South Africa should admit xenophobia isn't just about opportunity
What you need to know:
- The response of the South African political class has been mostly lukewarm and populist.
- Today’s South African xenophobia is not legally straightforward but it is more lethal and painful, since it brings brother against brother.
- A few weeks ago I had the misfortune of witnessing how Johannesburg’s airport officers mistreated and arrested an Ethiopian Supreme Court judge and his compatriot.
A new type of Apartheid has resurfaced in Africa. Nelson Mandela, the nation’s father, must be turning in his grave.
South Africa, an economic and political giant, powerful, influential and admired, has been in the news, this time for the wrong reasons. Xenophobia has shown its ugly face
Xenophobia is the sad barometer of a morally bankrupt and ignorant society. It advocates for the rejection and suppression of any other African brother, who is considered to be an intrusive enemy, a thief robbing the indigenous population of its rightful future and growth opportunities.
The response of the South African political class has been mostly lukewarm and populist. The African Union’s response has been largely ignored. The AU does not have a strong compliance mechanism, and for many countries it is just "Another Union".
READ: Desecrating the rainbow
Xenophobia has engaged reverse gear to Harold Macmillan’s famous "winds of change" speech of the 1960s that gave birth to so many dreams and aspirations throughout Africa.
South Africa has historically had strong xenophobic links. Apartheid was a sort of xenophobia, though dressed up in a legal way. Today’s South African xenophobia is not legally straightforward but it is more lethal and painful, since it brings brother against brother.
Xenophobia is one of the most prominent evils and tribulations resulting from economic and legal deficiencies in a democratic system. It is the most destructive type of revolution.
The roots of xenophobia are nurtured and grow in a society where the human person has a relative value, a society where human rights stop being human and remain just rights.
JOHANNESBURG AIRPORT
Modern revolutions have been shaped by extreme inequalities and blatant injustices in the distribution of wealth. An important ingredient at the core of every modern violent revolution has been poorly managed envy.
This envy may be ideological, material or ethnic. The first two types can change, for there is room for compromise. The third type, ethnic, is unchangeable, pernicious and lethal. This latter one cannot be compromised.
A few weeks ago, I had the misfortune of witnessing how Johannesburg’s airport officers mistreated and arrested an Ethiopian Supreme Court judge and his compatriot, the dean of Law of a reputable Ethiopian university. They were transiting through South Africa to attend a forum in another country.
They were arrested, locked in, declared illegal immigrants and officially deported back to Addis. They never made it to the forum. The organisers were distressed. It was an extremely inane step toward a diplomatic row.
Was this necessary? Could a Supreme Court judge be willing to seek asylum or illegal employment in South Africa? Perhaps this belongs to the visa discussion I wish to write about in a future piece.
We hope South Africa, a beautiful African jewel and the role model for many nations on this continent, will not join the ranks of the Nazi regime, where the Jews were not considered human; or Rwanda in the early 90s when a section of the population were compared to cockroaches; or the ISIS territories, where professing a different religion means the death penalty.
POPULIST COWARD
Martin Luther King Jr wrote on April 16, 1963 in his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail":
“An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law… Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust... Thus I can urge (my black brothers) to disobey segregation ordinances, for they are morally wrong. (...) We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was legal and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was illegal. It was illegal to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers.”
Mia Couto, Mozambican writer and poet, criticised Jacob Zuma's lack of decisive action. In response, Zuma said that the actions of a minority should not stigmatise 50 million South Africans who do not agree to any sort of xenophobic behaviour.
Certainly, Zuma is not xenophobic. He himself, like many South African anti-apartheid heroes, spent many years of exile in Mozambique, a country that hosted them and supported their plea.
Zuma's mishap has been his delayed and lukewarm reaction. Unless his fist is felt by the xenophobic killers he could go down into history as a populist coward, who was not strong enough to stop the massacre of innocent people on account of race or ethnicity, making Apartheid a never-ending story.
Illegal immigrants should be dealt with according to the law, without separating the "right" from the "human".
Unless the rule of law is re-established and the killer brought to book, South Africa is on the sad path of becoming a new Animal Farm by adhering to George Orwell’s Seven Commandments:
“Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal…but some animals are more equal than others.”
Dr Franceschi is the dean of Strathmore Law School. [email protected], Twitter: @lgfranceschi
Editor's Note: The article has been modified to clarify President Zuma's response.
