Slogans of “They must go” and “Abahambe” scrawled on shop shutters and chanted by marchers have marked a fresh surge of anti-immigrant violence across South Africa in 2026, leaving migrants murdered, homes burned and thousands displaced or repatriated.
The latest wave, intensifying from March and peaking around a June 30 unofficial deadline set by activist groups for undocumented foreigners to leave, has strained relations with neighboring African nations and raised hard questions about the “Rainbow Nation’s” post-apartheid ideals.
Nigeria, Ghana, Malawi and Mozambique have evacuated citizens, while diplomats question Pretoria’s response.
“They must go”: Ultimatum Fuels Fear and Flight
Anti-immigrant groups issued the June 30 deadline for undocumented migrants to depart or face consequences, sparking fear among both legal residents and the undocumented.
Protests in Durban, Johannesburg, Pietermaritzburg and smaller towns turned violent at times. A 29-year-old Malawian was stoned to death in Pietermaritzburg during one demonstration.
Homes and businesses owned by foreigners were destroyed; entire families sought refuge in town halls or makeshift camps. After the June 30 deadline, the anti-immigrant groups shifted to a door-to-door eviction threat, sparking more fear across the country.
Xenowatch, a monitoring project at the University of the Witwatersrand, has documented more than 1,300 xenophobic incidents since 1994, resulting in nearly 700 deaths and over 120,000 displacements. Still, the xenophobic storm is yet to calm.
The 2025-2026 period saw elevated numbers, with hostility toward immigrants reaching the highest levels recorded since surveys began in 2003.
Most targets are Black African migrants from Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Malawi, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Ghana and elsewhere.
While immigrant evictions and deportations have been common in the West, South Africa is the only African country known for an ugly xenophobic history, despite the small number of immigrants as compared to the local population.
According to official estimates, immigrants make up roughly 5 percent of South Africa’s population of about 62-65 million,
Economic Despair and the Search for Scapegoats
South Africa’s unemployment rate hovers above 30 percent, with youth unemployment far higher.
Inequality remains among the world’s starkest, a legacy of apartheid compounded by post-1994 governance failures, corruption, load-shedding, deindustrialization and strained public services, driving crime rates high.
In this environment of scarcity, many South Africans blame foreigners for “stealing jobs,” overcrowding hospitals and schools, and fueling crime—despite data showing immigrants account for a small share of arrests.
According to hsrc.ac.za researchers, the crisis develops as follows: deep socio-economic and political deprivation creates collective discontent; xenophobic beliefs portray outsiders as threats; political entrepreneurs mobilize that anger; and uneven governance allows violence to flare.
Immigrants become convenient scapegoats for structural problems that predate their arrival and cannot be solved by expelling them.
“Vigilante groups feed off the country’s frustrations over unemployment, socioeconomic decline and the lack of effort to address inequality gaps,” one migrant-rights activist told Al Jazeera.
“South Africa for South Africans”: Who drives the campaign?
The violence is largely grassroots-led rather than state-orchestrated, distinguishing it from earlier African expulsions directed from the top.
Leading organizations include Operation Dudula (“to push out” or “eradicate” in Zulu), which began around 2021 and has registered as a political party, and the newer March and March, headed by former radio host Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma.
These groups organize marches, demand documentation, blockade clinics to restrict migrant access to care, and pressure businesses.
Political parties such as the Patriotic Alliance, ActionSA and uMkhonto we Sizwe have amplified anti-migrant rhetoric, framing foreigners as competitors for scarce resources ahead of local government elections.
Critics argue this diverts public anger from government shortcomings onto the most vulnerable.
President Cyril Ramaphosa has insisted enforcement belongs solely to the state: “No individual may stop any person to demand documentation or proof of identity or nationality.”
Yet rights groups and courts have criticized slow implementation of the National Action Plan to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, and uneven policing of vigilante actions.
Echoes of European right-wing populism
The rhetoric— “take back our country,” prioritization of nationals, links between migration and crime or resource strain—mirrors nativist campaigns in parts of Europe and elsewhere.
South Africa’s immigrant share is lower than in many European nations, yet economic stagnation and identity questions produce similar scapegoating.
CFR analyst Ebenezer Obadare has noted the irony: a country that champions ubuntu (“I am because we are”) and a progressive constitution now sees repeated outbreaks of Africans attacking other Africans.
The recurrent nature of the violence (major episodes in 2008, 2015, 2019 and 2026) undermines South Africa’s claims to continental leadership and the African Renaissance.
“There is no place for xenophobia”: Government response and continental friction
Ramaphosa has repeatedly condemned vigilantism and intolerance. “There is no place for sexism, for xenophobia, for Afrophobia, or any other form of intolerance,” he said.
In a June address, he announced a comprehensive approach: intensified deportations and border interdictions (hundreds of thousands intercepted or removed in recent years), dedicated immigration courts, biometric identity systems, workplace inspections and penalties for employers hiring undocumented workers, anti-corruption measures in Home Affairs, and regional cooperation.
Police were placed on high alert for the June 30 marches. Diplomatic engagements followed, including talks with Nigeria after Abuja reported deaths of its nationals and questioned Pretoria’s response.
South African officials have denied state sponsorship of violence and pledged prosecutions. However, that is not enough to curb the growing xenophobic killings and other related violence in the country.
Critics, including Human Rights Watch and the International Commission of Jurists, say more is needed: consistent protection of migrants’ access to services, swift action against known agitators, and full implementation of court-ordered plans.
Nigeria’s foreign ministry has placed South Africa “on notice,” while Ghana has sought discussion at the African Union.
The violence damages South Africa’s image and soft power. As one CFR piece put it, recurrent xenophobia puts an asterisk against claims of African solidarity, championed by many founding African leaders, including the country’s first president, Nelson Mandela.
For the migrants who once saw the country as a land of opportunity, the message in recent months has been stark, with many packing up and leaving.
Whether stronger enforcement, economic recovery or genuine social cohesion can reverse the cycle remains the central test for the post-apartheid state.
