The attacks on migrant shop owners in Durban this week reminds us the
position of foreigner in South Africa is a complex one. After decades
of isolation from the rest of the African continent, and the world,
during apartheid, South Africa finally opened up to the rest of world in
1994.
Under apartheid, South Africa’s immigration mirrored the narrow
mindedness and prejudice of the National Party. Several laws made
visiting or living in South Africa unpalatable to many. Particularly
those of non-European descent.
At the dawn of the “new South Africa” in 1994, the country became
home to many outsiders playing a key role in offering protection and
refuge to people who had suffered unfavorable conditions in their home
countries.
At the heart of South Africa’s complex problem with xenophobia is the loaded meaning of the term “foreigner.” Pejoratively, the term “foreigner” in South Africa usually refers to African and Asian non-nationals.
“Other” foreigners—particularly those from the Americas and Europe go
unnoticed—they are often lumped up with “tourists,” or even better,
referred to as “expats.”
It is this reason why the South African government says its hesitant
to call the recent attacks on foreign nationals as xenophobic.
Is it “Afrophobia” or xenophobia?
Many South Africans look at the attacks on enterprising African
immigrants from Somalia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Mozambique,
Nigeria and Malawi—often running shops, stalls and other businesses in
the informal economy—and resolve that the current attacks on foreigners
are more afrophobic, than xenophobic.
Many ask: “Why is it that a Somali man can run a shop in a township,
get raided and beaten up, while a white immigrant in town continues to
run a restaurant full of patrons?”
It is this delineation that breeds ground for denial.
While this sentiment may be correct—that the violent expression of
xenophobia in South Africa is meted out mainly against African
immigrants – it is unhelpful to resolve the crisis that has left many
foreign nationals homeless, tortured and dispossessed.
While we can ascribe the attacks to sentiments of Afrophobia, we must
be willing to agree that the attacks are fuelled by a sense of hatred,
dislike and fear of foreigners – and that is xenophobia. And given the
fact that foreign nationals from Pakistan and Bangladesh have been
profiled in this wave of attacks, it will soon no longer be enough for
South Africans to cry “Afrophobia.”
A hangover from the past, fueled by present
South Africa’s xenophobia reflects the country’s history of
isolation. As a country at the Southern most tip of Africa, South
Africans are fond of referring to their continental counterparts as
“Africans” or “people from Africa.” Many business ventures, news
publications and events—aimed at local audiences—routinely speak about
“going to Africa.”
Of course this narrow-mindedness, suffered by both black and white
South Africans, is a by-product of apartheid. For black people,
apartheid was an insidious tool used to induce self-hate and tribalize
people of the same race. For white South Africans, apartheid was a false
rubber-stamp of the white race as superior.
It is these two conceptions that gave rise to the myth that South Africa is not part of the African continent, but a different place that just happens to be on the tip of the continent.
Long after the scourge of apartheid, it is also clear that we’re fueling this prejudice in the present.
It remains to be seen whether South Africans will break away from
these shackles, and rid themselves of this horrid prejudice anchored in
our past, but seemingly fuelled by our present.
Quartz is launching in Africa in June 2015. Sign up for announcements and updates here.
No comments:
Post a Comment