What South Africa’s June 30 Deadline Reveals About State Authority and African Integration

The events surrounding South Africa’s self-imposed June 30 deadline for undocumented foreign nationals to leave the country may come to be remembered as one of the most extraordinary chapters of governance in post-apartheid Africa. Yet they should also jolt us towards greater solidarity and unity, and inject fresh urgency into Africa’s integration agenda.

Africa has witnessed mass expulsions before. Ghana’s Alien Compliance Order of 1969 forced hundreds of thousands of West Africans, mostly Nigerians, to leave. Uganda under Idi Amin expelled its Asian population in 1972. Nigeria’s “Ghana Must Go” exercise of 1983 led to the repatriation of well over a million migrants, mostly Ghanaians. These episodes were regrettable, traumatic and, in some cases, catastrophic. But they had one thing in common: they were state-driven policies, executed by governments exercising sovereign authority, however myopically.

What makes South Africa’s June 30 moment different, and perhaps more disturbing, is that the state itself was not leading events. It was reacting to them.

Citizen movements, social media personalities and self-appointed activists, many dressed in symbolic regalia and broadcasting their activities in real time, succeeded in shaping the national conversation on immigration in a way that few could have anticipated. As their videos attracted millions of views on TikTok, Instagram and other platforms, and as vloggers followed their every move, their influence and visibility grew significantly. This raises difficult questions for any constitutional democracy about the balance between legitimate civic activism, social media mobilisation, and the responsibility of the state to maintain public order and ensure that matters of immigration policy remain firmly within the framework of the rule of law.

More troubling still was the perception that the authorities initially stood by, allowing intimidation, harassment and public vigilantism to flourish without decisive intervention. Predictably, this emboldened those involved. For when a state hesitates to exercise its authority, others inevitably step forward to fill the vacuum.

Continental Outlier

This is why many analysts argue that what we are witnessing is not simply a migration crisis. What the rest of Africa appears to be seeing is the visible manifestation of a state losing control over the narrative, over the streets and, ultimately, over its own legitimacy to influence the continent’s all-important policy direction on economic integration and related matters. Sadly, South Africa is today at risk of becoming a continental outlier on African solidarity; a nation whose moral authority in Africa is being seriously damaged by these events.

South Africa’s coalition staggers on while confidence, both domestic and international, steadily erodes. The government of President Cyril Ramaphosa has suffered a serious blow to its credibility and has its work cut out to restore it. If it cannot be seen to guarantee the safety and dignity of all those living within its borders, including fellow Africans, then institutions such as the African Union must be prepared to speak and act with greater moral clarity.

Free Movement of Persons

But Africa must also have the courage to confront the deeper truth behind this crisis. We are here because African leaders have collectively faltered in implementing one of the continent’s most ambitious political projects: the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community, adopted in Abuja in 1991, which envisioned a progressively integrated Africa with free movement, a customs union, a common market and, ultimately, an African Economic Community. The subsequent Protocol to the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community Relating to Free Movement of Persons, Right of Residence and Right of Establishment, adopted in Addis Ababa in 2018, was intended to make that vision a reality. Yet eight years later, only four countries have ratified it. Africa’s leaders embraced the rhetoric of integration while retreating from its practical implementation. What is unfolding in South Africa is, in part, the consequence of insufficient action on integration.

The great irony is that South Africa, whose domestic politics often betray a degree of scepticism towards deeper African integration, is precisely the country that stands to gain most from it. Africa’s single market of 1.5 billion people offers unparalleled opportunities for economies with advanced manufacturing, services and logistics sectors. The prosperity of South Africa lies not in turning inward, but in embracing the rest of Africa more warmly.

As many analysts have observed, the Afrophobia visible in South Africa today is less about foreigners than about a disappointment that may not be peculiar to that country. Millions of South Africans feel betrayed by a political and economic system that has failed to deliver security, prosperity and dignity. But rather than confront the structural causes of that failure, some activists have chosen a weaker and more vulnerable target: black Africans from elsewhere on the continent.

Social psychologists have long recognised this phenomenon. It is the politics of unification through a common enemy: the creation or exaggeration of an external threat to divert attention from internal failures. It is scapegoating masquerading as patriotism.

The way we fight this is to pile greater pressure on our leaders across the African continent to implement the policies and strategies of the AU that will enable the free movement of people, goods, services, capital and creativity across Africa for our shared prosperity and dignity.