Migration tests SA's standing in Africa

The diplomatic fallout from South Africa’s migration tensions escalated this week after The Presidency accused Ghana of helping to drive a campaign portraying Pretoria as isolated on the continent.

Presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) had raised South Africa’s concerns directly with Ghana’s High Commissioner, accusing Ghanaian officials of spreading misinformation about developments in South Africa.

The unusually direct criticism follows weeks of tensions over anti-immigration mobilisation, Ghana’s assistance to some of its nationals who wished to return home, disputed reports that President Cyril Ramaphosa had been rebuffed after seeking a state visit to Accra and growing concern within government that events inside South Africa could affect the country’s diplomatic standing and commercial interests elsewhere in Africa.

Speaking at the Union Buildings on Wednesday, Magwenya said the Presidency had observed "a sustained campaign" over the past two months aimed at portraying South Africa as "a pariah state".

"More concerning has been the peddling of false information by a diplomatic representative of a country that has become central to this campaign," he said.

Although Magwenya did not identify the country in his prepared remarks, he was explicit when questioned by journalists.

"We’ve taken note of the campaign, primarily driven by Ghana and, to a lesser extent, Nigeria," he said.

"That campaign is false."

Asked whether Ghana was spreading false information about South Africa, Magwenya replied: "The answer is yes." He said Dirco had raised South Africa’s concerns directly with Ghana’s High Commissioner and urged Ghanaian authorities to verify information with South African officials before issuing public statements.

Political analyst Donovan Williams said the Presidency’s concerns should be understood less as an allegation of a coordinated campaign than as an acknowledgement that diplomacy is often shaped by perception rather than formal action.

"I think evidence is too strong a word," he said when asked whether there was proof of a coordinated campaign.

"What is true... is that a lot of isolation or negative perceptions, is driven by perceptions."

Williams said governments did not have to formally coordinate their actions for South Africa to encounter growing diplomatic pressure if negative perceptions became entrenched across the continent.

The dispute intensified earlier this month after reports that Ramaphosa had sought a state visit to Ghana and had been rebuffed over South Africa’s handling of migration.

The Presidency denied that any such visit had been requested.

Diplomatic correspondence previously obtained by the Mail & Guardian showed that the exchanges related to postponing the South Africa-Ghana Binational Commission, which had been due to take place in Accra. Neither diplomatic note referred to a state visit or cited xenophobia as the reason for the postponement.

Ghana is one of South Africa’s most important diplomatic and commercial partners in West Africa, making the Presidency’s public criticism unusual.

Emmanuel Dogbevi, editor of Business Day Ghana, said the current tensions should not be mistaken for a breakdown in official relations between the two countries.

"I do not think the current tensions are any indication of broken official relations between the two countries," he told the M&G.

Dogbevi also rejected the Presidency’s suggestion that Ghanaian officials were orchestrating a campaign against South Africa.

"While I do not speak for the Ghana government, I’ll say it is reckless for anyone to think that there is an organised campaign by Ghanaian officials against South Africa."

He said Ghana’s decision to assist some of its citizens to return home during the recent tensions had been motivated by concern for their safety.

"It did not start a campaign to smear South Africa."

Dogbevi nevertheless said many Ghanaians believed the South African government had not done enough to halt attacks on other African nationals.

"There is a belief among many Ghanaians concerned about the xenophobic and Afrophobic attacks against other African nationals that the South African government is not doing enough to halt the violent acts by some of its citizens."

He said videos circulating on social media had shaped perceptions of South Africa.

Although he recently travelled to Cape Town without incident, he said it was the first time he had visited the country with a sense of unease.

"While I did not encounter any hostility while in Cape Town, I moved around with a considerable amount of uneasiness."

At the same time, Dogbevi said there was no Ghanaian government policy directed at South African businesses despite calls by some individuals for stronger action.

Magwenya argued that criticism over migration was being used to create the impression that South Africa was losing diplomatic influence despite continued engagement with African leaders and international investors.

"South Africa is not isolated. On the contrary, South Africa remains firmly engaged with our African continent and the rest of the world," he said.

He pointed to Ramaphosa’s recent engagements with French President Emmanuel Macron, African leaders, UNESCO, Google and Amazon, as well as Toyota’s R10.4 billion investment in local vehicle production, as evidence that South Africa remained an attractive investment destination.

The government also highlighted South Africa’s role in peace initiatives in South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo and confirmed that Ramaphosa’s special envoys would soon begin engaging African capitals as part of the government’s diplomatic outreach on migration.

The dispute also has economic implications. According to South Africa’s acting High Commissioner to Ghana, bilateral trade between the two countries reached The diplomatic fallout from South Africa’s migration tensions escalated this week after The Presidency accused Ghana of helping to drive a campaign portraying Pretoria as isolated on the continent.

Presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) had raised South Africa’s concerns directly with Ghana’s High Commissioner, accusing Ghanaian officials of spreading misinformation about developments in South Africa.

The unusually direct criticism follows weeks of tensions over anti-immigration mobilisation, Ghana’s assistance to some of its nationals who wished to return home, disputed reports that President Cyril Ramaphosa had been rebuffed after seeking a state visit to Accra and growing concern within government that events inside South Africa could affect the country’s diplomatic standing and commercial interests elsewhere in Africa.

Speaking at the Union Buildings on Wednesday, Magwenya said the Presidency had observed "a sustained campaign" over the past two months aimed at portraying South Africa as "a pariah state".

"More concerning has been the peddling of false information by a diplomatic representative of a country that has become central to this campaign," he said.

Although Magwenya did not identify the country in his prepared remarks, he was explicit when questioned by journalists.

"We’ve taken note of the campaign, primarily driven by Ghana and, to a lesser extent, Nigeria," he said.

"That campaign is false."

Asked whether Ghana was spreading false information about South Africa, Magwenya replied: "The answer is yes." He said Dirco had raised South Africa’s concerns directly with Ghana’s High Commissioner and urged Ghanaian authorities to verify information with South African officials before issuing public statements.

Political analyst Donovan Williams said the Presidency’s concerns should be understood less as an allegation of a coordinated campaign than as an acknowledgement that diplomacy is often shaped by perception rather than formal action.

"I think evidence is too strong a word," he said when asked whether there was proof of a coordinated campaign.

"What is true... is that a lot of isolation or negative perceptions, is driven by perceptions."

Williams said governments did not have to formally coordinate their actions for South Africa to encounter growing diplomatic pressure if negative perceptions became entrenched across the continent.

The dispute intensified earlier this month after reports that Ramaphosa had sought a state visit to Ghana and had been rebuffed over South Africa’s handling of migration.

The Presidency denied that any such visit had been requested.

Diplomatic correspondence previously obtained by the Mail & Guardian showed that the exchanges related to postponing the South Africa-Ghana Binational Commission, which had been due to take place in Accra. Neither diplomatic note referred to a state visit or cited xenophobia as the reason for the postponement.

Ghana is one of South Africa’s most important diplomatic and commercial partners in West Africa, making the Presidency’s public criticism unusual.

Emmanuel Dogbevi, editor of Business Day Ghana, said the current tensions should not be mistaken for a breakdown in official relations between the two countries.

"I do not think the current tensions are any indication of broken official relations between the two countries," he told the M&G.

Dogbevi also rejected the Presidency’s suggestion that Ghanaian officials were orchestrating a campaign against South Africa.

"While I do not speak for the Ghana government, I’ll say it is reckless for anyone to think that there is an organised campaign by Ghanaian officials against South Africa."

He said Ghana’s decision to assist some of its citizens to return home during the recent tensions had been motivated by concern for their safety.

"It did not start a campaign to smear South Africa."

Dogbevi nevertheless said many Ghanaians believed the South African government had not done enough to halt attacks on other African nationals.

"There is a belief among many Ghanaians concerned about the xenophobic and Afrophobic attacks against other African nationals that the South African government is not doing enough to halt the violent acts by some of its citizens."

He said videos circulating on social media had shaped perceptions of South Africa.

Although he recently travelled to Cape Town without incident, he said it was the first time he had visited the country with a sense of unease.

"While I did not encounter any hostility while in Cape Town, I moved around with a considerable amount of uneasiness."

At the same time, Dogbevi said there was no Ghanaian government policy directed at South African businesses despite calls by some individuals for stronger action.

Magwenya argued that criticism over migration was being used to create the impression that South Africa was losing diplomatic influence despite continued engagement with African leaders and international investors.

"South Africa is not isolated. On the contrary, South Africa remains firmly engaged with our African continent and the rest of the world," he said.

He pointed to Ramaphosa’s recent engagements with French President Emmanuel Macron, African leaders, UNESCO, Google and Amazon, as well as Toyota’s R10.4 billion investment in local vehicle production, as evidence that South Africa remained an attractive investment destination.

The government also highlighted South Africa’s role in peace initiatives in South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo and confirmed that Ramaphosa’s special envoys would soon begin engaging African capitals as part of the government’s diplomatic outreach on migration.

The dispute also has economic implications. According to South Africa’s acting High Commissioner to Ghana, bilateral trade between the two countries reached US$1 billion in 2024. South African investors have also undertaken more than 170 projects in Ghana worth about US$1.4 billion over the past decade, with investments spanning telecommunications, banking, mining and retail.

Magwenya dismissed suggestions that action against South African companies would benefit countries where they operate. "No one is doing anyone a favour here. It’s a mutually beneficial trade relationship."

The Presidency also used Wednesday’s briefing to reaffirm South Africa’s case against Israel before the International Court of Justice following the release of a United Nations Commission of Inquiry report into violations against Palestinian children.

The report, released on 23 June, reaffirmed the Commission of Inquiry’s previous finding that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza and concluded that Palestinian children had suffered severe physical and psychological harm through bombardments, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, restrictions on humanitarian assistance and the denial of essential healthcare, food and water.

Magwenya said the findings reinforced the concerns South Africa had raised when it instituted proceedings against Israel at the International Court of Justice in December 2023.

He argued that the report demonstrated that the risks South Africa had identified before the court had materialised and said Pretoria would continue pursuing legal and diplomatic avenues in support of Palestinian self-determination.

Asked whether South Africa’s ICJ case had contributed to international pressure on Pretoria, Magwenya declined to draw a direct connection. He nevertheless said South Africa had anticipated reprisals after instituting proceedings against Israel.

"It is on record by some authorities in Israel that South Africa must be punished," he said.

Williams said Pretoria’s challenge now was to remain consistent in explaining both its migration policy and its broader foreign policy positions across the continent.

"South Africa needs to be consistent," he said. "Its diplomats have to be consistent with a level of resilience."

Magwenya dismissed suggestions that action against South African companies would benefit countries where they operate. "No one is doing anyone a favour here. It’s a mutually beneficial trade relationship."

The Presidency also used Wednesday’s briefing to reaffirm South Africa’s case against Israel before the International Court of Justice following the release of a United Nations Commission of Inquiry report into violations against Palestinian children.

The report, released on 23 June, reaffirmed the Commission of Inquiry’s previous finding that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza and concluded that Palestinian children had suffered severe physical and psychological harm through bombardments, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, restrictions on humanitarian assistance and the denial of essential healthcare, food and water.

Magwenya said the findings reinforced the concerns South Africa had raised when it instituted proceedings against Israel at the International Court of Justice in December 2023.

He argued that the report demonstrated that the risks South Africa had identified before the court had materialised and said Pretoria would continue pursuing legal and diplomatic avenues in support of Palestinian self-determination.

Asked whether South Africa’s ICJ case had contributed to international pressure on Pretoria, Magwenya declined to draw a direct connection. He nevertheless said South Africa had anticipated reprisals after instituting proceedings against Israel.

"It is on record by some authorities in Israel that South Africa must be punished," he said.

Williams said Pretoria’s challenge now was to remain consistent in explaining both its migration policy and its broader foreign policy positions across the continent.

"South Africa needs to be consistent," he said. "Its diplomats have to be consistent with a level of resilience."

He said resilience also required broader public support. “SouthAfricans themselves, as angry as they may be with the government on various matters, need to support South Africa’s foreign policy stance because a government with public backing is far more difficult to isolate.”