Thinking Theoretically with MacHarry Cowans South African Xenophobia: The Nigerian Government and the African Union's Strategy Of Flexible Response
Thinking Theoretically with MacHarry Cowans
South African Xenophobia: The Nigerian Government and the African Union's Strategy Of Flexible Response
The recent xenophobic attacks on Nigerians and citizens of other African nationalities may come as a shock to many--not really because it is the first time an attack of such magnitude is happening, but because of its frequency in occurrence.
On March 5, 2015, xenophobic attacks occurred in Limpopo
Province. Foreigners on the outskirts of Polokwane left their
shops after protesting villagers threatened to burn them
alive and then looted shops. Violence erupted in the Ga-
Sekgopo area after a foreign shop owner was found in
possession of a mobile phone belonging to a local man who
was killed.
On April 8, 2015, a spate of xenophobic violence occurred
after Zulu King, Goodwill Zwelithini made comments that
foreigners should go back to their home countries because
they were changing the nature of the South African society
with their goods and enjoying wealth that should have been
for local people.
For almost a week, the attacks on foreign nationals reigned.
On April 12, 2015, in KwaZulu-Natal, shops in Umlazi and
KwaMashu, outside Durban, were torched.
In V Section, a
shop owned by a foreign national was set on fire by a mob.
Five people were reportedly killed.
On April 14, 2015, looting of foreign shops spread to
Verulam, north of Durban following a day of clashes
between locals, foreigners, and police in the city centre,
KwaZulu-Natal. About 300 local people looted foreign-
owned shops.
Since the post apartheid era began which was signaled with the election of Nelson Mandela in 1994, racial slurs and physical attacks on citizens of other countries have "surprisingly" increased.
(Vanguard Newspaper)
According to recent reports, more than 116 Nigerians have been murdered within the last two years in inexplicable circumstances either by South African citizens or even officials of the state.
The death of Tochukwu Nnadi is one of such examples of state-sanctioned extra judicial murders.
When the 2015 (March-May) incidents broke out in Pretoria and Johannesburg, many a commentator linked the causes Laziness of the South African workforce and youths, in response to the accusation that Nigerians and other foreigners are "taking up jobs meant for South African youths". The outward interpretation of this response is the innate self identification with the Nigerian enterprising spirit and the spontaneous solidarity with compatriots even though such nationalism is absent in Nigeria and on the Nigerian soil, and this absence is caused by ethno-religious sentiments.
The accusation that Nigerians in diaspora--South Africa, in this case--are mostly involved in drug pushing and prostitution lacks merit on the basis that the blanket characterization of citizens of other countries are mostly known of a particular anti-social vice and the logic that the inculcation of such vices by the youths and citizens of the host country is flawed.
This is not to say that Nigerians are not involved in such activities. It is no news that Nigerians are arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to death in countries like Indonesia, the Philippines etc where drug peddling is a crime which carries the death penalty.
In Italy and many states in Eastern Europe, Nigerians are involved in both legal and illegal businesses, of which prostitution, legal in some states and illegal in some others, is one.
It is hypocritical to accrue such acts to only Nigerians.
Come to think of it:
If Nigerians are selling these illegal drugs in South Africa, who buys it from them?
Nigerians or South Africans?
Did the Nigerian drug peddlers coerce the South African drug market to buy them?
How then is drug a Nigerian thing?
The seller-buyer dual axis has been one area many times ignored in the criticism of these incessant attacks and many a time, the chastising of the buyer is where it ends, complete justification or exoneration of the buyer is not a topic treated, and even if, treated with a slap on the wrist.
This is one angle which haven't been explored.
The Nigerian government's response to the xenophobic attacks is as drab and weightless as the South African government's approach to dealing with this menace.
Using the 2015 outbreak as an example, the response of the government of former President, Goodluck Jonathan was sickening. Fresh from erstwhile Foreign affairs minister, Ambassador Aminu Wali claiming that the incident was not as serious as the reported. Turned out that apart Nigeria was the last country to send national carriers to evict citizens from that state, right after Somalia, Mozambique, Tanzania and Malawi pulled out their citizens.
This came against the backdrop of initially telling citizens to take refuge in the Nigerian High Commission and consulate. Even the recall of Nigeria's High Commissioner to South Africa, Amb. Martin Cobham wasn't really a recall as the Nigerian press reported. The government (ministry of foreign affairs) issued a statement that Cobham was "called home for talks and consultation".
The explanation to this lackadaisical attitude to citizens' welfare is not farfetched. In Nigeria, security of lives and properties is not a top priority, especially when compared to the priority given to the looting of the treasury and diversion of public funds. Boko Haram and the rise of Fulani herds men propounds this fact. Over 15000 thousand Nigerians have been killed since 2009. The North East is a scenery of a Hollywood war zone. The current killings and destruction of lives by rampaging Fulani herdsmen in Southern Kaduna is a testament to the fact that the average Nigerian life doesn't matter, and ranks far below the lives of cows owned by marauding and rampaging Fulani herdsmen. And this is exacerbated by the response of the Muhammadu Buhari-led administration and the lack of political will in tackling this issue.
So it is just too farfetched to raise any hope of a strong, firm response to the issue.
A slight paradigm shift from this template occurred a few days ago when Buhari's special adviser on foreign and diaspora affairs, Hon. Abike Dabiri Erewa made a statement colored with strong rhetorics, but the usual gimmick of urging the south African government to fish out the sponsors of the xenophobic attacks. In international affairs, once there is an issue involving two states, the ministers of foreign affairs are expected to be the first people to make statements and proclamations either approving the issue or outrightly condemning it, but in this case, the current foreign affairs minister, Ambassador Geoffrey Onyema not only took long to speak, but when he did, he claimed that this is the first time he's hearing about xenophobic attacks on Nigerian citizens in South Africa.
The analysis of responses of both government officials sum up the lack of will and balls to address this issue.
Perhaps, even more annoying is the Nigerian government's appeal to the African Union to intervene in the crisis.
For a start, the African Union can do little or nothing on this issue. The AU, far from being the regional prototype of political integration is powerless in cases like these. The African Union's response Arab Spring which showed politically motivated internal divisions which the American-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) exploited which led to the death of Libyan strong man, Muammar Ghadaffi.
The AU's policy of "African solution to African problems" have not effectively achieved the purpose for which it was adopted. The barrage of criticisms which followed this approach is hinged on the attendant effect on the "responsibility to protect" doctrine (Article 4H, AU 2002 charter), in which the former means that the union will pressure states to deal with a particular issue without collective intervention.
African solutions to African problems have been distorted in many ways. In fact, the people who came up with this idea shot themselves in the foot by the vagueness in which it was presented, and a state can use external defense machinery to quell an uprising which could lead to high handed use of force.
In essence, even collective intervention is impossible in South Africa's case. The political will is not there. And even if this (collective intervention) is brought as an option on the table (even though it sounds not only improbable, but farfetched), South Africa, being a prominent member of the organization will shoot it down.
A far more veritable response may be to expel South African companies and businesses in the countries affected, but that itself does not come without dire repercussions, especially in a country like Nigeria where telecommunications Giants MTN, Cable service providers Multichoice (DsTV) and shoprite have gone great lengths in strengthening the Nigerian economy by providing thousands of youths employment opportunities. In the light of this consideration, a more forceful diplomatic response maybe to nationalize these foreign assets.
Furthermore, if the Nigerian government is really determined to see this crisis resolved once and for all through the channels of the African Union, the best way to do that maybe to lobby for the placement of sanctions on the south African government.
A step further, though rash would see the other 54 member states end diplomatic relations with South Africa, and expelling the latter's Diplomats in countries of assignment.
This should send a strong message to the South African government that a new, strong and workable device must be devised to curtail this incessant menace of xenophobia.
In the words of "The Guardian",
" While the so-called foreigners, including Nigerians, must be admonished to be law-abiding, the anti-Nigerian sentiment still growing in South Africa where foreigners, even those merely suspected to be Nigerians are still being killed, must be condemned in the strongest terms."
However, the world has gone past the era where burning issues like these are left to mere rhetorics of condemnation. It behoves the Nigerian government, the government of South Africa, and the African Union to take actionable and veritable measures to put to an end these attacks on common sense and the complete contradiction of the values of the African Union which xenophobia sadly is an embodiment.
"The issues of the day are not going to be settled by mere words and long statements (sic), but by blood and iron."
Otto von Bismarck.
¶¶ MacHarry "Cowans" Confidence, an international affairs analyst and a Socio-political issues commentator, is a student of International Studies and Diplomacy, in the department of History and International Studies, University of Benin, Benin city, Nigeria.
South African Xenophobia: The Nigerian Government and the African Union's Strategy Of Flexible Response
The recent xenophobic attacks on Nigerians and citizens of other African nationalities may come as a shock to many--not really because it is the first time an attack of such magnitude is happening, but because of its frequency in occurrence.
On March 5, 2015, xenophobic attacks occurred in Limpopo
Province. Foreigners on the outskirts of Polokwane left their
shops after protesting villagers threatened to burn them
alive and then looted shops. Violence erupted in the Ga-
Sekgopo area after a foreign shop owner was found in
possession of a mobile phone belonging to a local man who
was killed.
On April 8, 2015, a spate of xenophobic violence occurred
after Zulu King, Goodwill Zwelithini made comments that
foreigners should go back to their home countries because
they were changing the nature of the South African society
with their goods and enjoying wealth that should have been
for local people.
For almost a week, the attacks on foreign nationals reigned.
On April 12, 2015, in KwaZulu-Natal, shops in Umlazi and
KwaMashu, outside Durban, were torched.
In V Section, a
shop owned by a foreign national was set on fire by a mob.
Five people were reportedly killed.
On April 14, 2015, looting of foreign shops spread to
Verulam, north of Durban following a day of clashes
between locals, foreigners, and police in the city centre,
KwaZulu-Natal. About 300 local people looted foreign-
owned shops.
Since the post apartheid era began which was signaled with the election of Nelson Mandela in 1994, racial slurs and physical attacks on citizens of other countries have "surprisingly" increased.
(Vanguard Newspaper)
According to recent reports, more than 116 Nigerians have been murdered within the last two years in inexplicable circumstances either by South African citizens or even officials of the state.
The death of Tochukwu Nnadi is one of such examples of state-sanctioned extra judicial murders.
When the 2015 (March-May) incidents broke out in Pretoria and Johannesburg, many a commentator linked the causes Laziness of the South African workforce and youths, in response to the accusation that Nigerians and other foreigners are "taking up jobs meant for South African youths". The outward interpretation of this response is the innate self identification with the Nigerian enterprising spirit and the spontaneous solidarity with compatriots even though such nationalism is absent in Nigeria and on the Nigerian soil, and this absence is caused by ethno-religious sentiments.
The accusation that Nigerians in diaspora--South Africa, in this case--are mostly involved in drug pushing and prostitution lacks merit on the basis that the blanket characterization of citizens of other countries are mostly known of a particular anti-social vice and the logic that the inculcation of such vices by the youths and citizens of the host country is flawed.
This is not to say that Nigerians are not involved in such activities. It is no news that Nigerians are arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to death in countries like Indonesia, the Philippines etc where drug peddling is a crime which carries the death penalty.
In Italy and many states in Eastern Europe, Nigerians are involved in both legal and illegal businesses, of which prostitution, legal in some states and illegal in some others, is one.
It is hypocritical to accrue such acts to only Nigerians.
Come to think of it:
If Nigerians are selling these illegal drugs in South Africa, who buys it from them?
Nigerians or South Africans?
Did the Nigerian drug peddlers coerce the South African drug market to buy them?
How then is drug a Nigerian thing?
The seller-buyer dual axis has been one area many times ignored in the criticism of these incessant attacks and many a time, the chastising of the buyer is where it ends, complete justification or exoneration of the buyer is not a topic treated, and even if, treated with a slap on the wrist.
This is one angle which haven't been explored.
The Nigerian government's response to the xenophobic attacks is as drab and weightless as the South African government's approach to dealing with this menace.
Using the 2015 outbreak as an example, the response of the government of former President, Goodluck Jonathan was sickening. Fresh from erstwhile Foreign affairs minister, Ambassador Aminu Wali claiming that the incident was not as serious as the reported. Turned out that apart Nigeria was the last country to send national carriers to evict citizens from that state, right after Somalia, Mozambique, Tanzania and Malawi pulled out their citizens.
This came against the backdrop of initially telling citizens to take refuge in the Nigerian High Commission and consulate. Even the recall of Nigeria's High Commissioner to South Africa, Amb. Martin Cobham wasn't really a recall as the Nigerian press reported. The government (ministry of foreign affairs) issued a statement that Cobham was "called home for talks and consultation".
The explanation to this lackadaisical attitude to citizens' welfare is not farfetched. In Nigeria, security of lives and properties is not a top priority, especially when compared to the priority given to the looting of the treasury and diversion of public funds. Boko Haram and the rise of Fulani herds men propounds this fact. Over 15000 thousand Nigerians have been killed since 2009. The North East is a scenery of a Hollywood war zone. The current killings and destruction of lives by rampaging Fulani herdsmen in Southern Kaduna is a testament to the fact that the average Nigerian life doesn't matter, and ranks far below the lives of cows owned by marauding and rampaging Fulani herdsmen. And this is exacerbated by the response of the Muhammadu Buhari-led administration and the lack of political will in tackling this issue.
So it is just too farfetched to raise any hope of a strong, firm response to the issue.
A slight paradigm shift from this template occurred a few days ago when Buhari's special adviser on foreign and diaspora affairs, Hon. Abike Dabiri Erewa made a statement colored with strong rhetorics, but the usual gimmick of urging the south African government to fish out the sponsors of the xenophobic attacks. In international affairs, once there is an issue involving two states, the ministers of foreign affairs are expected to be the first people to make statements and proclamations either approving the issue or outrightly condemning it, but in this case, the current foreign affairs minister, Ambassador Geoffrey Onyema not only took long to speak, but when he did, he claimed that this is the first time he's hearing about xenophobic attacks on Nigerian citizens in South Africa.
The analysis of responses of both government officials sum up the lack of will and balls to address this issue.
Perhaps, even more annoying is the Nigerian government's appeal to the African Union to intervene in the crisis.
For a start, the African Union can do little or nothing on this issue. The AU, far from being the regional prototype of political integration is powerless in cases like these. The African Union's response Arab Spring which showed politically motivated internal divisions which the American-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) exploited which led to the death of Libyan strong man, Muammar Ghadaffi.
The AU's policy of "African solution to African problems" have not effectively achieved the purpose for which it was adopted. The barrage of criticisms which followed this approach is hinged on the attendant effect on the "responsibility to protect" doctrine (Article 4H, AU 2002 charter), in which the former means that the union will pressure states to deal with a particular issue without collective intervention.
African solutions to African problems have been distorted in many ways. In fact, the people who came up with this idea shot themselves in the foot by the vagueness in which it was presented, and a state can use external defense machinery to quell an uprising which could lead to high handed use of force.
In essence, even collective intervention is impossible in South Africa's case. The political will is not there. And even if this (collective intervention) is brought as an option on the table (even though it sounds not only improbable, but farfetched), South Africa, being a prominent member of the organization will shoot it down.
A far more veritable response may be to expel South African companies and businesses in the countries affected, but that itself does not come without dire repercussions, especially in a country like Nigeria where telecommunications Giants MTN, Cable service providers Multichoice (DsTV) and shoprite have gone great lengths in strengthening the Nigerian economy by providing thousands of youths employment opportunities. In the light of this consideration, a more forceful diplomatic response maybe to nationalize these foreign assets.
Furthermore, if the Nigerian government is really determined to see this crisis resolved once and for all through the channels of the African Union, the best way to do that maybe to lobby for the placement of sanctions on the south African government.
A step further, though rash would see the other 54 member states end diplomatic relations with South Africa, and expelling the latter's Diplomats in countries of assignment.
This should send a strong message to the South African government that a new, strong and workable device must be devised to curtail this incessant menace of xenophobia.
In the words of "The Guardian",
" While the so-called foreigners, including Nigerians, must be admonished to be law-abiding, the anti-Nigerian sentiment still growing in South Africa where foreigners, even those merely suspected to be Nigerians are still being killed, must be condemned in the strongest terms."
However, the world has gone past the era where burning issues like these are left to mere rhetorics of condemnation. It behoves the Nigerian government, the government of South Africa, and the African Union to take actionable and veritable measures to put to an end these attacks on common sense and the complete contradiction of the values of the African Union which xenophobia sadly is an embodiment.
"The issues of the day are not going to be settled by mere words and long statements (sic), but by blood and iron."
Otto von Bismarck.
¶¶ MacHarry "Cowans" Confidence, an international affairs analyst and a Socio-political issues commentator, is a student of International Studies and Diplomacy, in the department of History and International Studies, University of Benin, Benin city, Nigeria.
No comments