Reimaging Marginality: Covid-19 and the changing fortunes of South Africas foreign migrants

RE-IMAGING MARGINALITY COVID-19 AND THE CHANGING FORTUNES OF SOUTH AFRICA’S FOREIGN MIGRANTS

By Rev Dr Buhle Mpofu

Police remove foreign migrants from the Central Methodist Church in Cape Town, Sourth Africa, Thursday, April 2, 2020. The migrants, who had been sheltering there for months, refused to leave the church and had previously demanded that South Africa relocate them to other countries, including the United States and Canada, because they had been victims of xenophobic threats in South Africa last year. (AP Photo)

The global impact of corona virus has dominated recent developments alongside the invidious protests against racism sparked by the horrendous death of George Floyd in police custody in Minneapolis, United States of America (U.S.A). We have seen a renewed call for justice as Black Lives Matter (BLM), an international human rights movement originating from African-American community, mobilise people to stand up against racism and hegemonic structures that institutionally sustain remnants of White supremacy.

Despite fears for the spread of coronavirus during protest marches, global activists have seized this opportunity to organise solidarity marches and demand institutional reforms in the justice systems and an end to racist and unjust practices. The protests have also demanded decolonisation of global institutions and some protesters have pulled down or defaced statues of colonial figures like Winston Churchill in London, and Rhodes in Southern Africa. Those agitating for transformation recognise these statues as representations of symbolic and institutional violence against victims of colonialism. As coronavirus and this global call for change reset the world, it is important that focusing on the legacies of colonialism be expanded to help us address all forms of injustices created and sustained by the empire, including the challenges experienced by migrants, refugees and asylum seekers.

One of the legacies of the colonial borders was the creation of disparities between racial, ethnical and indigenous groups of people through restricted movement, limiting economic opportunities for segregated Black people. This is clearly visible in the US and in South Africa. For example, COVID-19 has exposed these racial inequalities as it disproportionately devastated minority communities in the USA. In South Africa, infections were severe and had catastrophic socio-economic consequences in poor black communities in Cape-Town. In responding to a global call for justice and restoration of human dignity for Black and minority groups who have been exploited by generations of White supremacists, it is critical that we also pay attention to situation of migration as most migrant workers were left stranded as governments implemented urgent measures to curb the spread of corona virus. This is one example of how authorities can be supremacist and reflect the colonial hangover mentality which thrives on segregation and exclusion.

Global responses to COVID-19 were marked by lockdowns which restricted movement to limit the spread of the virus and enforce social distancing measures. Closing of borders and restricting movement impacted negatively on migration flows, and meant that most migrant workers were abruptly removed from their places of work when their companies closed without necessary arrangements for their welfare and safety. Refugees and asylum seekers fleeing wars and violence were left stranded in transit communities where they are often framed as a security threat and sometimes criminalised as undocumented. Criminalising movement for people seeking safety and ignoring their plight is not anything new for the time of COVID-19, this has become a symbolic representation of institutional

violence perpetrated against the poor by the empire. Covid-19 simply laid bare these systemic injustices.

In South Africa the government moved to stifle migration in 2018 after the cabinet approved locating the department of home affairs within the security cluster alongside justice, police, military and correctional services. A white paper on international migration conflated migration legislation and policy with national security, proposing stringent measures to restrict migration to highly skilled people or capital and thereby criminalise certain forms of migration. In essence, the passing of the Border Management Agency Bill by the National Assembly ensured the creation of a centralised authority with sweeping powers over South Africa’s ports of entry, including policing and customs. More attention needs to be given on how these policies will facilitate transformation within the context of justice and respect for human dignity so that they do not impede the ‘rainbow’ nation’s vision of a just society.

The ideal of a rainbow nation was a vision of Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu who opened up a way to reimage South Africa as a society that would bring a fresh meaning to the celebration of human life in all its individual uniqueness and thus demonstrate a key aspect of ‘aesthetic existence’. This was after a painful past marked with segregation and oppression of the majority black people during the apartheid years. From 1994 under the leadership of the first black democratically elected President Nelson Mandela, the South African government emerged with an ambitious plan to bring about transformation and deliver justice to previously oppressed black communities. This plan prioritised focus on job creation (with full participation of foreign migrants in the economic sector) and alleviation of poverty, through provision of social grants and free housing under the Rapid Development Program (RDP). Despite challenges with corruption and poor service delivery, Mandela’s vision of a rainbow nation was inclusive and sought to deal with poverty and socio-economic inequalities through inclusive economic policies which promoted the integration of foreign migrants.

In an article published with Alternation Journal in 2019, “Migration, xenophobia and resistance to xenophobia and socio-economic exclusion in the aftermath of South African Rainbowism” I examined the different articulations of South African ‘Rainbowism’ through interrogating the place of migrant in the various structural or economic development policies from Mandela’s Reconstruction Economic Development (RDP), through Mbeki’s Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR), Zuma’s Radical Economic Transformation (RET) and more recently, Cyril Ramaphosa’s Thuma Mina (Send me) dispensation. This paper identified major constraints regarding paternalistic approaches to the situation of migration in South Africa and COVID-19 has laid these limitations bare. Mapping the changing fortunes of migrants in South Africa during the last 25 years of democracy, I also contended that while many migrants moved to South Africa because it presented hope for democracy, civil protections from ethnic division and inclusion, the opportunities and recognition of migrants remains an elusive dream.

Following Mandela’s retirement after a successful five-year term in which he championed the historical Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)- which brought political stability after the fall of apartheid, Thabo Mbeki took over with laudable economic policies which ensured development. He was considered a good liberal economist despite his term being marred with controversial HIV/AIDS denialism and euro-centric capitalist policies which protected White supremacy. Mbeki is popular for his iconic speech, ‘I am an African’ and advocated integration of African migrants into the South African society and economy. His government was so keen in protecting migrants and African states that he went as far as denying that there was a crisis in Zimbabwe after making one of his regional peace and reconciliation trips to the crisis hit Zimbabwe at the time when he was the chair-person of the Southern African Development Corporation (SADC). His second term was short-lived after he suspended deputy President Jacob Zuma for alleged corruption and fell into the hands of his political opponents who felt that economic transformation was slow and blamed him for targeting Zuma. Who was perceived to be pro-poor.

Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma dramatically ascended to the South African presidency in May 2009 on a wave of popular euphoria and sympathy from voters who were frustrated with declining economic growth and slow transfer of wealth to poor. There was rising unemployment and poor service delivery protests which were often accompanied with xenophobic attacks on foreigners and foreign businesses. Migrants in South Africa are often accused of taking jobs for locals despite evidence from studies which suggest that the majority of foreign migrants create jobs for themselves and employ locals. With Zuma’s endorsement as the leader of the African National Congress (ANC), came the Radical Economic Transformation (RET) program aimed at transforming the economy and dismantling institutions that sustain white supremacy and monopoly. The ANC’s policies of radical economic transformation emerged as a mechanism that would circumvent the structures of sustained inequality, and provide the poor with access to social and economic upliftment, as imagined in Mandela’s dream of a thriving rainbow nation. Zuma’s period was characterised by state capture and allegations of corruption, violent protests with very little progress toward the realisation of the dream of a rainbow

nation. The worst xenophobic attacks in 2008 and 2015 took place during the presidency of Zuma and very little was done to bring perpetrators of xenophobic violence to book despite churches and ecumenical bodies calling for justice.

In 2017 the ANC re-assessed economic conditions and later adopted new policies within the rapidly changing context as the government struggled to account for two decades of democracy while the Black majority were still landless and getting more impatient with slow transfer of wealth to address poverty and inequality. Growing protests, demands for land and agitation against government charades on poor service delivery and economic exclusion, led to increased scapegoating and violence directed to African migrants perceived to be ‘stealing jobs from South Africans’ and eroding the few opportunities available to locals. This narrative forced the government into an ideological shift against foreigners and the change in mood from inclusion to marginalisation of fellow African migrants in the economic development programs. The result was that we now see such discourses translated into institutionalised violence against fellow Black Africans. During the periods of Mandela and Mbeki, xenophobia was insidious, but it now assumes an invidious ideological basis supported by political rhetoric which portray migrants as a problem, making them vulnerable to xenophobic attacks and excluded from economic participation, schools and other public services. These are structural injustices that have been worsened and exposed by the devastating corona virus pandemic.

However, there was a sense of renewed hope towards reviving the dream of a rainbow nation when Cyril Matamela Ramaphosa took over as the President with the agenda for moral restoration as he was considered one of the ANC leaders who are ‘clean’ from corruption. He was tasked with reversing economic misfortunes when unemployment was at 27% and public health care had deteriorated and uncapable of coping with the growing burden of patients. There were reports of foreign migrants blamed for overcrowded hospitals even from some of ANC leaders, despite statistics which indicate that migrants are a negligible number in South Africa as opposed to narratives which cast them as an ‘overflow’ in the country. This issue took a centre stage as debate on migration dominated political campaigns during the 2019 national elections and most political parties highlighted migration as one of the major focus areas in their policies and party manifestos. These manifestos were influenced by developments in the US where President Trump was pushing for the construction of a wall on the borders with Mexico. Most notably, the Democratic Alliance (DA), the main opposition partly considered to be white supremacist, claimed that its plan was to “secure borders” because ‘the impact of porous borders and an ineffective, mostly corrupt Department of Home Affairs (DHA) has created a situation where it is not possible to be aware of the numbers of people who come in and out of the country. The DA further claimed that they are “... the only party which is willing to tackle the challenge of xenophobia and ‘illegal’ migration head on and provide leadership on what they considered a ‘difficult and indeed emotive issue.’

Some recommendations from the opposition manifestos highlighted the need to ensure legal migration into South Africa and effective policing of borders and rooting out corruption in the immigration processes. These recommendations resonate with the draconian Border Management Agency Bill which was passed by the National Assembly to ensure the creation of a centralised authority with sweeping powers over South Africa’s ports of entry, policing and customs.

Most opposition parties insist on the idea that tightening control of the country’s borders will address the socio-economic problems and xenophobia with some political parties such as the Freedom Front Plus even blaming South Africa’s poor economic performance and declining socio-economic conditions on the presence of foreign migrants. After President Cyril Ramaphosa emerged as the source of hope in the restoration of the dreams and vision of a rainbow nation, he inspired the nation by invoking the lyrics of a song from the late struggle and music icon Hugh Masekela, “Thuma Mina” (Send Me) in a desperate effort to restore confidence in the government and as a call to unite South Africans. Unfortunately, his inaugural speech did not extend a call for renewed collective nation building to foreigners resident in the country, as he acknowledged diversity but narrowly addressed “fellow” South Africans as reflected in the excerpt from his speech below:

In our magnificent diversity, and despite our many differences, the people of this country answered the call of Thuma mina (Send Me). In their multitudes, South Africans asked not what can be done for them, but what they could do for their country. In ways both large and small, both public and private, South Africans set about building a better nation (State of the Nation Address, May 2019).

Despite constitutional provisions that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, united in diversity, migrants are often neglected and marginalised in South Africa. This socio-economic privileging of citizens over ‘all people’ who live in the country, impede on the realisation of a just and humane post-apartheid society and was recently evident in a proposal by the Finance Minister Tito Mboweni. The Finance minister called for locals to be favoured in employment opportunities as one of the strategies

for the country to emerge from the COVID-19 crisis. For Mboweni, "[t]he proportion of South Africans working in any restaurant must be greater than that of non-South Africans”. Similarly, when the President announced a R5Billion stimulus package to revive the economy and support companies and unemployed South Africans who were not receiving any grants during the coronavirus lockdown, migrants were excluded from receiving government support. This was despite well documented evidence that the majority of people affected by the lockdown were non-South African migrants who work in the informal sector. Churches and NGOs had to provide food parcels to millions of starving migrants- some of them stuck in the country after the borders were closed on short notice.

More than two decades after the fall of apartheid, these actions echo a dark history of colonial and apartheid legacies reflected in disingenuous policies that protect neo-liberalism at the expense of dismembered Black majority. The post-COVID-19 unpredictable future of migrants in South Africa has been made darker by ambiguous government's policies laid bare by the impact of coronavirus pandemic. A shifting ‘rainbowism’ towards anti-immigrant policies and divisive rhetoric reflected in political discourses, all cast the South African dream of a rainbow nation as evasive and elusive. There is no clear program to promote the inclusion of migrants in the South African economic development strategy and foreign migrants continue to be marginalised. They live on the margins of South African society, under constant threat to xenophobic attacks and violence even in the face of a global coronavirus pandemic. We therefore need to reimage marginality as a survival strategy.

Reimaging marginality

Given the global activism demanding institutional reforms to end racism and decolonise global institutions, Covid-19 also presents an opportunity to reimage our communities and life affirming narratives as counter resistance to marginality and exclusion in the context of migration. Like migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, there are millions of the world’s poor peoples who are ostracised and live on the margins of society - so we need to appropriate a new meaning to marginality, exclusion and rejection.

The terms marginality, exclusion, rejection and ostracism can be used interchangeably and attempts to distinguish them and demonstrate that there is no significant difference. They all indicate a situation that threatens humanity’s fundamental need for belonging. Variables of marginality and exclusion range from socio-economic, political, racial, ethnical, religious and even socio-cultural and gender exclusion. Exclusion is fundamentally a state in which individuals or groups lack effective participation in key activities or benefits of the society in which they live. In the context of Covid-19, the exclusion and marginalisation of migrants meant that they could not participate in key prevention activities as they had to navigate a public health emergency with limited resources. They were exposed and posed a serious threat to the government’s response as they struggled to survive in their marginalised neighbourhoods with no state support during the lockdown. They risked being arrested for defying lockdown or being infected while they scrambled for food in crowded places where NGOs distributed food parcels.

Therefore, for migrants and refugees in South Africa marginality resonates with their experiences as they are often pushed to survive on the margins of society where they create their own safe spaces and develop survival strategies. Historically speaking, South African communities thrive in marginality as they are still racially and ethnically arranged and such arrangements facilitated activism in the poorly serviced majority black townships which led to the fall of the apartheid system. In essence, migrant communities also create their own spaces of struggle against injustices in the face of limited entitlements or access to resources and public services. South Africa is clustered into “causal complexes” or “marginality patterns” - the racial, ethnical and tribal divisions and practices that are still prevalent in society. It is in this context that marginality can be reimaged as ‘a site of resistance’. The work of Bell Hooks (1990), Marginality as a site of resistance proposed that exclusion of segregated Black Americans be “looked both from the outside-in and from the inside-out to focus attention on the centre as well as the margins of their communities in order to give meaning to their experiences of segregation.

Hooks’ development of ‘a particular way of seeing reality’ as a lens to examine segregated migrant communities helps us envision discrimination and marginality as a site of radical possibility - a space of resistance which is central to creating a counter hegemonic discourse, with the ability to transform the world. Therefore, marginality should not always be seen ‘as a sign marking the condition of pain and deprivation’ but rather as a position and place of resistance which is crucial for the oppressed, exploited, and colonised people. In seeking justice from the margins, reimaging marginality in this way restores human dignity for the vulnerable peoples and dehumanised people such as migrants, refugees, black people and the poor. Recognising their agency and framing marginality in this way will give meaning to their protests from the margins, disrupt order of the day and ensure radical transformation for oppressive institutions which sustain political, economic and ideological systems of empire.

Dr Li Wenliang is an ophthalmologist with the Wuhan Central Hospital. He first identified and warned of an imminent outbreak similar to the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) which was later officially named as Covid-19. The sharing of his warnings to the public did not go down well with the Chinese government and he was charged for making false comments on the internet and causing distress and panic to the population. Unfortunately, Dr Li died from contracting the very same disease he had tried to warn the people about. Although he was painted as a rumour monger by the authorities, many Chinese people see him as the bearer of truth in which his whistle blowing effort was to expose the falsehood of the Chinese government, from keeping the reality of the situation from the Chinese population at large.