NationStates Jolt Archive

Linky (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7407914.stm)

Some 6,000 people have fled a wave of attacks on foreigners in South Africa, which has left at least 22 dead, aid workers say.

"This is a classic refugee situation," Rachel Cohen from Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) told the BBC.

Many of those who have sought refuge in police stations, churches and community halls are Zimbabweans, who have fled violence and poverty at home.

Up to three million Zimbabweans are thought to be in South Africa.

The BBC's Caroline Hawley in Johannesburg says the immigrants have become a scapegoat for social problems, such as unemployment, crime and a lack of housing.

Mobs of South Africans continue to roam around some townships near Johannesburg, looking for foreigners and looting their shops.

But there have also been attacks on South Africans from other parts of the country, especially from near the Zimbabwean border.

Over the weekend, correspondents say central Johannesburg resembled a war-zone, as armed police used tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse angry crowds.

"If we go back into the streets, they're going to kill us there," one Zimbabwean man seeking sanctuary in a police station told the BBC.

Some Zimbabweans say they will go home, despite the political violence there, rather than face attacks in South Africa.

The front pages of several South African newspapers on Monday show a horrific image of a man being burnt to death.

The police say they have made more than 200 arrests for crimes including murder, rape and robbery.

"We're not talking about xenophobia, we're talking about criminality," said police spokesman Govindsamy Mariemuthoo.

He said police reservists and officers from other regions had been called in to help quell the violence, reports the AP news agency.

Loren Landau, from the Wits University Forced Migration Studies Programme, said the nature of the attacks was changing.

"We're seeing what was an anti-foreigner conflict transforming into what might be seen as an ethnic conflict," he told the BBC's Focus on Africa programme, pointing to the attacks on South Africans.

He also said much of the violence was "opportunistic crime".

A church where about 1,000 Zimbabweans have been taking refuge was attacked over the weekend.

Bishop Paul Veryn of the Central Methodist Church which was attacked told SABC radio: "We consider that the situation is getting so serious that the police can no longer control it."

He called for a state of emergency to be declared.

MSF spokesman Eric Goemaere said: "This reminds me of a refugee situation. I have treated bullet wounds, beaten people, rape victims, and the people are terrified."

The attacks on foreigners began a week ago in the township of Alexandra, north of Johannesburg, before spreading to the city centre and across the Gauteng region.

President Thabo Mbeki said he would set up a panel of experts to investigate the violence.

The leader of the governing African National Congress, Jacob Zuma, has also condemned the attacks.

"We cannot allow South Africa to be famous for xenophobia," he told a conference in Pretoria.

But the Human Rights Commission on Monday accused the government of not doing enough to address the underlying problems.

"There has been poor leadership in this country as far as these issues are concerned," HRC chief executive Tseliso Thipanyane told public radio.

He pointed out that there was a wave of attacks on foreigners in the late 1990s, before the situation eased in following years.

Since the end of apartheid, migrants from across Africa have gone to South Africa, attracted by its relative prosperity.

Thoughts? Comments? Do you think this situation will get better? worse?

bump

I travelled to South Africa about 16 years ago now. It was very dangerous then. I always thought that it would end up in civil war. Not surprised at all to hear that it is still bad. If they could get the violence under control it is a beautiful country to visit.

Edit: I predict forced deportation of immigrants they view as agitators. I also envision a military reaction on the border of Zimbabwe with police crackdowns to clean this up before the World Cup.

Europe should intervene.

Europe should intervene.

You mean the UK?

You mean the UK?

and the Dutch.

and the Dutch.

Aye, doubt either country has the will to try and fix South Africa.

Aye, doubt either country has the will to try and fix South Africa.

to be blunt it would take a unified European force.
the US would love to do it for you but we are all tied up at the moment (thanks bush). And considering that Africa problems largely trace back to European causes best we leave it to you all. best of luck.

Europe should intervene.

time to bring Cecil Rhodes back to life?

to be blunt it would take a unified European force.
the US would love to do it for you but we are all tied up at the moment (thanks bush). And considering that Africa problems largely trace back to European causes best we leave it to you all. best of luck.

Why would the US love to do it? I can't think of a good reason to intervene in South Africa at this moment.

time to bring Cecil Rhodes back to life?

If we can get that railroad built it will unify Africa!

Because this is something new for the continent. Seriously though why should anyone get involved in African domestic politics? They're rife with centuries of ethnic hatred and what not. Getting involved in it just adds more bloodshed to it. None of these will ever be stopped and they'll never end, not now, not for centuries. Expecting the UN or any other major country to do something is ridiculous and, even if the UN gets involved, with their track record, they'll just make matters worse.

Why would the US love to do it? I can't think of a good reason to intervene in South Africa at this moment.

diamonds + gold.
not oil but still worth a lot.

Because this is something new for the continent. Seriously though why should anyone get involved in African domestic politics? They're rife with centuries of ethnic hatred and what not. Getting involved in it just adds more bloodshed to it. None of these will ever be stopped and they'll never end, not now, not for centuries. Expecting the UN or any other major country to do something is ridiculous and, even if the UN gets involved, with their track record, they'll just make matters worse.

The reason they have all these problems is because European colonial lines ignored Tribal lines. Which has lead to states formed with many opposing tribes, instead of previous African states founded on allied tribal lines.

The US is in no condition to be intervening anywhere else atm.

A lot of the problems in South Africa, Zimbabwe and other ex-colonial countries is simply that you have a large population of poorly educated and historically disenfranchised people who are still bound by tribal allegiances over and above national allegiance.

What this means is that where jobs are fairly scarce, where the population was promised equality, contribution and a new world of opportunity on gaining 'democracy', problems arise.

The gap between the hope promised and the reality delivered creates huge frustration and this gap results in various issues including crime, protection against foreigners and ethnic conflict.

I'm certain the government doesn't help by deflecting blame and placing it on outside forces, certainly the case in Zimbabwe and most likely in South Africa. Something that will have to be resolved is the entitlement the ANC feels in terms of being the ruling party, this leads to upholding the legitimacy at any cost, a disinclination to point the finger at itself for any problems. At the moment it's not an obvious problem but it influences its decision and, down the road, I'd expect some further trouble over this. I can see protection of power, a natural fear of competition seeping down into the economy and creating a closed, somewhat corrupt country.

All this is, in overall terms, far better than apartheid in every way but the instability does lead to people making the false conclusion that 'things were better then', both within and without the country.

I was brought up in South Africa until the age of ten so I have very fond memories and emotional ties despite being English, it's possibly the world's most beautiful and abundant country and I hope the best for it.

The US is in no condition to be intervening anywhere else atm.

We would be if the the bloody Brits had not shoved Kurds, Sunni, and Shiites in one country.

We would be if the the bloody Brits had not shoved Kurds, Sunni, and Shiites in one country.

Yeah, nothing else has happened since that fateful day, history moves on dude, you could as well.

Yeah, nothing else has happened since that fateful day, history moves on dude, you could as well.

I am sorry someone has to try and clean up the mess the Europeans left By not listening to Wilson.

Let's face it, we could spend our time arguing over who did what to whom in the past until Judgement Day. I think its about time the world grew up and people stopped being fucking idiots.

I am sorry someone has to try and clean up the mess the Europeans left By not listening to Wilson.

Yes, and perhaps it should be those nations themselves, with support but not intervention by other countries.

Tootling in as though anything could be solved by an outside force, or that this would not affect the integrity of a people by essentially saying 'you're unable to deal with this yourselves' does not really help in the long-term.

Where a majority [or minority] is specifically repressing or annihilating another people I can see the justification for intervention, where social problems are causing trouble I can't.

Anyway, this is a slight hijack on discussing the situation in South Africa, heading back so far in history is something to be noted but no real gains are to be made by arguing over who's most to blame.

Let's face it (x2), you can point fingers all day but in the end everybody has cookie crumbs on their shirts. Everybody was in the f-ing cookie jar at one point or another.

Yes, and perhaps it should be those nations themselves, with support but not intervention by other countries.

Tootling in as though anything could be solved by an outside force, or that this would not affect the integrity of a people by essentially saying 'you're unable to deal with this yourselves' does not really help in the long-term.

Where a majority [or minority] is specifically repressing or annihilating another people I can see the justification for intervention, where social problems are causing trouble I can't.

Anyway, this is a slight hijack on discussing the situation in South Africa, heading back so far in history is something to be noted but no real gains are to be made by arguing over who's most to blame.

it is not blame it is the responsibility to fix problems one has created.
It is not moving on when you avoid honor and responsibility. yeah perhaps a military intervention is not best, however financial intervention may well be justified.

Let's face it, we could spend our time arguing over who did what to whom in the past until Judgement Day. I think its about time the world grew up and people stopped being fucking idiots.

You ask too much of humanity.

it is not blame it is the responsibility to fix problems one has created.
It is not moving on when you avoid honor and responsibility. yeah perhaps a military intervention is not best, however financial intervention may well be justified.

Like this?

http://www.dfid.gov.uk/countries/africa/southafrica.asp

You ask too much of humanity.

We ask too little. It's that type of paradigm that needs to be broken.

Like this?

http://www.dfid.gov.uk/countries/africa/southafrica.asp

by far not enough.

We ask too little. It's that type of paradigm that needs to be broken.

Let's not get too hasty here. The last paradigm we shifted got us this:

http://www.backpackinglight.com/backpackinglight/images/large/spork-sul-L.jpg

I don't think we're ready yet.

by far not enough.

Luckily it's just a small part - South Africa is one of the largest recipients of foreign aid in absolute terms throughout the developing nations.

Aid is given, work is being done to improve every area of life in South Africa, at some point it becomes the responsibility of the government to run its country to the best of its ability - doesn't apply only to South Africa either.

What's your next topic, "Water in the ocean"?

What's your next topic, "Water in the ocean"?

That's been done to death, I was thinking "fire is hot".

Europe should intervene.

Why? What, beyond a spurious notion of inherited accountability, impels us to do as much?

I any case, frankly, I'm neither surprised, nor concerned. In the decades following the end of colonialism, the standard of living in those states once colonised has declined exponentially, whilst those states that did have some economic merit, namely, Rhodesia and South Africa, have diminished rapidly.

I am sorry someone has to try and clean up the mess the Europeans left By not listening to Wilson.

Woodrow Wilson was completely correct? I'm sure, yes.

Would it offend your ego and unconscious, abominable cultural and political arrogance so much to simply leave the world to its own affairs, and not intervene like an anxious, moralistic housewife at the first mention of violence?