The King’s Speech: Why It Has Foreigners in South Africa Worried
10 hours ago
By Khanyisile Ngcobo, Johannesburg
Source: AFP/Getty Images
In a much-anticipated address aimed at calming anti-migrant sentiments in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa’s Zulu king, Misuzulu kaZwelithini, sparked significant concern among foreigners by using a derogatory term for migrants. His remarks, intended to foster unity, instead fueled divisive rhetoric.
Key Highlights from the King’s Controversial Speech
– Context of the Speech: The king spoke at the historic site of the Battle of Isandlwana, where 20,000 Zulu warriors defeated a British force of 1,800 147 years ago. This victory is a source of pride for many Zulus, emphasizing a historical struggle against foreign domination.
– Derogatory Language: Referencing migrants, he used the term “kwerekwere,” implying that all foreigners must leave the country, regardless of their family ties to South Africans. He remarked, “We must now sit down and discuss this because even if my nephew’s father is a ‘kwerekwere’, the ‘kwerekwere’ must leave, only the child will remain.” His audience reportedly responded with laughter.
– Historical Ironies: Many have pointed out the irony of the king’s xenophobic comments, especially given his own mother’s origins in Eswatini and his wife being from the same kingdom.
– Long-standing Xenophobia: Xenophobia is not a new issue in South Africa. It has led to violence against migrants in the past. His comments echoed those of his late father, Goodwill Zwelithini, who previously urged migrants to “pack their belongings.” South Africa struggles with one of the highest unemployment rates globally, hovering around 33%, which fuels the belief among some that migrants are stealing jobs and benefits.
The Political Landscape and Xenophobic Movements
– Populist Political Responses: New opposition parties, such as the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK), led by former President Jacob Zuma, have embraced anti-migrant sentiments to galvanize support, calling for the expulsion of undocumented migrants.
– Rise of Vigilante Groups: Vigilante organizations, like Operation Dudula, demand the removal of foreigners, gaining notoriety for their aggressive tactics. Their recent campaign targeted a primary school in Durban, where protesters alleged that 90% of the students were children of migrants. The local education authorities refuted this, stating that only 37% of learners in the area are immigrants.
– Government Stance: Up until now, all children in South Africa, regardless of nationality, have the legal right to basic education.
– Notably, 253,618 foreign students are enrolled in public schools across the country, constituting 1.8% of the total student population.
Implications of the King’s Words
– Potential for Violence: Experts warn that the king’s remarks could encourage harmful actions among citizens. Dr. Vusumusi Sibanda, a human rights lawyer, noted that the king is a respected figure whose opinions might influence citizens to act violently against migrants.
– Condemnation from Experts: Lizette Lancaster from the Institute for Security Studies stated that the king’s comments exacerbate anti-migrant sentiment and should be condemned. Laws are in place to protect against incitement, but vigilance is needed to prevent escalation into violence.
Cultural and Identity Concerns
– Renaming KwaZulu-Natal: The king’s desire to remove “Natal” from KwaZulu-Natal is another controversial point of discussion. Advocating for the name change reflects a longing for Zulu nationalism—a sentiment that carries complex historical implications stemming from apartheid-era divisions.
– Multicultural Reality: Experts caution against viewing KwaZulu-Natal solely as a Zulu province. The region is multicultural, hosting diverse communities speaking 11 official languages.
Conclusion: The Broader Impact of the King’s Speech
King Misuzulu’s recent speech marks a troubling moment for the foreign community in South Africa, igniting fears of renewed xenophobia. His comments resonate within a wider context of political strife and economic hardship. While the king’s role is influential, the repercussions of his rhetoric may prolong the cycle of division, necessitating urgent dialogue and action to foster unity in a country rich in cultural diversity.