XENOPHOBIC VIOLENCE against other Africans of foreign nationalities is not new in South Africa. It has become a recurring decimal, particularly given a fillip since South Africa gained independence from Apartheid regime and began its black majority rule in 1994. What was new, especially this year, was what the marauding South Africans latched upon as the impetus for the recent wave of xenophobic attacks that quickly became widespread since the closing days of March 2026.
Violent protests and tension erupted in KuGompo, South Africa’s Eastern Cape on Monday, March 30, in response to an installation ceremony organised by the Nigerian Igbo community in South Africa, involving an alleged coronation of an Igbo traditional leader. The controversial crowning of a so-called Igbo king in East London in the Eastern Cape was at the centre of heated and violent scenes in that region. Protesters reportedly torched several foreign‑owned vehicles and businesses, leaving at least 26 people injured and hospitalised.
The tension later caught the attention of others, spreading further afield. Solomon Ogbonna Ezike’s installation as “Igwe Ndigbo” was entirely an Igbo community’s affair, a title representing the Igbo community abroad. However, the unrest that followed the coronation of Solomon Ogbonna Ezike became a South African national affair, as the outrage among South Africans led to chaos, with protesters attacking properties and later demanding that Africans from other African countries living in South Africa should leave and go back to their countries.
Notable among countries’ immigrants the raging South Africans directed their anger against were Nigeria, Ghana, Ethiopia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe, Mozambique. There are others. Remarkably, the South African xenophobic attacks came just weeks after Ghanaians accused the tribal Igbo community living in Ghana of coronation of an Igbo king, demanding that Nigerians in Ghana should leave. It became a case of double whammy for the Igbo communities in two prominent African countries.
But, here is the interesting part: in South Africa, the Ghanaians got served the same stew they served Nigerians while reacting against Igbo community and Nigerians in general in Ghana. What distinguished South Africa’s case from Ghana’s is the former’s generalisation, extending to other African countries whereas Ghana was only incensed against Nigeria and its Igbo communities. Either way, the reactions of the Ghanaians and South Africans portend an existential threat to Africa’s unity, diplomatic harmony, political tranquillity and beneficial transnational economic cooperation, especially in South Africa where protesters set vehicles ablaze and indiscriminately attacked buildings believed to be linked to foreign nationals.
The validity of the arguments of protesters in Ghana and South Africa against a Nigerian community in the Nigerian diaspora is debatable. The argument that recognising a foreign traditional ruler undermines local leadership structures and raises concerns about sovereignty is also flawed to a great extent. Europeans of various nationalities meet to fashion out leadership and coordination efforts among homogenous groups outside Europe. Indians, Chinese, Arabs and North Americans in the diaspora hold community meetings. They even invite citizens of countries of residence to attend.
The Americans usually refer to their organisational heads as presidents. If these do not spark outrage among citizens of their countries of residence, how is the coronation of a king of Igbo community in the diaspora any different, especially as a cultural group? How is it an offence? To underscore an ulterior motive and the fact that the protesters only latched on an excuse for their deep-seated outrage, the South African protest organisers initially described their march as a demonstration against the “installation of a foreign king,” instead of seeing such a title as a cultural symbol rather than a political authority.
The real motive came to the surface when some participants began attacking vehicles and property associated with foreigners. South African authorities have yet to release estimates of the damage or confirm any arrests, especially as there are signs of official complicity in the violent protests, which are associated with long-standing tensions surrounding immigration and xenophobia in South Africa. Attacks on foreign nationals, including Nigerians, Zimbabweans, Congolese, Malawians, Zambians, Ghanaians and Somalis have occurred over and over again during previous protests.
The complaints of those protesters are tied to unemployment, crime and economic frustration allegedly caused by the immigrants from those other African countries. While there are claims that investigations are on-going, with local officials expected to review the circumstances surrounding both the protests and the controversial installation ceremony, there are genuine doubts that these will lead to any arrest of culprits as the framing of the cause of the protests was negative, even by Eastern Cape authorities and local residents who condemned the ceremony, arguing that appointing a foreign national as a “king” violated South African customs and undermined national sovereignty.
The involvement of so-called civil society groups in staging a picket outside the Nigerian High Commission in Pretoria, demanding clarity on the Igbo cultural event and accusing some Nigerians of criminal activity – claims that have long fuelled xenophobic tensions in parts of South Africa – further buttresses the reasoning that the attacks were bottled up and only found expression and an opportune moment in the Igbo cultural event. In a desperate attempt to take a pound of flesh on foreigners from other African countries, many South Africans have taken the law into their hands as many private citizens suddenly became informal police officers, immigration officers and were demanding for the immigration papers of perceived immigrants, legal or illegal and telling them to go back and fix their own countries. The official complicity with these miscreants was evident in the tardy response of the government at the highest level.
The belated speech of President Cyril Ramaphosa, however, threw some light upon what those protesters are missing. According to Ramaphosa, “It must never be that we trample into the dust the African fellowship that made our freedom possible. We are a people who live the value of Ubuntu. We should never allow the legitimate concerns of our communities about illegal migration to breed prejudice and hatred towards our fellow Africans. We should not allow that to happen. Yes, we all have concerns as many other countries in the world have concerns about undocumented and illegal migrants. We must not allow these concerns to give rise to xenophobia, to give rise to hatred that is directed towards people from other African countries or any parts of the world.”
Continuing, Ramaphosa said: “We as South Africans, we cannot be driven by hatred towards others. Others gave us compassion. They gave us support. And we cannot be driven by hatred towards them. Instead, we must insist that the law of our country be upheld and enforced. That is why we are clamping down on illegal migration and on businesses that flout the law by hiring undocumented persons at the expense of our citizens.
“I spoke about this during the state of the nation address. We are actively rooting out corruption in our immigration system. We know that a number of people who are coming illegally into our country were allowed by some, not all, officials who have had corrupt tendencies. We will not allow people to take the law into their own hands. We extend hospitality to those who are guests in our country with the expectation that generosity is honoured with respect for our society and its laws. And we say to those who are here legally, respect us as South Africans, respect our laws, respect our conventions and our traditions as you would want us to respect the laws and traditions of your own country. As a nation that defeated colonialism and Apartheid through international solidarity, we carry a responsibility to advance constitutional values beyond our borders. So, we then therefore say, yes, let us allow our laws to take their course. We have already set in place the way in which we will be able to deal with those who are in our country illegally.
“We remain committed to multilateralism, to respect for international law and principled diplomacy. International law was born from the devastation of global conflicts. Whether it is recognised now or not, the attacks and forceful removal of African immigrants in South Africa will backfire terribly and tremendously against South Africa in [the] not too distant future if the current xenophobic actions are not stopped.”
Despite all of Ramaphosa’s high-sounding speech, those bent on ridding South Africa of foreign black immigrants are not relenting. One of them has announced that they are setting June 30 as the ultimatum for the immigrants to voluntarily self-deport.
They ignore the fact that, historically, South Africa benefited from many other African countries during the anti-Apartheid struggles. The so-called frontline states supported the South African black population in putting enormous pressure on the Apartheid regime in many different ways. Although most of the frontline states are geographically close to South Africa, Nigeria – one of them – is from West Africa. Nigeria played a leading role in the struggle.
Recently, some South Africans have started coming forward to condemn the hostility towards the immigrants. Some are reminding others about the pre-independence history of South Africa and are warning against further attacks. In particular, one vlogger called the hostility “It was point blank afrophobia.” Advising the attackers to educate themselves, the vlogger told them to “find out what Nigeria has done for our country. Go and read up on history. Nigeria spent $61 billion to help liberate our people from 1960 to 1995. In those 35 years, Nigeria spent $61 billion. We are not talking [about] rands here. We are talking dollars.”
According to her, “they also issued us passports when we needed it. Nigeria spent over 61 billion to support the end of Apartheid. This is according to the South African Institute of International Affairs. This is coming from our archives. This is the same Nigeria that set up the SARF.” In 1976, Nigeria set up the Southern Africa Relief Fund (SARF) destined to bring relief to the victims of the Apartheid regime in South Africa and provide educational opportunities to them and promote general welfare. This is the same Nigeria where civil servants and public servants made two percent donations from their monthly salaries, the same Nigerian students that skipped their lunch to make donations. And, by June 1977, in just six months, they were able to contribute 10.5 million dollars. They called it the Mandela Tax. That’s why kids in schools were skipping lunch to be able to contribute this much.”
The vlogger continued: “This is the same Nigeria that allowed our South African students to come over and study for free. That’s how Thabo Mbeki was able to benefit from Nigeria and study for free. This is the same Nigeria that their government issued more than 300 passports for our South African citizens. The same Nigeria that lobbied for the creation of the United Nations Special Committee Against Apartheid. The history is there. The research is there and is from our own people.”
Apart from the massive support coming from Nigeria for those involved in the struggle to end Apartheid regime in South Africa, countries such as Zambia, Tanzania and the Soviet Union provided military support for the ANC and PAC. After gaining independence in 1980, Zimbabwe served as a crucial, albeit often covert, shelter and transit point for South African freedom fighters (particularly from the ANC’s Umkhonto we Sizwe or MK) during the final stages of the anti-apartheid struggles. In Tanzania too, Julius Nyerere’s government also contributed financial aid, weapons and diplomatic support to the ANC and other anti-apartheid organisations.
Tanzania played a critical role in the anti-apartheid struggle, serving as a primary sanctuary, training ground, and diplomatic base for South African liberation movements between the 1960s and the early 1990s. Under the leadership of President Julius Nyerere, Tanzania solidified its position as a “frontline state” against apartheid, offering land, resources, and refuge to thousands of ANC and PAC exiles. Countries such as Zambia, Tanzania and the Soviet Union provided military support for the ANC and PAC. It was more difficult, though, for neighbouring states such as Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland, because they were economically dependent on South Africa. Still, they did feed the struggle underground.
The perpetrators of xenophobia in South Africa will need serious reminders on the historical journey of today’s South Africa out of the wilderness of Apartheid rule to the black majority rule since 1994 and the independence obtained four years earlier. The realisation of how South Africans got to where they are should make the xenophobic citizens to drop their rhetoric, stop assaults on immigrants and be ready to live in harmony with fellow Africans resident in South Africa.
- business a.m. commits to publishing a diversity of views, opinions and comments. It, therefore, welcomes your reaction to this and any of our articles via email: comment@businessamlive.com
Dr. Olukayode Oyeleye, Business a.m.’s Editorial Advisor, who graduated in veterinary medicine from the University of Ibadan, Nigeria, before establishing himself in science and public policy journalism and communication, also has a postgraduate diploma in public administration, and is a former special adviser to two former Nigerian ministers of agriculture. He specialises in development and policy issues in the areas of food, trade and competition, security, governance, environment and innovation, politics and emerging economies.
The cruel paradox of Nigeria’s economic recovery