Editorial | Moretele Times
Today’s March on March took place across parts of the country, including in Hammanskraal. Reports from our community and elsewhere indicate that the majority of demonstrations were peaceful, with citizens exercising their constitutional right to protest. That assessment was echoed nationally by the Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) on Migration, which confirmed that demonstrations on 30 June 2026 were largely peaceful and non-violent, notwithstanding isolated incidents. The government further expressed appreciation to those who protested responsibly within the bounds of the law.
Peaceful protest is not xenophobia. It is democracy in action.
At the same time, recent incidents involving attacks on foreign nationals have once again led to South Africa being labelled a xenophobic country. Let us state clearly that targeting anyone because of their nationality is wrong and unlawful. When individuals attack foreign nationals because they are foreign, that is an act of xenophobia. It is criminal conduct, and it must be dealt with as such.
But violent and criminal acts do not define a nation. Our communities in Hammanskraal and across South Africa are diverse and deeply interconnected with the rest of the continent. Families, businesses, churches and schools include people from many African countries. Our economy is tied to regional trade and labour mobility. Some South Africans live and work lawfully across the continent, just as some African nationals do so in South Africa.
Xenophobia, properly understood, is a deep-seated and irrational hatred of foreigners. South Africans, as a people, do not live in a constant state of such hatred. The lived reality in our communities reflects cooperation, shared spaces and economic interdependence far more than hostility.
This debate is not new. Following the 2008 violence widely described as xenophobic, former President Thabo Mbeki cautioned against describing South Africa itself as a xenophobic nation. Whether one agreed with him or not, his distinction between criminal acts and national identity remains relevant. A nation can address and prosecute criminal acts without accepting a characterisation that defines all its people by those acts.
That distinction matters. To move from acknowledging xenophobic acts to branding the entire country and its people as xenophobic is to level a serious charge. It suggests a deeply entrenched national hatred that does not reflect the lived experience of millions of South Africans.
At the same time, public frustration over illegal immigration, unemployment, service delivery and economic hardship is real. These pressures do not arise in a vacuum. In any sovereign state, immigration policy must be managed effectively, consistently and transparently.
Where enforcement is weak, systems are overwhelmed, or policy implementation falters, frustration grows. That is not xenophobia, it is a symptom of governance strain.
At its core, this is a governance issue. The management of borders, documentation, migration systems and economic policy falls squarely within the constitutional mandate of the state. When those systems do not function as they should, public trust erodes and tensions rise.
Governance failures must be corrected through institutional reform, accountability and democratic pressure, not through actions targeting individuals who do not control state policy.
Why is careful language so important? Because labels carry consequences. When South Africa is broadly branded as xenophobic, the impact goes beyond social media narratives. It affects investor confidence and tourism. It influences trade relationships and regional partnerships. It shapes diplomatic engagement across the continent. It can also place South Africans living and working elsewhere in Africa and the world at risk, as perceptions of hostility may fuel resentment or retaliation.
Reputational damage is not abstract. It has economic costs, political costs, and it can have human costs.
South Africa is a constitutional democracy built on dignity, equality and the rule of law. The actions of violence and criminality cannot be allowed to define the moral character of an entire people.
At Moretele Times, our position is clear. We will not excuse xenophobic conduct because violence and intimidation have no place in our democracy. But neither will we subscribe to narratives or sloganeering that reduce South Africa and its people to a damaging stereotype.
We reject the claim that South Africans, as a people, are inherently xenophobic.
A responsible nation confronts wrongdoing honestly. It prosecutes crime. It addresses governance failures. But it does not accept sweeping labels that misrepresent its character.
As today’s largely peaceful demonstrations have shown, citizens are capable of expressing their concerns within the framework of the Constitution. That is the standard that must prevail.
South Africa must not be defined by isolated acts of violence and criminality, nor by rhetoric that oversimplifies complex challenges. It must be defined by its constitutional order, its diversity, its continental ties and its commitment to lawful expression.
Calm leadership, responsible public discourse and respect for the rule of law must guide us in the days ahead.
