Ghanaians fleeing violence shows how anti-immigrant drives demonize calls for regulated immigration and embrace ethnic bravado instead.
Ghanaian nationals stand at the check-in desk for an evacuation flight at OR Tambo International Airport in Ekurhuleni on May 27, 2026. Ghana on May 26, announced it was evacuating 300 citizens from South Africa, after an upsurge in xenophobic incidents across the country in recent weeks. (Photo by Phill Magakoe / AFP)
Last week, over 300 Ghanaians left South Africa and went back home, involuntarily so.
It was found most of them had overstayed their welcome in this country and thus fell into the category of “illegal immigrants”, as defined by those wanting foreign nationals to leave South Africa by their 30 June deadline.
The truth, though, is among those who left are people who were in the country legitimately but feared for their lives.
Their fear is genuine because they know the violence that can accompany being mistakenly labelled an illegal immigrant.
And that is the grave injustice of government allowing lawlessness to reign supreme in this Abahambe (foreign nationals must leave) campaign.
A narrative has now been developed that seeks to demonise people who use the word xenophobia to describe the motivation of those who want foreign nationals to leave the country. Anyone who calls for a sensible approach to deal with immigration is labelled unpatriotic.
There is a dangerous marrying of toxic patriotism and ethnic bravado that has seen Amabutho being bussed to hotspots across the country to beef up efforts to drive foreign nationals out.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting a chaotic immigration system to be regulated and organised.
This is the standard in First World countries.
A visitor to any country must know what they are entitled to in that country and what they can and cannot do while in that country.
They must know the privilege they have been granted to visit that country can be revoked at any time.
Legit visitors cannot be treated like beggars.
If they are in the country legally, with papers that state how long they can stay and what economic activities they can partake in while visiting the country, they must never be given reason to fear for their lives because they look different and speak differently.
Part of the campaign to label people unpatriotic because they are calling for an orderly approach to immigration is to say “those who don’t agree with the violent approach must take the illegal immigrants into their own homes and provinces”.
In the political space, people like EFF leader Julius Malema have been targeted and told they are selling the country to drug cartels because they embrace the Pan-African vision which envisages a borderless Africa.
No-one wants to listen to the logic that a borderless Africa does not necessarily mean uncontrolled immigration.
The danger with the 30 June deadline is half of its proponents are not doing it because of their love for South Africa, but simply based on hatred of people who look and sound different to themselves.
This is the kind of patriotism that has resulted in the toxic kind of nationalism that has taken root in many Western countries.
The UK and US are today faced with this kind of toxic nationalism and their political narratives are now driven by hatred of those that look and sound different.
However unpatriotic it might sound, if the primary driving force behind the Abahambe campaign is not to sort out South Africa’s chaotic immigration process, then it must be called out for what it is.
It does not matter that bigotry exists in America or Britain.
It is what it is: xenophobia.
Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber and President Cyril Ramaphosa need to put their heads together to counter the fear and pandemonium that is used to harass even documented foreign nationals in the name of patriotism.
