners.
Almost without exception across racial and income groups, attitudes towards foreigners are negative and steeped in stereotypes, reinforcing the perception that 'they do not belong'. Thus, by virtue of not being South African citizens, foreigners are barred from a range of economic, social and welfare benefits in a process that has been described as 'excluded by nation building'.
This is best illustrated by the fact that foreign nationals are not afforded the same protection as South Africans by that state, either because of their status or because of xenophobic attitudes among officials.
Previous research conducted by the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation and other organisations documents the complicity of some officials in corruption, intimidation and abuse of foreigners.
Foreigners state that they are reluctant to report violent crimes because police neglect to follow up cases, commonly interrogate and victimise the complainant, and, most importantly, because they risk being detained themselves, regardless of the validity of their documentation.
Fifthly, public and official discourse does little to dispel myths and stereotypes pertaining to foreign nationals. Many of the beliefs about foreigners are based on ignorance and/or hearsay. Sweeping generalisations are made about foreigners without any apparent evidence or knowledge, and it is only when confronted with actual evidence to the contrary, that some South Africans are willing to reconsider their views.
For many South Africans, Africa continues to be the 'dark continent', and they have very little knowledge of, or interest in, the countries and cultures that exist beyond the Limpopo, or indeed in getting to know their fellow Africans living in South Africa.
In 2000 and again in 2004, the Southern African Migration Project conducted an analysis of print media coverage of cross-border migration in South and Southern Africa's major English-language newspapers, drawing from more than 1 200 clippings about migration between 1994 and 1998 and a further 950 clippings about migration between 2000 and 2003.
In sum, the findings suggest that coverage of international migration by the South African press has been largely anti-immigrant and un-analytical.
Not all reporting is negative, and newspaper coverage would appear to be improving over time, but the overwhelming majority of the newspaper articles, editorials and letters to the editor surveyed for this research were negative about immigrants and immigration and extremely superficial in nature - uncritically reproducing problematic statistics and assumptions about cross-border migration.
While not blaming the media as the cause of xenophobia, the report concludes that, at best, the press have been presenting a very limited perspective of cross-border migration dynamics, and in the process leaving the South African public in the dark as to the real complexities at play.
At worse, the press has been contributing to xenophobic sentiments in the general public by weaving myths and fabrications around foreigners and immigration.
The immediate impact of the xenophobic violence in South Africa
There have been a number of immediate socio-economic implications stemming from the xenophobic violence in South Africa - many of which will still be impacting the country in the future.
The first set of implications for South Africa (and the region) was, and still is, logistical. The displacement of populations has been of grave concern. In the immediate aftermath of the violence, a humanitarian crisis developed as displaced people faced shortages of shelter, food, medical care and sanitation in crudely affected temporary accommodation in police stations, churches and even petrol stations.
In collaboration with local government, UNHCR and NGOs had to step into an emergency situation, providing food, shelter, medical supplies and clothes in the vacuum created by an absence of policy or planning for such an eventuality.
Temporary refugee camps were constructed in various parts of the country to accommodate the displaced until they could be reintegrated into their communities or until they decided to return to their countries of origin.
These camps in themselves created problems: there were complaints from residents in the suburbs in which they were constructed about the possible impact of the camps on middle-class house prices and crime in the area, which illustrates that xenophobic attitudes in South Africa are not limited to poor blacks living in informal settlements. In addition, violence flared up again in some of the camps between foreign nationals from different countries, usually over scare resources.
The punishment of the perpetrators of the violence is a second logistical nightmare - firstly because of the difficulties of identifying perpetrators of the violence. Foreign nationals cite fear and intimidation or their own illegal immigrant status as barriers to reporting, while South Africans cite an unwillingness to get involved or the fear of being seen to be on the side of foreigners.
Secondly, any mass prosecution of the perpetrators would place a terrible strain on an already over-burdened criminal justice system. This means that justice may well not be served for the victims of the xenophobic violence - those injured and displaced, as well as those who lost property and possessions, and those who lost family members.
This creates a culture of impunity for those involved in perpetrating the violence, which could contribute to a belief that xenophobic violence is tolerated by the state.
Furthermore, a lack of justice for the victims of the violence compounds the perception and reality that foreign nationals in South Africa struggle to access the criminal justice system.
She second immediate implication for South Africa is that the country was once again in the international press for all the wrong reasons. The xenophobic attacks immediately sent a negative message to the rest of the world about the security situation in the country and the South African government's ability to contain outbreaks of violence.
Already perceived by the rest of the world as having a runaway crime and violence problem, the xenophobic attacks added to the negative opinion of South Africa's ability to host such an immense international sporting event as the soccer World Cup, in terms of providing adequate security, as well as ensuring the safety of players and fans.
In addition, the xenophobic violence put some strain on the South African government's relationship with the governments of neighbouring countries. There was the widespread condemnation of the xenophobic violence by regional leaders, many whose citizens had been victims of the violence or displacement.
One of the underlying sentiments behind the regional leaders' dissatisfaction seemed to be that, during apartheid, many ANC cadres found refuge in Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Malawi, Tanzania, Botswana, Zambia and beyond, in which countries they were offered asylum and assistance.
Some members of the South African government have insisted on labeling the xenophobic violence as purely criminal, refusing to acknowledge its political facets as violence motivated by dynamics of inclusion or exclusion, access to resources and nationalistic identities, with, undeniably, an element of opportunistic criminal activity.
This attitude has not helped the South African government's international image, making it look like the government is trying to amalgamate the xenophobic problem into the problem of violent crime in South Africa rather than treating it as its own problem, with discrete symptoms, manifestations and solutions.
Longer-term implications
Although the xenophobic violence in South Africa in May this year has been contained, with less than two years to go before the World Cup is held, there are a number of ripple effects from the crisis, which may still affect the World Cup.
The reintegration of foreign nationals back into their host communities in South Africa, which is the preferred resolution for both the government and the displaced people, has its own pitfalls.
We know from the experience of other countries such as Rwanda and Kenya that integration is a complex process, which if not management correctly could have serious consequences.
We know from our own context and experience with ex-combatants that the impact of poor integration strategies, or the lack of such strategies, can be felt years later - in further violence, reprisal/revenge attacks and civil unrest.
South Africa needs to be aware that the integration process involves sending people back into communities where they have experienced extreme violence and loss. While the victims need considerable support regarding their trauma and the practicalities of reintegrating and rebuilding their homes and lives, most of the work needs to be done within the South African communities.
Various areas need to be addressed within these communities before integration can be wholly successful.
These include: building trust between South African nationals and both victims and foreign nationals; investigating the underlying causes of the xenophobic violence and beginning to address these constructively; addressing the myths surrounding foreign nationals and raising awareness regarding migration and refugees; laying the groundwork for conflict transformation in those communities in order to prevent future incidents; and giving a voice and/or space to South African community members so that they do not feel that the only way to make their voices heard is through the use of violence against the most vulnerable of society.
If integration is not thoroughly and sensibly completed, the problem will not have been dealt with and the potential will exist for xenophobic violence to flare up repeatedly in the future.
In addition, there are implications for the foreign nationals who have been victimised and who have had to return to their home countries or flee to other neighbouring states.
This is especially true for people from war-torn or conflict situations who have been forced to return home - if economic refugees, they face extreme poverty and starvation; if political refugees, they face renewed violence (and possible death).
Another element to consider is the transference of trauma with displaced persons across state borders. The journey undertaken when fleeing violence (whether in their countries of origin or host country) is often fraught with fear and the threat of further violence.
The needs of traumatised individuals are complex and individual-specific, but at the very least, such people need to access mental and physical healthcare facilities and, ideally, long term interventions. This has implications for both the trauma sufferers and the host communities.
Many traumatised individuals need the most basic of assistance such as immediate food relief and shelter. The concept of movement of trauma and violated displaced populations needs to be understood by host countries in order to be able to adequately deal with the implications.
Because of this movement of people, the aftermath of the xenophobic violence in South Africa, if not properly managed, contained and dealt with, could lead to the destabilisation of the region as a whole in the build up to the World Cup.
The southern African region is intimately connected: what happens in one country impacts those around it. Violence in one country spills into neighbouring countries - if not directly in the form of the perpetration of violence by displaced persons across borders, then by implication through the movement of traumatised individuals and political refugees who have specific needs. Competition between host populations and displaced populations can, in turn, result in more violence in the form of xenophobia.
To use Zimbabwe as just one example: the political violence and economic problems in Zimbabwe have spilled over into South Africa through the movement of large numbers of political and/or economic refugees.
Condoleeza Rice, US Secretary of State, stated on June 19, 2008 that "the political instability and economic collapse created by the Zimbabwean Government's actions are destabilising an entire region", adding that the situation in Zimbabwe had troubling implications for the security of its neighbouring states.
The crisis in Zimbabwe and influx of refugees into South Africa contributed to the rising xenophobic sentiments in South Africa, resulting in violence, which in turn has had implications for regional stability.
Movement of populations across borders is not going to cease, and may even increase in the run-up to the World Cup. South Africa needs effective and well-implemented policies and measures in place to deal with this.
There is often confusion among the general population, as well as among foreign nationals and even state officials as to the legal status of immigrants.
The length of time taken for asylum applications to be processed combined with uncertainty about the different categories of immigrants, means that officials and foreign nationals alike often do not know where they stand in terms of the law.
In addition, there is lack of coordination from government departments in addressing the challenges facing foreign nationals. In many cases government departments will refer foreign nationals to the Department of Home Affairs for assistance with service provisions. However, while the Department of Home Affairs is set up to assist with documentation, the relevant government departments at local level are mandated to assist with service provision.
The good news is that the xenophobic violence has had very little impact on South Africa's preparations for the World Cup in terms of infrastructure, transport systems, planning and organisation. In addition, the incidents of violence have not occurred near any of the central business and tourism areas where visitors would be staying.
It is highly unlikely that World Cup fans will be targeted by xenophobic sentiments - which, unfortunately, are not to say that they will not fall prey to violent crime (South Africa having the high crime rate that it does).
Xenophobia in South Africa is directed towards those people living in South Africa (legally or illegally) and sharing resources with the local population.
The violence has, however, had an impact on the enthusiasm of fans to travel to the World Cup - especially if the nature of the xenophobia has been misrepresented to include the fear and hatred of all foreigners (including tourists). The fewer fans and visitors attracted to South Africa and the World Cup will definitely have an impact, not only on South Africa, but on the southern African region as a whole, in terms of the anticipated economic boom that the World Cup should bring to the region in terms of direct revenue and spin-off tourism.
The anticipated economic opportunities that the World Cup promises, such as the influx of resources, as well as opportunities for small businesses, hawkers and even criminals, will attract foreign nationals from the region and even further a-field.
This could create another situation where there is competition between South African nationals and foreign nationals over the resources and opportunities available. Foreigners might be perceived to be flooding into South Africa expecting to share in the economic benefits of the World Cup - with the precedent set by the xenophobic violence in May, this might result in a resurgence of the xenophobic sentiments and ensuing violence.
In a related concern, the handling of the xenophobic crisis in South Africa generates a legitimate question mark over South Africa's ability to cope with the World Cup in terms of security, crowd control and crisis control.
The South African Police Service was overwhelmed by the xenophobic crisis, resulting in Thabo Mbeki calling in the army to help control the violence. Emergency responses were not well coordinated or managed during the crisis, and many NGOs had to step in to bridge the gap.
However, having said that, the xenophobic violence was largely unanticipated by the emergency services (including the police force), whereas as a lot of thought, planning and resources have been poured into the preparations of security for the WNew Era Publications Corporation Copyright - All rights reservedorld Cup - extra police officers are being trained and the private security companies have been drawn in to reinforce the state forces.
On a positive note, the latest crisis has alerted South Africa to the fact that xenophobia is a real problem. The horrific nature of the violence has sensitised many stakeholders to the severity of the problem of xenophobia.
The issue has received increased media coverage, continuously providing platforms for individuals to voice concerns and presenting an opportunity for collective engagement between government, civil society and communities.
It has also highlighted the need for South Africa as a country to educate its population on the issues of migrants and migration in good time for the influx of visitors and opportunity-seekers to South Africa for the FIFA 2010 World Cup.
To end, I would like to emphasise that the xenophobic violence in South Africa has regional implications, not only for the World Cup, but also for the stability of the region as a whole, especially bearing in mind the continual and extensive movement of people within the southern African region.
South Africa and South Africans have tended to look inward since the crisis in May, scouring the political and domestic landscape for root causes and solutions.
Read comments. Write your own.
Copyright © 2008 New Era. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
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.
I'm curious in what areas are has Xenophobia been most prevalent? If it is in Cape Town or Johannesburg, then what areas primarily? We are considering making the move to Muizenberg and I was wondering where this was taking place primarily. Thanks.