Reflecting on the July unrest in Phoenix: A call for reconciliation
Image: Zainul Dawood
The commemoration of the July 2021 unrest in Phoenix, on Saturday, is expected to be an opportunity to announce the reconciliation and conflict resolution projects, as well as other initiatives that will be launched with the communities afterwards.
The Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities (CRL Rights Commission) and the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) held the commemoration to serve as a symbolic gesture to promote peace, friendship, humanity, reconciliation, social cohesion, and solidarity between the members of the African and Indian communities in the surrounding areas.
The SAHRC National Investigative Hearing report into the July 2021 unrest in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal stated that the unrest was initially, and mainly branded and characterised by news reports of protests supporting former president Jacob Zuma, and their subsequent development into, and intertwining with the mass anarchy that ensued, characterised by burning warehouses and shops, a racialised tone of interpersonal violence began to emerge amid the narrative.
Images and footage of gruesome violence were shared on social media, particularly attached to the hashtags #KZNViolence, #phoenixmassacre, #EthnicMobilisation, and #IndiansMustFall.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
The SAHRC findings found Lapses in intelligence coordination and communication.
Inadequate preparedness and response of the National Security Council.
Insufficient security expertise and resource management.
Failure of joint security expertise and resource management.
Failure of joint security, intelligence, and operations bodies.
Absence of community engagement in case reporting and access to justice.
Lack of accountability and impunity within justice institutions.
Private Security Industry Regulation (PSiRA) findings: poor regulation and abuse of power.
Government accountability.
On June 29, 2021, the Constitutional Court found Zuma guilty of contempt of court. He was sentenced to undergo 15 months' imprisonment.
The mobilisation of protest actions and population of the #FreeZuma or #HandsOffZuma campaign on social media and other platforms occurred against this backdrop.
It was reported that 40,000 businesses and 50,000 informal traders were affected, with 150,000 jobs put at risk. The financial damage of the unrest was estimated at R50 billion, and approximately 353 lives were lost.
Before the event, Seelan Archary, Mount Edgecombe Arts and Culture Council chairperson, said that he hoped that lessons were learnt and people would not repeat this drama and tragedy that ensued during the unrest.
'Our society is intelligent enough to know the cause of this particular unrest, where ordinary citizens were caught in the middle. People came out in their numbers to protect their properties. However, opportunists and mischief makers did something criminal in nature. When the rule of law is applied, justice must be fair, just, and swift. We sympathise and send condolences to those who lost their family members in this incident,' Archary said.
He appealed for calm, peace, and brotherhood, and further added that people had lived peacefully together all these years.
'We cannot let this tear up as a part. The government must also focus on developing the areas around Phoenix, like Inanda, so that those residents cannot say Phoenix is better off and has everything,' he said.
Azad Seedat, community leader and member of the South African Communist Party (SACP), said we must look beyond racism, adding that both Indians and Africans lived alongside one another for decades and should not let political agendas get between them and sow racial division.
zainul.dawood@inl.co.za
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Can SA forge a new consensus at G20 summit?
For the second time this year, the world's most powerful finance ministers have gathered in South Africa, this time at the lush resort of Zimbali north of Durban. But one minister will once again be conspicuous by his absence: that from the US. Scott Bessent, the mercurial US Treasury Secretary, has once again skipped the G20, choosing instead to send Michael Kaplan, the acting undersecretary for international affairs at the US Treasury. It all started when Secretary of State Marco Rubio refused to participate due to the host's vision of this year's G20 presidency being about 'Solidarity, Equality and Sustainability' — principles the current US administration theatrically rejects. In one sense, the timing of this South African presidency of the G20 could not be worse. Faced with the anti-globalist, protectionist bent of the US, what is usually a processional opportunity for showcasing a nation's soft power and producing vacuous missives about global cooperation has become a near impossible job of managing diplomatic fallout. As the first country from Africa to host the G20, South Africa had hoped to push issues vital for the very developing nations that stand to lose the most from the US president's trade war. With US aid budgets cut to virtual non-existence, and with tariffs about to decimate the export industries that, until now, had been the only hope for small African developing countries to build some semblance of a manufacturing sector, South Africa now finds itself managing the wreckage of international consensus. The G20 is a relatively new arrival to the international global system of forums and talk shops. Established as a response to the global financial crisis in 2008, the whole point was for countries like the US, the UK and the EU to include the faster growing nations of the Global South, which were becoming increasingly critical to the global economy. That promise now looks increasingly hollow. US vs the world: SA salvages G20 How naïve and quaint that looks, from the perspective of the realpolitik of 2025. In addition to Trump's threat of crippling levies on key trading partners from 1 August 2025, the US president has taken aim at the BRICS bloc of emerging economies — which includes host nation South Africa — threatening an extra 10% tariff for 'anti-American' policies. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, following the BRICS summit in Rio last week, was the first of the group to hit back. 'The president of the US must recognise that multiple centres of power now define the global landscape,' he said. Ramaphosa is still trying to convince Trump to attend a G20 leaders' summit in Johannesburg in November, where he is due to hand over the presidency of the group to the US. But hopes that Trump will support any of South Africa's G20 initiatives have largely been extinguished. Under fire from corruption scandals at home, Ramaphosa's efforts are increasingly looking to be in vain. The G20 international outreach also follows a highly publicised Oval Office dressing-down, where Trump repeated false claims about a so-called genocide against white South African farmers. Still, despite Washington's aggressions, South Africa has no option but to press ahead with this week's meetings, which culminate on Thursday and Friday with sessions led by finance ministers and central bank governors. South African Reserve Bank governor Lesetja Kganyago and Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana will, at least, be in the limelight as opposed to the embattled president. The EU is now in the firing line It is not only developing countries that have been targeted by Trump. On Saturday, the EU received a typically condescending letter from Trump, threatening blanket tariffs on European goods. In a message that appeared to be copied and pasted from the one sent to South Africa and countless other recipients, Trump invited the EU to 'participate in the extraordinary Economy of the United States, the Number One Market in the World', while warning of sweeping new levies. His parting line, as ever: 'Thank you for your attention to this matter!' The proposed 30% tariff rate, together with existing sectoral duties and an expected levy on critical goods, would take the increase in the US effective tariff rate on the EU to a brutal 26%. According to estimates from Goldman Sachs, if implemented and sustained, it would lower euro area GDP by 1.2% by the end of 2026. The US is the largest trade partner of the EU, with the sum of exports from the EU totalling $815-billion in 2024. The EU understands that such a trade restriction with its biggest partner is nothing short of an existential challenge. In response, the bloc is actively seeking to diversify its trade ties. Besides Canada and Japan, the bloc is now fast-tracking agreements with India and other Asia-Pacific nations. Speaking from Beijing, EU competition chief Teresa Ribera confirmed that discussions with India are expected to conclude by year's end. 'We need to explore how far, how deep we can go in the Pacific area with other countries.' Africa will undoubtedly be next. Can South Africa lead a G19 without the US? Where the tariff war ends is anyone's guess. But with the US — the architect of the post-war global order — now acting as a destabilising force, the need for alternative alliances and renewed multilateralism between other parties has never been clearer. Already, the US absence has drawn others closer. After Rubio's withdrawal, the EU publicly endorsed South Africa's G20 agenda. Within weeks, the EU and South Africa held their first summit since 2018, marking a thaw in previously strained relations. Strangely then this year's G20 could prove to be its most consequential since its inception. Will it become the moment when the rest of the world reaffirms a commitment to open markets, trade and mutually beneficial cooperation? Or will it cement the beginning of the end for the rules-based global economy? In that sense therefore the timing of South Africa's G20 presidency could not be better. As a nation that once symbolised the post-Cold War liberal ideals of inclusion and equality, it is perhaps fitting that it should fall to us to rally the Global South and like-minded powers toward a new consensus. But the challenge is enormous. Can Ramaphosa — wounded politically and isolated diplomatically — rise to the occasion? Can South Africa lead a meaningful G19 in the absence of the US? To quote Tennyson's Ulysses, while 'death closes all, some work of noble note may yet be done'. The South African president may identify with the itinerant Greek after his own interminable political odyssey. Given his patchy track record in office, the answer may not be encouraging. And yet, history never asks whether leaders are ready. It simply presents the moment. Ramaphosa now faces his. DM
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Road ahead is steep but not insurmountable– SA's G20 can still deliver for debt and development
The global economy has slowed and become less supportive of developing countries. African countries may be forced to resort to international capital markets to fill the gap in their development financing needs. It is crunch time for South Africa to begin delivering on its ambitious G20 development finance agenda. The third of the four meetings this year of G20 finance ministers and central bank governors takes place on 17 and 18 July. A communiqué is expected to be issued, focusing on the development finance issues that South Africa prioritised at the beginning of its G20 presidency. The agenda includes politically and economically complicated topics such as sovereign debt and the cost of capital and climate finance, which are issues that are high on the global policy agenda. At the recent African Union Conference on Debt held in Togo in May, African leaders, among other matters, called for the reform of the G20 common framework and for a 'new debt doctrine'. The Compromiso de Sevilla, the outcome document from the recently concluded UN-sponsored Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4), also acknowledged the need for a more development-oriented debt architecture. Unfortunately, the international economic environment in which South Africa needs to deliver on this agenda has become significantly more complex and challenging. The global economy has slowed and become less supportive of developing countries. The World Bank recently reduced its estimate of global growth from about 2.8% to 2.3% and forecast that average global growth in the first seven years of the 2020s would be the slowest of any decade since the 1960s. Its chief economist declared that ' outside of Asia, the developing world is becoming a development-free zone '. Some G20 participating states have become less supportive of developing countries. For example, the US and the UK, among other countries, have significantly cut their official development assistance, with the US going as far as eliminating USAid, its main aid agency. US President Donald Trump's administration also pulled out of FfD4 and has given mixed signals on his participation in the G20 summit in November. He has even opposed the theme for South Africa's G20 presidency – Solidarity, Equality, Sustainability. These developments aggravate Africa's development challenges. Currently, Africa has an annual financing gap of around $900-billion to $1.3-trillion for Agenda 2063 and the SDGs. While domestic resources should be the major source of each country's financing for these needs, they are unlikely to be enough in the short to medium term. Unfortunately, the amount of funding from official sources such as donor governments and the multilateral development banks (MDBs) will not be sufficient to plug this hole. Therefore, African countries may be forced to resort to international capital markets to fill the gap in their development financing needs. The financing these markets offer is expensive, involves exchange rate risks and is pro-cyclical. In addition, evidence suggests that African countries are charged much higher interest rates than countries in other regions with comparable credit ratings. The resulting 'African premium' costs African countries $74.5-billion per year in excess interest payments, according to a UNDP report. The reasons for this premium are still up for debate. It has been attributed to credit rating bias, lack of quality data, a lack of sound fiscal and public finance management by African governments, and to the fact that many African countries are new to international markets, having only started issuing international bonds between 2007 and 2020. Meanwhile, as African countries continue to deal with these tough conditions on the international capital markets, efforts to address their existing debt burden remain painfully slow. The current approach to sovereign debt restructuring uses the common framework developed by the G20 to deal with the obligations to all official and commercial creditors of low-income countries. Unfortunately, this framework has failed to deliver adequate outcomes for African countries. South Africa's G20 presidency provides the next opportunity to address this challenge. As South Africa commences the last half of its G20 Presidency, we suggest that it prioritise the following issues on the development finance agenda: South Africa must champion the Borrowers' Forum This forum, promoted in the outcome document from FfD4, would facilitate the exchange of ideas, information and peer learning among sovereign borrowers. If supported by a permanent secretariat, as proposed in the Report of the UNSG's Expert Group on Debt, the forum could become the repository of information about sovereign borrowing and the source of technical support and capacity building for debtor countries. South Africa should advocate for the G20 to actively support the creation of the forum as soon as possible. It should also work with the African Union and African G20 guest countries to take the first actions to operationalise a regional borrowers forum in Africa. Improving sovereign debt architecture South Africa, as co-chair of the Global Sovereign Debt Roundtable (GSDR), must use it as a tool to promote the improvement of the sovereign debt architecture. The FfD4 Compromiso calls for the creation of a working group to propose a set of principles for responsible sovereign borrowing and lending that can make sovereign debt transactions and the international debt architecture more effective, efficient and more supportive of optimal development outcomes. The GSDR was established as an informal G20-linked forum, chaired by the G20 presidency, the IMF and the World Bank. It brings together a diverse array of creditors, debtors and other stakeholders to discuss how to make the sovereign debt process work better for all stakeholders. South Africa should convene a meeting of the GSDR to begin discussing the framework for promoting responsible sovereign borrowing and lending, including the planning and management of such transactions and their outcomes. Panel of technical experts South Africa must advocate for the G20 to appoint a panel of technical experts to study the barriers to affordable, adequate and predictable flows of development finance to African sovereigns and make recommendations on what the G20 can do to remedy this situation. This can complement the work of the African Experts Panel, which has a broader mandate of 'exploring and defining strategies that advance Africa's collective developmental interests'. South Africa's G20 presidency should not be the end of this year's advocacy for a new and more developmentally responsible debt architecture. These actions should also be promoted at the World Social Summit and the COP30 in Brazil. DM Daniel D Bradlow is a part-time G20 Senior Fellow at the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA), where his research focuses on the finance track of the G20 and related Think20 issues.
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
SA's critical minerals strategy a shopping list to revive existing carbon-intensive mining economy
South Africa's recently released critical minerals and metals strategy continues to prop up carbon-intensive processing and manufacturing activities, while giving a nod to greener minerals and green hydrogen as future endeavours. Following successive pronouncements by South African Mineral and Petroleum Resources Minister Gwede Mantashe on the need to leverage the country's critical minerals, the ministry recently published its national Critical Minerals and Metals Strategy. Mantashe has been vocal in criticising developed countries for defining 'critical minerals' to serve their own interests, and in February this year, threatened to withhold access to these minerals from the US if it limited funding. At the time, he called on African countries to embrace their strategic mineral advantage and take charge of growing demand. The South African critical minerals strategy seeks to do just that, by charting a roadmap that leverages these resources to the nation's benefit, while simultaneously driving growth, job creation and industrial development. Its stated intention is to focus on the entire value chain, with a view to growing the country's existing industrial base while improving value addition. The draft is sensitive to geopolitical tensions and trade restrictions and positions itself in that context, identifying the need to anchor the country as a supplier of critical minerals globally in the context of growing demand for certain minerals. Similar to many African countries, South Africa's value chains are primarily upstream, with a focus on extraction and export and little beneficiation and value addition. Like its neighbours, for example, Zimbabwe and Namibia, the country wants to take steps to localise beneficiation and processing. Carbon-intensive processing However, the strategy is less focused on leveraging minerals for the low-carbon transition and related green technologies, unlike the recently finalised African Union Green Mineral Strategy. Instead, it continues to prop up existing carbon-intensive processing and manufacturing activities, while giving a nod to the need to pursue greener minerals and green hydrogen as future endeavours. Noting the difference between a 'green mineral' and 'critical mineral' strategy, the one published by the ministry is very much the latter. This follows a unilateral view of what counts as a 'critical mineral', which Mantashe has previously stressed should be something that a country decides for itself. In the words of the strategy, critical minerals are those which are 'critical for South Africa'. This is seen to include 'minerals that are strategically important for economic growth, industrial development, job creation and national security', measured through economic potential, supply risks and risk of supply disruptions. In the strategy, this translates into a list of 21 minerals and metals (some of which are not strictly speaking either), which fall on a continuum of 'highly' critical to 'moderately' critical to the country. Sitting in the highly critical list are coal and iron ore, both extremely carbon-intensive input materials, grouped with minerals and metals well known for their green transition value, such as chrome and platinum. Lower on the list are gold, copper and aluminium, coupled with rare earth metals, cobalt, and uranium. This classification clearly illustrates that although there are differing interpretations of what a 'critical mineral' is, the South African approach is by no means linked to forward-looking technologies or a low-carbon transition. Coal Instead, it presents as a lengthy shopping list of measures across a broad spectrum of mined resources to revive South Africa's existing minerals economy, including sectors that have fared poorly in recent times, such as gold. South Africa is not alone in designating coal a critical 'mineral'. US President Donald Trump earlier this year issued the 'Reinvigorating America's Beautiful Clean Coal Industry' executive order. This designation of coal is contrary to the forward-looking and globally driven critical minerals environment, which the strategy itself acknowledges is primarily driven by the renewable energy transition, geopolitical dynamics, technological advancements and international trade policies and standards. The latter would include the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) that penalises carbon-intensive goods and services. The strategy also seeks to position the country as a regional hub for critical minerals' processing and beneficiation, as well as battery manufacturing, and underscores the importance of working with other countries in the region. Regional coordination However, notwithstanding comments around the difficulties of nationalism and unilateral action, it does not meaningfully address how South Africa intends to work with its neighbouring partners to jointly benefit from their respective strategic advantages and what role these other countries might play. This is something the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCTA) could play a role in facilitating and supplementing, as it provides for the progressive elimination of tariffs on mining-related goods and services between members. The strategy then pans to other sectors such as hydrogen and fuel cell manufacturing, revitalising the ferro-alloys sector through various incentives and stimulus measures, trade measures to support the local steel industry, a handful of measures to stimulate electric vehicle manufacturing, and steps to develop a downstream industry for titanium. The measures are detailed and considered and build on or echo previous initiatives that have sought to revitalise these aspects of the economy. For example, the focus on batteries and fuel cells to support new energy vehicles (e-mobility) in the Just Energy Transition Implementation Plan and Electric Vehicle White Paper. The basics To work, however, South Africa will first need to ensure it gets the basics right. Minerals and metals have little value if they can't get to the ports or national processing facilities; if there is no power to process or utilise them; or if the ports are non-functional or congested. This has been a challenge over the past decade that has brought the South African mining sector to its knees. The strategy acknowledges this, but offers little more than reiterating the need to deepen existing efforts (Operation Vulindlela) to support port, energy and rail infrastructure and to create special zones, support initiatives, infrastructure finance and energy conservation measures. The strategy is laudable for the many measures and interventions it seeks to introduce or build on to further grow the sector, but given the breadth of its scope, and the legacy challenges that beset the industry, it will need a comprehensive implementation plan with sufficient financial backing and political will to get it off the ground. This may be the hardest part of all. Similarly, if it is to overcome the nationalistic trade tendencies and geopolitical tensions to become the regional hub it promotes, it will need to develop a much clearer strategy with neighbouring countries so that each can profit from their relative advantages. DM Olivia Rumble is a consultant to Enzi Ijayo Africa Initiative and a director at Climate Legal. Leezola Zongwe is a researcher at Enzi Ijayo, specialising in critical minerals and energy policy.
