 |
| Framed Risisng Xenophobic and Afrophobic |
Nigeria has used the United Nations General Assembly’s adoption of a new political declaration against racism to deliver a pointed warning: African governments cannot credibly preach Pan-Africanism, continental integration, and shared destiny while tolerating violence and discrimination against fellow Africans living in their territories. The statement, delivered by Ambassador Bola Asaju in Nigeria’s national capacity, framed rising xenophobic and Afrophobic attacks as a direct threat to the historical bonds forged during the continent’s struggles against colonialism and apartheid.
The intervention came as the Assembly formally endorsed a political declaration marking the 25th anniversary of the 2001 Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. The text was adopted by a vote of 95 in favour, five against and 37 abstentions. It renews commitments to eliminate racial discrimination, acknowledges the enduring legacies of slavery, the transatlantic slave trade, colonialism and apartheid, and addresses contemporary challenges including racial profiling, hate speech, unequal access to justice, and discriminatory practices amplified by digital technologies.
RECOMMENDED ✒︎ Wike Ridicules Amaechi’s Regional Math and Sparse Cross River Crowd, Underscoring Deep Rivalry and Opposition Challenges Ahead of 2027
Asaju’s remarks went beyond ritual support for the declaration. Nigeria stressed that economic hardship, unemployment and social pressures can never justify violence, persecution or collective blame directed at people because of their nationality. Governments, the delegation insisted, bear a clear responsibility to protect everyone within their borders regardless of origin or immigration status, and must hold perpetrators of xenophobic violence accountable. The country called for stronger national legislation, improved regional cooperation, public education campaigns against xenophobia, and genuine efforts to tackle the socioeconomic conditions that demagogues exploit to turn migrants into scapegoats.
Historical Bonds Under Strain
The Nigerian position draws on a deep well of continental history. During the anti-apartheid struggle, Nigeria provided substantial material, diplomatic and moral support to the liberation movements in South Africa and elsewhere. That solidarity was rooted in a shared rejection of racial hierarchy and foreign domination. Nigeria’s argument is that those sacrifices should inspire greater unity, not reciprocal hostility once political freedom was achieved.
Yet the gap between rhetoric and reality has widened. Waves of violence targeting African migrants—particularly in South Africa—have recurred for years, often intensifying amid high unemployment, competition for scarce jobs and services, and political opportunism. In 2026 alone, the pattern has been stark: Ghana evacuated nearly 2,000 of its citizens from South Africa in a costly operation; Nigeria has repatriated hundreds of its nationals; Mozambicans and others have also sought to leave. Businesses owned by foreign Africans have been looted, individuals killed or intimidated, and communities forced into flight.
South African authorities have made arrests—hundreds in some recent crackdowns—but critics argue the response remains insufficient to deter future outbreaks or address root causes.
Nigeria has already elevated the issue at the African Union level. In August 2026, President Bola Tinubu, represented by Vice President Kashim Shettima at an extraordinary AU session in Luanda, formally requested that recurring xenophobic and Afrophobic attacks in South Africa be placed on the agenda of the AU Assembly’s 40th Ordinary Session in January 2027. The message acknowledged South Africa’s sovereign right to enforce immigration laws while insisting that violence against African nationals undermines the very foundations of continental solidarity and peaceful coexistence.
The Deeper Contradiction
This is more than a bilateral or even regional problem. It strikes at the heart of Africa’s integration project. The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and protocols on free movement of persons are built on the premise that Africans should be able to live, work and trade across borders with greater ease. When citizens of one African country face systematic hostility in another, those ambitions ring hollow. Asaju’s intervention essentially asked: How can African states demand a greater voice and permanent seats on the UN Security Council, or champion a multipolar world free of neocolonial patterns, while failing to protect the dignity of their own people on the continent?
Analysts point to structural drivers. High youth unemployment across much of Africa creates fertile ground for narratives that blame “outsiders” for scarce opportunities. Weak state capacity in enforcing the rule of law, porous borders, and the activities of informal vigilante groups compound the problem. Social media has amplified hate speech and misinformation, turning local grievances into continental flashpoints. At the same time, irregular migration and genuine security concerns around crime provide political cover for broader anti-migrant sentiment that often fails to distinguish between documented residents, entrepreneurs and those involved in criminal activity.
South Africa has consistently rejected the characterisation of the country as inherently xenophobic, arguing that the actions of individuals or fringe groups should not define the nation.
Officials note arrests and the government’s right—and duty—to manage immigration. Yet for governments whose citizens have been killed or driven out, such distinctions offer cold comfort. The language has evolved in some diplomatic circles: “Afrophobia” is increasingly used alongside “xenophobia” to underscore that the targets are overwhelmingly other Africans rather than migrants from further afield.
Beyond Declarations
Nigeria’s support for the new UN political declaration is consistent with its long-standing commitment to the Durban framework. The original 2001 document remains the most comprehensive global blueprint against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
The 25th-anniversary text seeks to move from rhetoric to action, calling for stronger national legislation, accountability, data collection, and attention to new forms of discrimination linked to technology. South Africa backed the declaration; several European Union members and others expressed reservations, particularly around language on neocolonialism and reparatory justice—tensions that have shadowed the Durban process since its inception.
Yet Nigeria’s core message was practical: international commitments mean little without tangible improvements in people’s lives. Protecting human dignity and reinforcing solidarity among Africans are presented not as sentimental ideals but as prerequisites for the continent’s integration and development aspirations.
The challenge is implementation. Strengthening legislation and law enforcement is necessary but insufficient. Governments must also address the underlying economic frustrations that make scapegoating attractive. Regional mechanisms—whether through the AU, regional economic communities, or bilateral channels—need clearer protocols for protecting migrants and ensuring swift accountability when violence erupts. Public education that emphasises shared African identity and the economic contributions of migrants can help counter toxic narratives. And the private sector, civil society and media have roles in refusing to amplify division.
Nigeria’s intervention at the UN was not an isolated diplomatic flourish. It forms part of a broader pattern of assertive African diplomacy that links historical memory, contemporary security and the unfinished project of continental unity. Whether that message translates into fewer attacks, stronger protections and genuine solidarity will depend less on the elegance of declarations than on the political will of governments to confront hostility within their own borders. For a continent still building the institutions of integration, the cost of failure is measured not only in lost lives and livelihoods, but in the erosion of the very idea of a common African future.
Samuel O. Sulaimon is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of Naijapiz. He covers News, Sports, Finance, Faiths, Education, Politics and Technology.
Post a Comment