6 times South African refugees sought asylum abroad
As Trump's 49 South African refugees make headlines globally, we recap the history of asylum seekers. Owing to the country's cruel apartheid history and systematic discrimination, more South African refugees have been forced into asylum in the last seven decades than many care to remember.
The first wave of South African refugees came about due to apartheid policies of 1948 that steadily increased institutionalised racial segregation. However, a turning point was the Sharpeville Massacre of 1960, in which 69 peaceful protesters were killed by police. Black South Africans and white anti-apartheid sympathisers truly feared for their lives … The anti-apartheid movement gained momentum all over the world, and asylum seekers were duly welcomed in throughout UK, Europe and Africa. Image: File
According to records, between 1960 and 1990, roughly 40 000 South African refugees sought political asylum. These were predominantly black South African refugees fleeing racial persecution to Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland and Zimbabwe.
Tanzania and Zambia emerged as a significant destination for South African refugees in this 30-year period. Tanzanian President Julius Nyerere established dedicated settlements and provided educational opportunities. Likewise, thousands of African National Congress (ANC) members, and members of other liberation movements, setup operational bases in Zambia. The nature of pre- and post-apartheid asylum seekers could not be more different. Image: File
At the other end of the spectrum, the United Kingdom took in an estimated 15 000 South African refugees in the same three-decade period. This included political exiles, activists, journalists, and academics who faced imprisonment due to their anti-apartheid stance.
Similarly, Sweden distinguished itself by welcoming as many as 3 000 South African refugees during the 1970s and 1980s. In turn, the Swedes provided comprehensive support for asylum seekers. This included language training, housing assistance, and educational scholarships. The current crop of Afrikaner refugees is making headlines. But Canada welcomed in as many back in 2018, citing farm attacks. Image: AFP
Concurrently, the United States accepted approximately 6 000 South African refugees during apartheid. However, while asylum seekers cited political persecution based on opposition to racial segregation, this occurred primarily through specialised academic scholarships. 4. POST-APARTHEID MOVEMENT
Following the dismantling of apartheid in the 1990s, the nature of South African refugees shifted dramatically. Many whites feared returning ANC exiles from Africa, now in power, would exact violent vengeance. As such, apartheid sympathisers left the country citing economic instability and rising crime rates.
As such, it's believed as many as 3 000 South Africans sought a new life in Australia after the end of Apartheid. Leading to South African strongholds in the likes of Perth and other cities. However, the Australian government did not process these applications as refugees. Instead, it followed standard immigration channels but with higher scrutiny. White Afrikaner refugees are welcomed into the US this week. It is unknown how the US government will fund their asylum stay. Image: AFP
Then, in 2018, the Canadian government made headlines by accepting approximately 50 South African refugees. These were 12 farming families who claimed persecution based on targeted farm attacks in their homeland. This controversial decision blindsided the South African government and had officials decrying that such attacks occurred or constituted persecution.
Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1.
Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
36 minutes ago
- IOL News
The fallout from Trump's Afrikaner project on Ramaphosa's National Dialogue agenda
President Cyril Ramaphosa has defended BEE as an engine of growth. Image: GCIS President Cyril Ramaphosa's upcoming national dialogue aims to tackle critical issues facing the country, including the divisions sparked by US President Donald Trump's controversial offer of resettlement to white Afrikaners, alongside pressing concerns regarding unemployment and poor governance. On Wednesday, Ramaphosa announced the appointment of an 'eminent persons group,' comprising 31 South Africans, who will spearhead the National Dialogue scheduled for August 15. One of the eminent persons, who requested anonymity, said the dialogue can be seen as a response to concerns, aiming to address the country's challenges and promote national building. 'The issue should definitely come up, although everybody has a choice to leave the country. "We are way beyond the colour lines now and should focus on nation building with the people who are in the country, instead of dwelling in the past. 'Sure, it's a bone of contention but we do have bigger problems," she said. However, not all are on board with Ramaphosa's dialogue initiative. The uMkhonto weSizwe Party has rejected the dialogue as an "elitist farce," saying it is a "staged theatre for the political elite". In a statement its spokesperson, Nhlamulo Ndhlela, asked why there were no ordinary South Africans, such as shack dwellers, represented? 'The so-called Eminent Persons Group, handpicked by the very same ruling class responsible for mass unemployment, deepening poverty, collapsing infrastructure and the ongoing betrayal of the Freedom Charter, is a mockery of the suffering endured daily by millions of destitute and despondent South African,' Ndhlela wrote. The EFF has also expressed skepticism, questioning the government's motives and the selection process for the Eminent Persons Group. "The challenges Ramaphosa's National Dialogue seek to address are not a product of triumph of human sacrifice against evil, which require collective national reconstruction, but are a product of man-made destruction and corruption of which he and the party he leads have been at the centre of," the EFF said in a statement. The DA's national spokesperson, Willie Aucamp, welcomed the National Dialogue saying his party would embrace the opportunity. 'I think it's high time that we as a nation get together and discuss collectively what we see as a road forward for this country,' he said. Build One South Africa (BOSA) described the announcement as a positive and necessary step forward for the country at a time of great political uncertainty, public anxiety, and economic malaise. The GOOD Party's general secretary Brett Herron said it was long overdue as the wait had been frustrating.
The Citizen
38 minutes ago
- The Citizen
‘Bring all to dialogue': Experts insist national dialogue must be people-driven
Political analysts stress the need for land restitution and broad participation to ensure a meaningful and effective national dialogue. Experts say the envisaged national dialogue must not be a top-down process, but people-driven and discuss contentious issues like land and racial polarisation. But more importantly, said one expert, the dialogue required full commitment from various actors to find a collective solution to the country's myriad problems. Political analyst and scholar Dominic Maphaka from North-West University said the dialogue was necessary to unite the diverse and divided country. National dialogue necessary to unite country He said, as outlined by President Cyril Ramaphosa, stakeholders, including business, labour, civil society, communities, youth and people with disabilities, should form part of the dialogue to chart the way forward. 'But the dialogue will require a commitment from various actors to form part of a collective solution to the myriad problems faced by the country,' Maphaka said. ALSO READ: Thandiswa Mazwai says she would've accepted invite to national dialogue had Ramaphosa sent it He alluded to the fact that, due to the vibrant civil society, nonstate actors were often at loggerheads with government and opposing its development policies. 'Despite having divergent ideologies, it is not far-fetched that South Africans share common problems in many areas. I therefore think that ideologies should not take precedence in the dialogue; instead, stakeholders should deliberate and find common policy solutions to address common policy problems,' Maphaka said. Ramaphosa yesterday said he would call a National Convention on 15 August, which would set the agenda for the National Dialogue. National Convention to set agenda A follow-up convention would be held early next year. He said the convention would be a representative gathering, bringing together government, political parties, civil society, business, labour, traditional leaders, religious leaders, cultural workers, sports organisations, women, youth and community voices. Some experts believed people and civil society, not government and political parties, should lead the planned dialogue process, including the convention. ALSO READ: Ramaphosa urges caution as floods claims lives in Eastern Cape Political analyst Lesiba Teffo said the national dialogue was not supposed to be driven by the state because that was where the seeds of its failure lay. 'It was contested from inception and some of the initiators are now in the periphery. A reasonable modality would be to start in the provinces whose reports would feed into the national convention. Otherwise, you are likely to end up with another voluminous, glossy and expensive National Development Plan 0.2 Vision 2040,' Teffo said. The need for an all-inclusive national dialogue was first proposed by former president Thabo Mbeki. Mbeki, assisted by Jacob Zuma, was the ANC's first chief negotiator at the pre-1994 Convention for a Democratic South Africa (Codesa) talks before they were replaced by Ramaphosa and Mohammed Valli Moosa. Need for national dialogue first proposed by Mbeki There seemed to be a common view that dialogue should involve various roleplayers – from civil society, to state, business, trade unions and political parties. It is understood that the struggle stalwarts' foundations were involved in consultations to kick off the process, while Nedlac was identified to play a role as one of the facilitators due to its composite nature with business, trade unions, community and government. ALSO READ: 'A meaningless publicity stunt by a limping president': EFF slams Ramaphosa's national dialogue call Political and heritage analyst George Tsibani, who supports the idea of a national dialogue, said such a gathering should address the question of land in its proper perspective. He said democratic South Africa was a result of a negotiated settlement that was underpinned by Sunset Clauses that were a compromise and did not address the land question. 'If we pretend that there was no compromise, it would take the focus away from the land issue. The land redistribution and restitution must form the cornerstone of national dialogue,' Tsibani said. Previous Codesa process failed The previous Codesa process failed to address many issues due to the Sunset Clause that allowed for the continuation of white control of the state. 'So Codesa 2 must address the land issue in its totality, meaning there must be a deliberate restitution of land for the people who lost their land during the colonial and slavery periods,' Tsibani said. NOW READ: Ramaphosa, Chief Justice mourn passing of Judge Temba Sangoni
The Herald
40 minutes ago
- The Herald
Higher education minister keeps up stonewalling on 'SETA panel'
Higher education and training minister Nobuhle Nkabane continues to dig in her heels over the submission to parliament of the names of the 'independent selection panel' she relied on to make controversial appointments to SETA boards last month. Nkabane had until the close of business on Wednesday to submit records and minutes of the meeting of the 'independent panel' that she says advised on the appointments of the chairpersons of Sector Education and Training Authorities that she was last month ordered to reverse by the presidency. But at the eleventh-hour on Wednesday, it emerged that Nkabane wrote a letter dated June 10 to Tebego Letsie, an ANC MP who chairs the portfolio committee on higher education, asking that the June 10 deadline be extended by a further 20 days, to June 20. The higher education committee had given her the deadline of June 11 last week after she refused to disclose the names and full details of her 'independent panel' at a heated meeting, with Nkabane citing the Protection of Personal Information Act. Nkabane landed in hot water several weeks ago after it emerged that she had appointed controversial and politically connected people to chair the boards of the SETAs. Among them were Buyambo Mantashe, the son of minerals minister Gwede Mantashe who was once deputised by Nkabane in that portfolio. Also on the controversial list were former KZN premier Nomusa Ncube-Dube, former KZN MEC Mike Mabuyakhulu and Johannesburg MMC Loyiso Masuku. The move has pitted Nkabane against President Cyril Ramaphosa, who first ordered her to withdraw the names and most recently also asked her to submit a report to him on the matter. Sources in the higher echelons are adamant that Nkabane's stonewalling on this issue is slowly catching up with her and she will soon run out of options, with some casting doubt on the existence of the 'independent selection panel'. In her letter to Letsie, which has since been shared with all members of the higher education committee, she placed on 'record and confirm my full intention to comply with the portfolio committee's request'. Again citing the POPIA and the Promotion of Access to Information Act, Nkabane said she needed more time to ensure that the information she was preparing to send to parliament would be disclosed in a lawful manner. She told her oversight committee that she had been 'assured that I am legally permitted to disclosed the panellists' details in a lawful manner'. 'For these reasons and in acknowledgment of the panellists' rights to privacy, I have written to each of the members of the selection and evaluation panel and advised them of my intention to comply with the portfolio committee's request. 'However, it remains unlikely that my engagements with them will be completed by the 11 June 2025 deadline. In the circumstances, and to allow the panel members an opportunity to respond to my letter or exercise whatever right they may have, I request an extension of the deadline to 30 June 2025.' The higher education committee was expected to discuss its response to Nkabane's deadline request in the coming days.
