‘Ge Beck’ (read Go Back) to your country is the widely used catchphrase by protesting anti-immigrant and xenophobic South Africans against African immigrants in their country. The protesters who were repeatedly telling immigrants to ‘ge beck’ to their countries accused them inter alia of being responsible for their economic woes, and of committing all kinds of crimes.
The idea of being told to go back to one’s country is not entirely new. It is as old as history. The well-known and touching Biblical story of ‘Pharaoh let my people go’ (Exodus 5:1) is a many centuries-old catchphrase describing a demand made by Moses and Aaron to King Pharaoh in obedience to God’s directive.
There are many instances in history when a large number of people left their countries because conditions (such as war) made it untenable for their survival. Examples of countries where this happened in recent history are Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Palestine, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Ukraine. In many other countries, their citizens left to other places due to hostile and discriminatory policies or simply because of bad governance. A typical example is South Africa during the Apartheid regime, which forced many political activists and youths to flee into exile. Again, the exodus of Nigerian youth (popularly known as the ‘Japa’ syndrome) is a typical example of what bad governance can cause. For instance, statistics from the Nigerian Immigration Service (NIS) indicate that about 3.7 million people left Nigeria within that period.
The point, however, is that migration and its emigrant problems in host countries is a fact of historical life. But responses by host countries vary across the world, as some had a high threshold of tolerating immigrants while others do not. Nigeria, for example, drove away undocumented Ghanaian immigrants in 1983 under the Shehu Shagari administration using a popular catchphrase, ‘Ghana-must-go.’ The name Ghana-must-go bag, widely used today, originated from this incident.
Recent developments in the United States and Europe through the emergence of far-right-wing populist (ideological) parties have made anti-immigration issues a very big one. President Donald Trump of the United States is the chief protagonist of the anti-immigration policy. Marine Le Pen of France, who is the leader of the largest opposition far-right populist political party (the National Rally) runs her presidential campaign on anti-immigration policy among others.
In other parts of Europe, there has been a rising phenomenon of political parties with far-right ideology fighting to take political power from the mainstream parties, all hinging their populist viewpoint on anti-immigration. In Germany for instance, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) is well-known for its anti-immigration policy. In all these countries mentioned and in many other ones, there have been cases of anti-immigration-induced demonstrations and in some cases, violence that involved the killing of immigrants. What all these right-wing political parties are saying is that immigrants should ‘go back to their countries.’ It was their anti-immigration stand or policy that made them popular in the first instance.
Given this background, therefore, the South African case cannot be seen in isolation of this rising trend. But the high level of South African xenophobic expression appears very offensive and reprehensible to follow African countries, particularly those who made a lot of sacrifices to liberate them from the evils of the Apartheid regime that dehumanized them. It is again considered reprehensible because of the extreme form of hatred and violence, all of which smacked of ingratitude to first, the Frontline States (of which Nigeria was a prominent member even though physically far away) and secondly to other Africans through the then Organization of African Unity (OAU), now the African Union (AU). There appears to be a complete absence of national history in all of these xenophobic expressions. If there was one, it should have moderated or checked the violence and bitterness associated with the anti-immigrants’ protests. It is because of this that one finds it incomprehensible, reprehensible and unacceptable that an official of the government can dismiss the call for compensation by the Nigerian government. It is in the interest of South Africa to manage with wisdom the fall-outs of these extreme displays of hatred against fellow Africans.
Coming back home to Nigeria, the ‘Go back’ to your country and its associated sad experience by Nigerians in South Africa is a serious governance and policy challenge that must be confronted. Nigeria can be a land flowing with ‘milk and honey’ if good governance and the right developmental policies are put in place. People do not just leave their country for the sake of it, as there are pull and push factors that make such moves imperative. Bad governance (which manifests in insecurity, harsh economic conditions that make life difficult, high youth unemployment rate, among many others) is the number one push factor, while good governance that promises good things of life elsewhere constitutes the number one pull factor. Good governance is key to retaining people in their country of origin, even though migration is a historical fact of life.
Delivering good governance in Nigeria is a big problem, as politics takes pre-eminence over governance to the extent that political leaders concentrate much of their time on self-aggrandizement and enrichment rather than on rendering selfless service to the people. Many a time, the ideal of selfless service to the people takes the back seat because politics, ethnicity, and religion are used as camouflage to actualize personal gains and material self-enrichment. This leaves many unfulfilled promises, thereby creating the conditions that push people away. Nigerian governments at all levels should face the challenge of delivering good governance rather than playing politics of material self-enrichment and that of their cronies. The various forfeitures of illegally acquired properties that the courts are declaring reveal the magnitude of such self-enrichment propensities.
Nigeria needs to be fixed to make it attractive for people to stay and pursue their careers and legitimate business in life. The onus is on the government to make this happen for that is the main reason why it exists in the first place. It is worth stating the fact that one’s country remains the best for one to live and prosper, but the conditions must be conducive for such. The question now is: what are the resettlement policies does the government have for those it has commendably evacuated from South Africa beyond bringing them back? This is both a governance and policy challenge facing all levels of government and not just the federal government alone.
Prof. Obasi, a public policy expert, is of the Department of Public Administration at the Yakubu Gowon University, Abuja (formerly University of Abuja).
