
SA politicians also weaponise migration
A moment to reflect: The US is politicising the issue of asylum, but in South Africa some populist politicians do the same. Photo: Delwyn Verasamy
Headlines in recent weeks have been dominated by the meeting between President Cyril Ramaphosa and Donald Trump, after the US president granted asylum to white South African farmers.
Framed by Trump as a response to alleged land seizures and violence, the move has been widely criticised as a politically motivated gesture aimed at energising his conservative base ahead of the US mid-term elections. This culminated in a televised version of what Trump might conceive of as version two of
The Apprentice
in the Oval Office. Despite the ambush, the South African delegation
As much as Trump's reality-TV delusions persist, this moment presents an opportunity for introspection, given South Africa's own challenges with immigration. While the United States faces scrutiny for the politicisation of asylum, South African politicians have similarly weaponised migration to serve populist agendas. South Africa stands at the centre of intricate migration dynamics that continue to shape its socio-economic landscape, development trajectory, and national security concerns. As one of the continent's most industrialised economies, South Africa has long been a destination for migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees from across Africa.
In a bid to intensify efforts against illegal immigration, Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber recently launched
A substantial proportion of migrants cross the border without any documentation. The majority originate from Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Malawi, Lesotho and Nigeria. These migration flows were and are still driven by multiple push and pull factors, including economic hardship, civil unrest and environmental changes in migrants' home countries. As climate change, organised crime and extremist activity intensifies in some areas, internal displacement and cross-border migration into South Africa are expected to increase, further complicating the country's migration governance.
In an attempt to curb the influx, the South African government erected electric fences along its borders with Zimbabwe and Mozambique. This was inefficient; illegal migrants continue to enter illegally by damaging the fence. The establishment of the Border Management Authority (BMA) has augmented the fencing efforts. The BMA's mandate is to manage and secure South Africa's borders. This includes facilitating legitimate movement of people and goods while preventing and mitigating illegal activities at ports of entry and within the border law enforcement area. In the 2024–25 festive season, the
Despite the deployment of drones, surveillance equipment and improved patrols, South Africa's border security continues to be problematic. The BMA and the police have both acknowledged ongoing issues, including infrastructural decay and systemic corruption among border officials, which compromise the integrity of enforcement efforts.
The government has, since the democratic transition, enacted legislation intended to manage migration more effectively. The
There is no definitive method to accurately determine the number of undocumented migrants in South Africa. Estimates vary widely and are often politicised. This is not unique to South Africa — globally, countries struggle to account for their undocumented populations because of the clandestine nature of illegal migration. But the
The socio-economic and political costs of irregular migration are often cited by critics of the government's migration policies. Based on Professor Albert
Civil society and political parties continue to play an influential role in shaping public discourse on immigration. While ActionSA and the Patriotic Alliance have pushed for stricter immigration enforcement and border controls, the Democratic Alliance has generally supported regulated immigration tied to economic opportunity and legal compliance.
The Economic Freedom Fighters, on the other hand, have condemned mass deportations and raised concerns about the financial and humanitarian costs of hardline immigration policies. The government spent more than
Despite these problems, it is important to acknowledge the positive contributions that migrants make to South Africa's economy and society. Many fill critical labour shortages, create businesses and bring cultural diversity. Effective migration management should not only focus on enforcement but also on integration, inclusion and sustainable development. A balanced and humane migration policy must consider the structural drivers of mobility across the region, such as poverty, inequality, and conflict, while also upholding the rule of law and national security.
While South Africa's migration landscape is shaped by deep-rooted regional and global forces, it would be inaccurate to suggest that the country has consistently implemented evidence-based migration policies or applied them uniformly. Although frameworks such as the White Paper on International Migration (1999), the Refugees Act (1998), and the Immigration Act (2002) lay a strong legal foundation, their implementation has often been ad hoc, reactive and vulnerable to political influence. South Africa's adoption of a non-encampment model for refugees and asylum seekers, rooted in a rights-based approach aligned with the Constitution and international obligations, is commendable in principle. It allows refugees to live freely rather than being confined to camps. But this model also presents significant administrative and logistical problems, particularly in ensuring access to services, legal protections and regular documentation.
One clear example of these difficulties is the persistent dysfunction within the asylum system, where application backlogs and lengthy appeals processes have left thousands in prolonged legal uncertainty.
Another example is border management. Despite the creation of the BMA and increased investment in surveillance technologies, porous borders and corruption among officials undermine state efforts and contradict stated policy goals. To build a migration regime that is truly secure, fair and reflective of constitutional values, South Africa must commit to depoliticising migration governance, investing in institutional capacity and using reliable data to drive reform — rather than responding to public pressure or electoral cycles.
Leleti Maluleke is a peace and security researcher at Good Governance Africa.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Maverick
4 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
US asks Australia to increase defense spending to 3.5% of GDP
The defense chiefs also discussed security issues including accelerating U.S. defense capabilities in Australia, advancing defense industrial base cooperation and creating supply chain resilience, the Defense Department said in a statement. 'On defense spending, Secretary Hegseth conveyed that Australia should increase its defense spending to 3.5 percent of its GDP as soon as possible,' the statement said. The ministers' meeting on Friday on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue, Asia's premier security forum, is only the second between the security allies since U.S. President Donald Trump took office in January. Marles said after the meeting they did not discuss a specific percentage of GDP to raise Australian defense spending.


Daily Maverick
7 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
ANC succession battle — the pros and cons of the top candidates vying for Ramaphosa's job
While it is unclear who will take over from President Cyril Ramaphosa as leader of the ANC, their ability to win votes will be extremely important. It may be constructive to examine what five of the most likely candidates would bring to the electorate. As our politics becomes more competitive than ever before, the identity of the leader of each party has become more important. One of President Cyril Ramaphosa's great strengths when he became leader of the ANC was that he was more popular than the party. The ANC itself said that he played a major role in helping it win the 2019 election (this was hugely contested at the time, and the then secretary-general, Ace Magashule, was forced to publicly disavow his comment that Ramaphosa had not played an important role). Ramaphosa's deteriorating popularity among voters, partly due to his inaction against corruption, and the Phala Phala scandal, might well have played a role in the ANC's dramatic decline last year. This shows how important the vote-winning ability of a new ANC leader will be. While it is not clear who will contest the position at the ANC's electoral conference in 2027, there is plenty of well-informed speculation that candidates could include Deputy President Paul Mashatile, International Relations Minister Ronald Lamola, Police Minister Senzo Mchunu, Electricity and Energy Minister Kgosientsho Ramokgopa and the ANC secretary-general, Fikile Mbalula. Paul Mashatile There is little evidence that Mashatile has broad support among the electorate. His apparent inability to communicate a distinct message during his time as Deputy President suggests he is finding it difficult to create space in which to move. This could be a function of the position he holds. Deputy presidents are often subject to intense scrutiny, and people look for evidence of their ambition for the top job, which could be why he has not, so far, articulated a particular vision. Mashatile's public speeches in English are often stilted. His answers to parliamentary questions are, frankly, boring. He does not say anything new, and his delivery comes across as wooden. As a result of having no apparent message, the narrative around him is dominated by claims that he has benefited from fishy financial deals. He has failed to properly and publicly condemn the violence used by his security officers when they assaulted the occupants of a vehicle on the N1 highway. It is difficult to imagine him crafting a coherent message as the leader of the ANC. On the election trail he probably won't provide much help to the party. His position as Deputy President means he doesn't have responsibility for any particular portfolio. However, for the contenders Lamola, Ramokgopa and Mchunu, what happens on their watch reflects on their public images. Ronald Lamola The minister of international relations and cooperation is a high-profile position — but it is overshadowed by the President. In some instances, for example, SA's genocide case against Israel, Lamola has been able to take the lead. However, in the hardest and most high-profile issue, dealing with the Trump administration, Ramaphosa has taken over. What Lamola does have, almost uniquely in the ANC, is the ability to connect with younger voters. His age (41) makes him one of the youngest leaders in the party. He is relatively unscathed by the scandals that have surrounded so many people in the party. That said, if he were to undergo more scrutiny, he would have to answer questions about how his law firm failed to notice the massive corruption at the National Lotteries Commission, when it was tasked with investigating it. Kgosientsho Ramokgopa The public perception of Ramokgopa is entirely linked to load shedding. He is an excellent communicator and has ensured that he, the government and Eskom have controlled the narrative whenever load shedding is instituted. He is associated with the successes in dealing with load shedding — and also the failures. He will also appeal to voters who want a technocratic face for the ANC. He can give the impression to black professionals that he is one of them, that he speaks their language and can get things done. Sipho Mchunu Mchunu appeals to a slightly different constituency. Crucially for him and the ANC, he could win back voters in KwaZulu-Natal. This province voted for the ANC when former president Jacob Zuma was its leader, then appeared to move in the direction of the ANC and the IFP when Ramaphosa took over, only for large numbers to vote for Zuma's uMkhonto Wesizwe party in the last elections. Mchunu may well be able to develop a crucial constituency in this province for the ANC, where he was once its provincial secretary. Nationally, it would be a huge card in his favour if he were seen to be leading a successful effort to reduce violent crime. However, the problem of SA's crime is so large and is so intertwined with aspects of our politics that Mchunu is unlikely to be able to make much difference. Fikile Mbalula Mbalula, of course, is not in government. It is his position as secretary-general of the party that might give him the edge in any internal ANC race. In the past, the position of secretary-general has been shaped by the personality occupying it. Gwede Mantashe imbued the office with huge authority, while Kgalema Motlanthe had more of a quiet legitimacy. Lately, Mbalula has appeared to be trying to portray more of a sober appearance than in previous years. However, it is unlikely that voters have forgotten what happened when he was transport minister and how he was responsible for so many missteps. As previously pointed out, Mbalula has a history of running his mouth off. People are unlikely to have forgotten how he tweeted that he had 'Just landed in Ukraine', or that he had taken Prasa into administration with no legal authority to do so, or that he used such vulgar language when talking to taxi drivers that the SA Council of Churches was moved to to make a public comment. Or that he was found by a Public Protector to have received a paid holiday from a sporting goods chain while minister of sport. These are the consequences of his long history in the public eye. It is unlikely that he can change the way the public views him. While it would be entirely rational to assume that ANC delegates would have the 2029 elections in mind when they vote for the position of ANC leader, history shows that sometimes internal dynamics are more important. And the ANC appears to have done virtually nothing to win back votes since the polls last year. This suggests that the electability of candidates will not be the most important factor in the ANC's leadership election. DM


Daily Maverick
7 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Estonia showed that Leon Schreiber is the minister of good intentions
Daily Maverick was invited to Estonia as a guest of the minister of foreign affairs to attend the African Business Forum and 11th annual e-Governance Conference — and finally have a chat with Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber. Something Anastasiia Kapranova from the Ukraine delegation said when we spoke can't leave my mind: 'We had to shift from peacetime to wartime solutions, but having those technologies is not only about fighting the war, it's also about strengthening national resilience.' Resilience. That's a word Minister Leon Schreiber also uses — and it's what he says he's trying to build at Home Affairs. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads He's right to see the opportunity. Estonia — the country we're here to learn from — digitised out of necessity. After regaining independence in 1991, Estonia had nothing. No property, no institutions, no legacy bureaucracy. 'It was absolutely zero,' explains Taavi Linnamäe, founder of the technology consultancy Digital Nation (he was also an adviser to the former president). 'The average salary was about $30 per month.' But that vacuum allowed space for radical experimentation. In the 1990s, the average age of a minister in Estonia was under 30. The country's first ambassadors were in their twenties. This wasn't recklessness — it was strategic necessity. Faced with massive development gaps compared to its Scandinavian neighbours, Estonia realised it needed 'shortcuts' and had to 'run faster'. The young leadership understood they needed 'different kinds of thinking' and were willing to trust even if mistakes were made. The private sector drove much of the innovation, from e-banking to pushing the government toward digital IDs. Crucially, the privatisation process that sold media houses to foreign investors — primarily Scandinavians and Germans — established a strong, free and competitive media landscape vital for safeguarding against corruption. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads Age of enlightenment At lunch, I caught a memorable line at the tail end of a conversation between two delegates: 'Estonia is what happens when you let engineers rebuild a country.' Schreiber is inspired, and his vision is comprehensive: digital transformation as the 'clear apex priority' for Home Affairs, built on the foundation of digital ID work. The goal is to 'clean up and build the credibility of our databases and modernise those databases, make them more accessible, decentralised through things like smartphones and technology'. He's already pointing to 'shorter-term, smaller wins' — the trusted tour operator scheme, smart ID access for naturalised citizens, expanded services through bank integration, and courier delivery options. His aim to deliver an electronic travel authorisation system before the G20 meeting in November shows admirable urgency. He grasps the broader implications: 'Home Affairs is also the foundation of the financial system. When you open a bank account and you put your fingerprint there, it's Home Affairs that ultimately provides that data to verify who you are. And if that's not working and if that's not credible, your financial system is not credible. Your tax system is under threat.' advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads This understanding led to reinvigorating the relationship with the SA Revenue Service through a new memorandum of understanding that includes the Government Printing Works and Border Management Authority — a sensible move toward the interoperability Estonia achieved. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads Minding the tech gap Schreiber's intentions are admirable, but his grasp of the technological realities seems limited. Estonia's success wasn't just about political will — it was built on fundamental technical principles that took decades to perfect. As the Estonian experience shows, the key fundamentals were establishing digital IDs and ensuring data interoperability — 'the data move, not the people move,' explained Linnamäe. This led to the 'once only principle', where government institutions can ask citizens for the same data only once. They focused on adopting tried and tested technologies while ensuring the 'whole society is on board using the technology'. The gap between Schreiber's enthusiasm and technical understanding becomes apparent when compared to his Estonian counterpart. Estonia's minister of foreign affairs, Margus Tsahkna, gets it. I finally met him at the e-Governance Conference gala dinner. He is polished, structured and technically informed. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads 'Digitalisation is a powerful tool to curb corruption, strengthen democracy and increase trust,' he says. But it requires more than code. 'Effective reforms, legal frameworks, change management, inclusiveness — these must come together.' Methodical advancement Tsahkna speaks with the confidence of someone whose country has delivered on digital promises, and his approach was methodical. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads 'In order to efficiently implement digital technologies, it has to be together with change management, effective reforms, legal frameworks, capacity building and inclusiveness,' he says. Most tellingly, he understands the foundational requirement: 'When we talk about digitalisation, we cannot forget about cybersecurity. We need to integrate basic cybersecurity elements into all digitalisation projects already from the very start.' Next stop, reality check I'm in the car to the airport, reading headlines about hackers compromising Deloitte, Mediclinic and Adidas in South Africa. The uncomfortable truth is that South Africa already has many of the tools Estonia used. We have digital infrastructure, technical expertise, and existing systems. What we lack isn't technology — it's the political stability, institutional trust and systematic approach that allowed Estonia to build from its clean slate. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads South Africa's challenge is achieving similar transformation within existing constraints. Schreiber's focus on quick wins and measurable progress is smart politics, but the Estonian experience suggests the real work lies in the unglamorous fundamentals: data integrity, system interoperability, cybersecurity, and building public trust through consistent delivery — which is not our national strength. DM