Leadership Failures, Political Rhetoric Fuelling Afrophobia in South Africa

Dr. Reneva Fourie

The sight of crowds armed with sticks, machetes and improvised weapons chanting threats and targeting vulnerable immigrants, while senior leaders either encourage or ignore, hangs over our country as a spectre of shame.

When those entrusted with governing fail to assert control over borders, enforce the rule of law or communicate a coherent and humane migration policy, they create an environment that induces fear, misinformation and, ultimately, violence.

At its core, illegal migration in South Africa is not a crisis caused by those who cross borders in search of survival. It is a crisis produced and perpetuated by the inability or unwillingness of leaders to govern effectively.

Since the end of apartheid, South Africa has positioned itself as a beacon of human rights and constitutional democracy. Yet our association with subjecting other human beings to harassment, violence, death and forced displacement due to their nationality or origin undermines this image.

Xenowatch indicates that between 1994 and February 2026, there have been 1,299 xenophobic incidents, particularly against those from other states in Africa, resulting in 696 deaths, 128,758 displacements and 5,648 looted shops.

The data represent a sustained pattern of violence that, while often associated with economic hardship and social frustration, ultimately reflects a deeper failure of leadership and accountability.

Political rhetoric has played a significant role in fuelling public attitudes. Parties such as ActionSA and the Patriotic Front and movements like Operation Dudula have framed undocumented migrants as competitors for scarce resources, particularly in healthcare, housing and employment.

This framing is politically expedient but ethically flawed. It reduces complex socio-economic issues to a question of exclusion and fosters a climate in which violence becomes justifiable. 

The assertion that public services should be reserved exclusively for citizens ignores both constitutional principles and basic human dignity. Denying healthcare or education based on nationality is not only inhumane but also counterproductive, as it creates marginalised populations that are more vulnerable to exploitation and crime.

At the heart of the issue lies border management. South Africa has over 4,700 km of land borders with six neighbouring countries, along with a coastline of roughly 2,798 km. In addition, the country must monitor a significant volume of air traffic through its international airports.

Managing these multiple points of entry requires substantial resources, coordination and technological capacity. These issues were apparent twenty years ago, yet the current system falls short on all three fronts, leading to a crisis of border integrity characterised by extreme porosity, rampant illegal immigration and the free flow of illicit trade.

The South African National Defence Force has been deployed to assist with border safeguarding, including patrols and surveillance along land, air and maritime borders, but its capacity is limited. Patrols are often under-resourced, and large stretches of the border remain difficult to monitor due to terrain and infrastructure constraints.

Fencing along key sections of the border is frequently damaged or poorly maintained. Surveillance technology, including drones and sensors, is not deployed at the scale required to ensure effective coverage.

As a result, many crossings occur undetected. Likewise, the Border Management Authority, which is responsible for border law enforcement and control at ports of entry and within border areas, is severely under-resourced.

The situation is further complicated by corruption. Reports of bribery among border officials are widespread, with some individuals allegedly facilitating the passage of undocumented migrants in exchange for payment. This undermines the integrity of the entire system.

Efforts have been made to address corruption through investigations and the establishment of specialised units, but these measures have had limited impact. Prosecutions are relatively rare, and institutional culture remains resistant to change.

Austerity measures have exacerbated these challenges. Sustained underfunding has led to the deterioration of physical infrastructure and a severe shortage of personnel, rendering border control a theoretical exercise rather than a practical reality.

To plug the gap, the government has pivoted to Private Public Partnerships (PPPs) to rebuild ports and outsource terminal management. On 28 April, the Minister of Home Affairs, Dr Leon Schreiber, together with the Border Management Authority, formally announced the successful bidders for a R12.5 billion public-private partnership to redevelop six key land ports of entry.

On paper, this investment promises modern infrastructure and streamlined processing, but the underlying model remains deeply problematic. Each of these privatised functions introduces a profit motive into what should be a public good. A private contractor has no incentive to spend extra resources on thorough searching when speed and volume maximise returns.

Furthermore, private contractors are not always subject to the same level of oversight as public officials, and accountability mechanisms can be weaker, leaving greater room for corruption and other national security threats. The result is a system in which the state has ceded operational control without securing greater efficiency or accountability.

These vulnerabilities are closely linked to the broader issue of crime. South Africa is a key transit point for human trafficking and drug smuggling, due in part to its geographic location and infrastructure.

Porous borders make it easier for traffickers to move people and goods across the region. Weak enforcement capacity and corruption further enable these activities. In this context, the focus on undocumented migrants as a threat to public safety is misplaced. The real threat lies in the networks that exploit both migrants and the state’s weaknesses for profit.

Improving border management is therefore essential, but it must be approached in a way that respects human rights and addresses underlying structural issues. This includes investing in modern surveillance technology, strengthening anti-corruption measures and enhancing coordination between agencies. It also requires a more nuanced public discourse that distinguishes between irregular migration and criminal activity.

Leadership is crucial in shaping this discourse. When politicians endorse or remain silent in the face of xenophobic rhetoric, they legitimise it. Conversely, clear and consistent messaging that emphasises constitutional values and the rule of law can help to counteract fear and misinformation. Public frustration with service delivery and economic inequality is real, but it should not be directed at those who are themselves vulnerable. 

Ultimately, the challenge of illegal migration in South Africa will not be resolved by scapegoating the powerless or tolerating mob justice. The mobs that chant in the streets are tackling the symptoms and not the causes of this crisis.

Effective border management, ethical governance, regional cooperation and public investment and control are fundamental responsibilities.  Those in positions of authority must confront their failures and be held accountable for their ineptitude.

* Dr Reneva Fourie is a policy analyst specialising in governance, development and security.

** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.