Journal (?f 1111111011 DCI!(!/opmellt ond Cal)(l/Jilities Vol. II. No.2. May 2010

Xenophobia, International Migration and Development

JONATHAN CRUSH and SUJATA RAMACHANDRAN J(matbllll Crusb is Ijn~/es.'m ,. (lj- G{ofu/l Delle/vlnnelll Studies al Queen's (JlliliersiZ)', Ctl/Ulda, (/Ild DireclOI' of the SOli them Alric{II/ M igmti(nI I'mjeel (fllt/llol/ormy Pnljessor {II Ibe Uni versity (if Cap e TOllin

SlIjata Ramacbmulrall is Researcb Associate III tb{~ SOl/the/'1I A/ricall M igratioll Project. Callada.

Abstract Migration from developing 10 developed coulllries has heen accompanied by growing resentment o r immigrallls and refugees. While xenophohic sentiment continues to he strongly cntrenchnl in developed coutl(ries, it is increasingly preva lent in deve loping countries as wel l. This paper l~xamines tht: rise of xenophobic sentiment and action in India and South Africa. The response of the state 10 xenophobic violence in e ach jurisdiction is considered. In each c ase, lhe ability of the Slate to formulate and implement remedial poliCies is compromised by its own complicity or denialism in regard to xe nophobia. Wit hout a coordinated inte rnational. regional alld national recognitio n of the magnitude of the problem and the formulation of a coherent and coordinated response (including much more rese ardl on the actual r.llher than imagined impacts of migration) . xenophobia w ill continue to undermine lhe rights of migrants and bedevil efforts to max imizl' the development p otenlial of migration .

Key w o rd .. : Xenophohia , (:nlss·bordtT migration , Soutl! Africa. India . Discrimination and intolerance. State policies

Introduction

Flows of migrants between countries and within regions of rhe South an: an increasingly prominent feature of the contemporary glohal migr.ltion system (Ratha and Shaw, 2007: Castles and Odgado Wise, 200H; Rakew ell. 2(09). The World Rank (2009, pp. 1'50-1 '5 1) suggests that the re has hee n a marked shift from North-South to South-South migration. w ith sever.11 devdoping countries inc.::luding India, ctlle d ' ivoire, the Islamic Republic of 1r.1I1 and Pakistan now appearing in the list of top destination coulltries w orldwide. In 200S, there , >,,,ere all estimat ed 7H million migrants residing ill lkvdoping countries of rhe SOlllh (or 4')'x, of the toral global migrant slOc k that year)

ISSN 1945·21\29 print/ lSSN 1945-210 7 onlinc/ 10!()2U2()'j ·20 ., \ 2()llllInitcd Natio", rkvl'i"pmmt Pro!o\ramnh.' IX)! , 1 ()_ I IJ~()/ I ')452iQ 1 ()O.lh 77 .1 27

I Crush and .~: Ramachandran

(Uatha and Shaw, 2(07). Migration flows hetween countries in the South may currently be higher than South-Nonh migr:ltions, pankularly if irregular and infomlal muvements are taken into acnmnl.

Ikspite its growing significance, South-South migration has been c uriollsly neg lected in the g lohal policy debate;: abo ut mig ration and develop­ment. The <lchatc.: has te nde d to foeus on migr.ttion from de;:veloping to dt:vd­oped COllntrics , which is perfectly consistent with the idea that w hat matters most in deveJopmem is how Ihe Soulh can become more like the North and w hether South -North migration hinde rs or helps thaI process. The global migration agenda calls on developing couTl(ries to recognize the bendits (hat accrue to them from the migration of their citi7.cns to the North. The same argument could also he made about South-South migration w ith the adden­dum that migration hetween developing countries has human development impacts on both countries of origin and destination .

·rilis paper explores ont~ of the major e merging obsta(.~ks to realizing the reciprocal human developlllelH potcntial of migration in origin and d estina­tion cOllTl(ries in the South ; that is, the growth of xenophobia in countries of destination. The evidence suggests that few destination states in the South believe that in-migr:ltion from other developing countries is at all beneficial (Iureidini, 200:i; Crush and Pendleton , 2001; d e Haas, 2007; Morapedi, 2007; Crush and Ramachandran, 2009). Indeed, the response of ordinary citizens and many govc:rnments {O lhe presc:nee of foreign migrants is often e x tre mely negative. Hostility towards foreign migr.tllts is certainly not a Ilew phenome­Ilon. In Africa, for example, the mass expulsions of Nigerians from Ghana in 1969 and (If ('hanaians from Nigeria in the mid-19ROs wen~ clear examples of peoples and governments w h o had become increasingly intolerant of migrants from other African countries (Peil , 1974 ; Adepo ju, 1984 ; (Or:lvil , 1985). However, the global increase in Smuh-South migrJtion has bee n accompanied b y more intense and widespread intolerance of migr:lIlls across the South.

Xeno phobia tow ards migrants is lIsllally sce n as a northe rn plague. Th e naLUre , cllIses and conscquences of xenophobia have heen extenSively stud­ied and theorized in the North , panieularly in Europe: (sec Cohe n , 1994; I.ueassen , 200";; Rerczin, 2006; A!exseev, 2006; EUMC, 2006; Delant }' and Millw ard, 2<K)7). However, lill ie aue nrion has bee n paid to date to the g rowth of this phe;:nomenon in the South . This paper, and the longer contribution on which il draws (Cmsh and Ramachandr:lIl, 20(9), aim to dr:lw attention to the negative de velopment conseque:nces of xenophobia in the South and the urgent need fo r more researc h , :m:llys is and policy inrcrve ntion . In the longer paper, we disc llss the upsurge of xenophobia across the So uth lIsing the case studies of l.ibya, Thailand, Malaysia , India and South Africa (Crush and Hamachandran, 2009). We examine the maniJeslations of popular and state­sanctioned hostility to mig rallls, the lItility of (.~ urrc nt theories of x e nophohia and racism for explainin~ the causes of xenophobia in the South , and the human development conseque nces of the growth of xenophobia.

This paper has a narrower foclIs , contrasting and comp aring the experi­e nce of India and South Africa. Thematicaliy, the paper foc uses on three con:

2 10

,outh m ay :~gular and

has heen j devdop­~ to devd­at matters North and ~he glohal nd.t s that The same he adden­lelopme nt

aJizing the Id destina­)Untries of the South hendkial

,txli. 2007: ry citizells extrt:mely phe Tlome­I Ghana in (ampll:s of )fmigrams I ii . 19H5) . ()fnpaninl e South . lague. Thl: .ivd y stud­len , I 'N-i; : Iant y and he growth ihulion on lion to the 11 and Ihe tlte: longn I~ the case ~rush and and s lat c­

: nophobia 1. and thc

he e xperi­three core

X el1opbobia, /l1lel1wli()lla( Migralion ami DevelojJment

issues: the nature of xenophobi;1 in India and South Africa, s lal e: rcanions to (and complicity in) xenophobia and thl~ human developme nt consequence s for migrants of xenophohia and state (in)action . Our gene ral argulllc llf is that IInkss xenophobia is acknowledged as a real and 'volatik political and sodal phcnomenon ' (Ikrezin. 2006, p. 27 3) and systematically addressed through a widl: range of political and puhlic and mnlia education interventions. the human dcvclopmcm potcntial of migration will he slTiously unde rmincd in countries of migram origin and destination in the South.

Geographies of migration

The ae(Ual numbe r of migrants in hoth India and South Africa is unknown and unknowahle. The irregular status of many migrants and the poor Ireat­ment they rt'cdve give the m linh.' interest in makin~ thc..~ir real idelll it)1 known to census-takers. Census data for 2(1)1 puts thc numher of fordgn-born migrants :11 6.28 million in India and 1.0 2 million in South Afri c a. Thc United Nation ' s 2008 Migrant Stoek O:uahase provides estimates for both t:(nullrks that suggest a decline in the numher and proportion of migrants in India from 7.5 million (and 11.9% of tlw total population) in 1990 to SA million (O.4'){,) in 2010 Crable I). In South Africa the numhers have been climbing si nce 2000 and are ex pected to reach 1.9 million in 2010 (or 5.7% of the population).

The vast Illajorit y of migrants (99% in the case of India and 76'% in thl: case of South Africa ) arc the product of South-South movement Crahle 2). In Sout h Africa , 23% of the migrant stock in 200t was from Europe, the legacy of South Africa 's apartheid immigration policies that promoted EUl'Opean settleme nt (Peberdy, 2(09). 50mh AfriGI's s izable ' brain drain' indtu.ks substanti:ll re turn migration to Europe so lh:u thl: European migrant stock has dwindled in recent years (McOonald and Crush, 2002: Crush el (1/.,2005).

Most migration to hoth India and South Africa is intra-regional in charac­ter: 97% of India 's migrants come from Asian countries and 72% of South Africa 's comc from African coun tries (Table 2). Three neighhouring countries domin:lte the flo w of migrant s to bot.h . Bangladesh , Pakistan amI Ne pal arc the major sources of migrants to India (92% of the 200 1 migrant stock) (Tabk 5). Migrants from the ne ighhouring countries of Mozambique. Zimhah\ve and

TABU' I Nurnh.: r ;llld I'r"1'<>r(i<>11 o r r<>rt"i~1l migr.uus. I ')')()- 20 III

N,"ul,n

1')<)0 7 ~');I 104

1 <)<)" 7 012 I('~

24~~) (, ·il 1 Dl 24~)~ ~ H/oI(, K70

20lU ~ ~5(' OJl

S'I/Ir("(': I i)l; (n1 N,u;olls (lOOK).

Imh"

J'o:rn·!l1;1g<· of

p" p.,I;o r;, ,"

0')

0 .7

0.(,

!l.~

u .·!

N umhn

I ll·r ;I(lli

I !~)7 7')0

I 011 5 7(,

I liH 7.~2

I H(,2 HI-\')

l'<·n:<·m:'gt· of

1"'1',,1:<1 ;''' '

57

211

.f. Crush and S. Ramacbandrall

TAlII.f. 2 . ;\'ig,..~m ~t .... d;: of IIlt1ia and South Afrk~

lnd;~ S()uth Africi

R~g;' 111 ofc,rigin Numher , Nmnh.; r ,. Nonh

Europc .~~ n()() HJ. 1.1-(. (~IO '!':I .O

Nonh "'mcri~":l. I 1 UIIII U.! 91100 1.11

AII.'l r;l l~,;. 4000 11.1 ·woo 0 .<;

SIIIHnl.1 so non II.') .!49 I~k) 1 1.<;

S"". h Arnci (.,(,000 " HII IMIO 7 1.<;

A~ia (. 1')0 I~M) ')7.;'0 27 1MK) .~ . o

Middk 1':1'( .H IMM) II'> ('(MM) '" .... ,in AIllt"riC.1 ')(MMI 0 .2 U IK~) 1.0

Sull ·"",,1 (. !')') (Mil) '.)') I n (.IIIM) il •. 11

"'ol:d () ,n 'S (MM I 1(MUI I 02<; IK M) 11111 I)

Sown:: IInit~d N:ni"n~. SI"tis'i('~ Sowh Afrk·~.

COllmry of migr:I!H origin

lI:m}!l ••. lc:sh

1'~ki sl:11l

Nq>:"

Sri Lanka

'\'r~nm;tr

Chil1:1

"'aI3)" '3 l iAr;

Af}!l1;'";st~ n

IIh'll:.n

TOf~ 1

S,,"r.V: llnill'd Nations.

T"'I\I.E .~ ~bif)r <"OlLIurit:s ()f migrJrH origill. hldi"

Numhl: r I'nn'nI:lgl' ,.f 101:1 '

j HOU C){){I (,,1.1)

I .H OIM)U 2. 1.7

('<;0 (1111) IIU

I<)()I II II) .~JI

('uouo 11.9

.\OIMM) 0,')

'5 CII II() 0.2

I ,j (Mil) Cl.:? III nUll H.2

1"111110 11.1

(, I 'if) Clno ')7.1

I'~·n ... m:lllt· of Asi. "

(, I (,

U,J HI (,

" 1.0

ll.'i

0 1

0 ,1

(I..!.

H. I

~J.l1

l .csot lu) make up ;0% of South Africa's 2001 migrant sT ock and ()I% ()f those from Africa (Tahle 4). Over 90% of South Africa's African migr::mts were from the cou11l rks of the Sou thern African Devdopmenr Communi ty .

The collapse o f apartheid hrough t three main changes in patterns of migration [0 South Africa (Crush el al., 2005). Firs\. thac was a marked incrcast: in temporary regular and irregular uoss-horder movemen t hetwt:en South Africa and its neighbours. M igrants who wanted to work in sectors other than mining and commercial agricul ture had no mcans of lel-\:l1 :lo,:ess to South Afrka. As a n:sult , irrcgular m igrJt ion expanded . Second ly, South Africa became a desirable destinatio n for economic migra lll s from West, East and Ccntral Africa (Morris and Boui ll ion, 200 I ). Third, South Africa hecame a country of asy lum for renll-\ees from Somalia, Angola, the Democr.ltic Repuhlic of Conl-\o and Sudan. Since 1994, ovcr 200 ()(X) reful-\ec claims have

2 12

1.HI

I.U

0." N ."

7 1. 0;

.~ n

0<;

1.0

76.0

100 0

tho~

fro m

ns o f ark~d

Wt.TIl

·ctors (-"cess iouth , East ea me..· :: rark have

Xe" o!JbIJbia. Jn tern a tilmal Mi~rathm and f)('IIClopll1t!tll

CI,m"I")' o f ml~rJn' urij:;n NlIlIlh •• ·r l'o:n.:o:n1ag,· uf IUlal I" · ... ·. ·nt :og,· " f Afri .. an

M .. ~amhiqm· 170000 l(d ';7,0

Zimhahw,· I.n IK)O 11.') 1"- 1

1 ... ·,..,'11,' I.'> (KK) 1 1,2 10;.1'1

N~",lhb 51-! (14K ) .~ . 7 " !'\"'a~.i l""d 111 lH11l ~, 7 5.K 1.:lIuhi:l l( INK) 2,1l 1.'1

Io-I:t l:iwi 20lKKI 2,1I 2.7

1\o)I~w:o " :' I'> (MKI "

~ , 1

I\Il!!"I:. f{) (1414) L,n IA

Illte <i(M N) U..! 1I. '>

T:IIlZ"lli:1 2')(11) I l..! II . . {

M:l lI ri l i ll~ 2'>1141 0 .2 11 .\

'{""tal h'ili 114111 (~I . I ')ll. 1

.\,mrn'; :-l:llb[k~ So.llIh Afne: • .

be~n lod W:d in South Africa hy asylum-seeke rs from a w ide vark ly of African (and !lo ll-African) countri~s (H:mdmake r et a l .. 200H; u mdau and Wa Kabwe..' Segani. 2009, p. H).

Mig rat ion In South Africa is inc reasi ngly d ispersed geogr.l phicall r . Fan n s ncar the horder w ith neigh bouring countries re main :m important desti na· l ion . as OIl"(: the gold mining towns of the Free Slate. liowcver, the most migr.uio ll is to tile majo r urban con u rbatio ns o f Joha nllesbul1:. Durban , Cape Tow n :lnd Prctoria_ Mort: reeentl r, migr.mls have h(:gull 10 dispcrse 10 o ther cit ies and smalle r urban centres. Most li vl: in ·inner-city areas o r in informal s lum sc u lt: mc nts on lh e pe riphery o f cities. The p ropo rl ion of South Africans w ht) had none.; o r little contact w ith migran ts from ncigh bourin!! countries fe ll from ~O'y.J in 1997 10 (li % in 2006, rd1cct i n~ ~r()win~ numhers and gt:ogr:lphic al dispe rsal (Southern Africa n Migration Pro ject ISAMP I. 200H, p. ~2).

In Ind ia, IOn , migr.lIlts have hecomc more d ispersed . The India­Ba ng ladesh migr.!lio ll corrido r is still o ne o f the husiest in Ihe world . st:con<.1 o nly to the Mexico- Un ited States corridor (Ratha and Shaw, 20(7). Most 1I:lI\gladeshi migr.Ults in India live d ose to the bo rder hetween the.; two coun· t rks. I'oorly demarcated boundaries. n lltu ral :t(fi n it ics. p hysical proximit~' and the prescnce o f carlicr m igr.mts rei nforce this spal ial patte rn (va n Sche n­del. 200 I: n hallm ik, 2005). They also con trih ute to thriving short-term ei f<.'U­b tory m igr.uion . Suhstantial numhers o f Banglad eshis cross into West Bengal every day [() work , re lurning to the ir ho me villages at day e nd or aft e r a s llo n period (Sa m:uJd ar. 1999: Datta. 2001 :l . 2(X)1b ; 1'r.101:tni k, 2(KI6).

In ren'nt years. Uangladeshi migr.lI1ts have bec n moving into the more prosperous parts of no rth and nurt h western [l1d ;;1 illduding u rhan areas like New Ddhi and Mum hai w here thl:re is a cunstant dcmand for c hcap laho ur (Ramachandran , 2005). In these cities. migr.lI1t s jo in the vast r.mks of the urhan poor li ving in s lums and shanties. Many 15a llg ladesh i w ome;:n w ork in

2 13

J. Cr us/) (lml .\: Ramael)({fldrmt

middlc-t.: lass Indian househo lds , while mall: migr:l1us st:ek e mployn1l:nt as lahourers, rkkshaw-pullers u r rag-pickers who s:i1vage re-saleable material our of garbage (K umari , 1997; Kuberlcin , lO(1 ) .

In bot h India and South Africa , t herefore , eonte m por.t ry miJ.,\nl1ion flows re pn:sell1 an illlens il1cation of his torical pall c:rns , However, migr.tnts arc a lso seeking out new dcs lillalio ns , p :lrtic ularly the lary.:er, wealth ier d tks o f both cou ntril'S, and as ,I result an: becoming visible 10 mOrt; citize ns.

Framing migration

The xenophobia that gripped Smuh Africa in the.: I 990s w as a flew ;lIld d iffer­e nt pheno me no n . After 1994, South Africans uf all r.tcc.:s and h ;u.:kgrounds could agreed on one thing: ' illegal aliens' were pouring into the country , undermining {he nc.:w nation and depriving citiZc ns o f sea n.:t: resources (Manes el ai" 1999). All AfriclI1 migrants were typecast and vililkd in inc reas ingl y strident and insulting lanJ.,\uage. In India. xeno phohia has bcL'n a imed primaril y at nangladt:shi migmnts, although therc Ius been a marked tendency tu c()ntl:uc.: earlit.T groups o f Bengali mig rant s/refugees w ith newer migr.tnts from Bangladesh (Ba nmh , 2007 , pp. 4 5- 1(6). The !onJ.,\e r hi story of hostility towards Ilengali spe;lkcrs resonates w ilb the c urrt:fIt antipathy towards irregular Bangladt:shi migmnts. At first appearanct' . Ihe rd {)re, India and South Africa 's e xperkll<:e w itll xenophobia is ~hronologic:llly very diff(:r· e llt. Howcvt:r, in both ~ou ntrit:s it is a post-independence pilcl1ol11enon ek:uly associated w ith natioll-bu ilding and the const ructio n o f new nat ional k knt itic s and idioms of inclusion and e xdusion (peberdy, 2()(11 , 2009; Samaddar, 1999). T he constnu':lion of xcnophobia in hoth South Africa and India also has man y common discu rsivc dements.

The language of xenopho\) ia is a languagc of h yperhok. O ne of the most obviollS exampks of this is the te ndency to inllatt: the volume o f migr.tt ion heyond th t: houndarks o f reason and logic In the context o f w idesp re:ld antagonism (tlwards migr.lnts , migr.ttion stalist ics are ncver ' ncutr.ll · measures of migr.t!lt nows. Highly exagJ.;er.tted !lumbers quickly become accepted as fac t through uncri tica l repetition , :lnd contribute.: powerfully to

the idea that national territory is under siege from the o utside. O ne t'lJ01mOn invention, with no basis in fact. is that there arc four million 10 10 illillion foreigners illegally in Sout h Africl. Since 2003 , the numbcr of Zimhahweans in the country is said by poli[icians, oflic i:tls and thc Illedia to he tWIl to thrn million - a figure disputed by Makina (2010) , who est imates thai t he Zimbanwl:an mig mnt stock of South Africa only reached 765 000 in 2007.

Tht.' manip ul:ttio n of numbe rs also bedevils rational discussion of Bang­ladeshi migration to India . Est imates by gove rnment agencies, journalisls, acadl:mics ami Ihe Hindu right o ff"cr ever·wowi ng, and ofte l1 staggering, daims aho ut the numbe r of Bangladeshi migr.tnlS in India. Fur Saiki a (200~, p . 2H2), for t:x:lmpk, 'the quantum of illt:gal Bangladeshi im migrant s in Assam of 4 to 5 million , would 1llt:;111 that hetween 18 to 22 perc t:nt o f

2 14

Ass For l:ad, (He fo r Ind res l hig Bh : 20

rhl: lIig pm Hin dt:s ;tya

higl like It;<; Ball pol I r.1 1

thl:1 kinl ' illt: the

T he . 11.: x p re. Km opil mig

200 gal bt.'c Ass:

as 'ial

ws Iso Jlh

e r­Ids

'Y. TS

in l~n

ed ' IT

of hy lia IT­

DB

lal )9;

n" )st .m ,.d <II'

nc to m m ns to ,e

X enopbobia, /nlernafioual Migration and lJevelojJmenl

Assam's population compri~s of iIIq.,tal aliens'. The Indian Border Security Force recently cl<lim~d that b~twe~n 1972 and 2005 soml' 1.2 million Bang· ladeshis l~ntered India on tourist visas and failed to leave the country (FcOIlOmic Times, 2 Novemher 20(8). In 2009, the Union Ministl'r of Sial{: for Homc, Shriprakash Jaiswal, informed Rajya Sahha (thc I Jpper House ()f the Indian Parliamcnt) that the re were more than ' 12 million Bangladeshis' residin)!, 'illegally' in the country (Ec01lOmic Times , 20 Febmary 2(09). The highest estimates have eome from Hindu nalionalis( groups such as the Bharatiya Janata Party (Navlakha, 1997) , who claimed that there wne some 20 million irregular Bangladeshis living in India in 2003 (van Schendel , 2(05).

In India . the e xclusionary politics of the Hindu right lias invigorated a rheLOric of fear and loathing surrounding migration ( liamac handran , 1999). Highly incemJiary texts create the spectre of an impending catastrophe posni hy the 'enemy alien' that threatens (he safety and ~curil)' of the Ilindu-indian nation ( Upadhyaya, 20()6) . Bangladeslli migrations 11.IVe b een described as 'tkmogr.lphic aggression'. a ' silent invasion' and a 'Muslim avalanche ' unleashing on India "millions of illiterate, fanatical , hungry and highly motivated Muslims Iwhol hav!: already selllnJ al1(J spread themselves like a swann of locusts in till: lush grCl~n fields and forests of Assam' (Rai. 1993, p. I I). A distinction is made between Il indu and Muslim migrants from Bangladesh. T he former arc 'refugees' and ' victims' of 'a most iniquitous political system based on Islamic fundame ntalism ' while the latter an~ ' infil­trators' w ho shou ld he punished ror tllis 'aci of crime' (Rai. 199:~ , p. 11). This tl1('1lle has bcen pursued hy Kumar (2006). w ho distinguishes between two ki nds of migrant : 'traumatized, frightened and brutalized ' Hindu refugees and ' illegal' Mus lim immigrants (Kumar. 2006, p . I). ()ne flow is to be welcomed . the other resisted :

The implications of large·scale immigration from llangJadesh to this country are going to be very grave. 11 is adversely affecting our econom y and soc ial environment; c reating la w and ordlT prohlems wherever they arc present in s izable numbers . The ilkgal immi­grants have become hold e nough to l~ommit robhell', even in Delhi. ( Kumar, 2006, p. 1)

The result s supposedly include high population growth, disturhance of the 't l~xture of the population '. Bangladeshi (ake-{)ver of Indian te rritory and the presence of 'dis liked . unskilled Iahoure rs who are .1 drain on til(: country'. Kumar'); views ;IT(: broadly representa tive of a whole swathe of Indian public opinion. Another propaganda text, for example , described the Hangladcshi migr.lliom as the ' ingredients of a grand design and stt-:'Itegy to dem()lish India

surely , steadily and irreversibly ' (Hal. 1994. pp. 2- 3) . In an intervitw in 2005, Sarhananda S;lIlowa l of the Asom Gana Parishad p arty stated: T he ille· gal migmnts from Bangladesh arc a major threat to our identity. We will bl' come foreigners in our own land unless we kee p these pcork out of Assam' (UBe News, 16 June 2(05). As wel l as c ausing 'chaos ' and 'social

215

/. Crush alld S, Ramacbmulrall

tensions', migr.lIlts arc bl:ml!:d for ul1t:m ploymen t , environ mental degr.lda­tion , domestk: and intern:ll iunai [(:rrorism, crime amllawkssness, and so on.

In South Afriea. media analysts have:' shown how negative. ullan:ll ytieal rcport ing pcrpetuates and e ntrench cs stcrcotYIlt.:S of milV'Jtio n and migr.lIlts (Mc Donald and D:mso, 200 I: Md}tma ld and Jacobs, lOO; ; Fine :Ind Bird, 20()(1 : Vig nesw:tra n , 20(7). Xe l1 ophobk discourse in South AJrica Cll ll struC(,s m igr.lIlts as a threat to the cconomk , social and cultural ri).\hts and entit k~­

mellts of citizens. Migr.lIl ts ' pour' in and 'invadc ' in 'wavcs ' and 'flood s ' and ' av:tla ndu:s' , invOiriOlhly ' swamping' 10(';11 communities and job markcts. T hcy arc tYlKGISt as bringers of dist::ISl.', crime and a variety of othcr soci;1I ills . The y sll.'al jobs '!Ild compele unfairly Wilh citize ns for restlUf<.:CS, slll.: lt e r and pllhli(~ ~rvi('(;: s . All migrJ ll[s arc generally homogenizcd as 'aliens', ' foreign­c rs ' and · illq~a l s' . Tllt:y arc callex l derogatory !l;Ull('S, denigr.lted in insulting iangllag{: and rl.'pc:ucdly told t o ' ).\0 home ' . Rcu :ntly, the migr.llion mcta­phors llsed (0 depict the general ·(hn:at' of migration havt.: becn applied to a 'human tide ' and 'flood ' of Zim hahwt:ans (Mawadza , 2(10). One South AfriGIIl comnle illalor argued :

Wt: voluntarily switc hed off the apartheid eleetric hord e r fem:!.:. But the ceOllOmic meltdown in Zimhabwe is forcing us 10 think about how to cont:tin the avalanche..' of illegal economic and polit ical refu· gees from Zimbab we . ,Fa ilure to do somethi ng about this risks hostility from our llll t.: mployed and poor directed at the forci!!ners I1I.HJdin!! into South Africa. ( N eil'S 2 4 . 7 Ot:toht.:r :W(6)

Aparthdd-styh.~ elccri!1catioll o f borders woutd seem dl~ lslit.: , expensive antJ unworkahk. Yel. in a survey in 2006. SAMP (2()OH, p. 2;) fOllnd that 7Wi, of South Africans supported eicctril1c:uion (up from 66% in 1999).

A natio nal :lIlitudinal survey b y SAMP (2{)OH) foulld that South AfriGlll antipath y [() migr.lIlts a!lct: ts the way in whic h d lizens thin k about migr.ltio n and w hat policy options sho uld be p ursuctJ to (lirtail it. First , So uth Africans hd k vl.' that the two main rcasons w hy migr.Ults come lo th .... count ry ;IIT to look fo r work (35% of I'cspundcnts) and 10 c ommit crime (21 % of respon­dents) . Two-thirds agree that migrallts uSt: lip resou rces, lake johs and (;o mmit criTll t.:s. Se(;ondl y.75% would SUpp0l1 :I poli(;y of tJeporting anyone not (;onlributing ct.:onomil.:ally to South Africa: 61 % want any migr:.mt with HIVj AIDS d cpol1ed and one-hal f SllppI Jrt lkport ing all foreign n:ltionais, ill(;luding (host, living Iq~;lIly in th e (;m ultry. Third , 72% w;m l it to he c ompulsory for

-rA'IH. s . Allil ll.k~ IOward~ all"w;,,)! ll1 i):r.llu ~ ~·II( r)' III wu o.

" l.el !1II)'.mo: ,\ ., IUllg ~s ;oh~ I'b,·.· .'>! rin l'r"h ill;, 1M.·uPl<- l)"n 'l

nlillo: (", ) " \'ai l;.hk ( ~:') lilll il~ ( 'lo ) l"null . :uminj.\ ( 'II.) k .. .,w ( % )

.<;t,IlI·.·.·· World \,~ l lJO:S :;nr\'o: r

2 16

non .. SOll! right neve to s (

hl.· d

Afri{ o rigi tht.:)' I.cso miW gell!. with di.-;Iil t hc), thd l com violl. ing I

Iml

In ho lmll. spill rep{ ity ).!

mid mas 'Sav Ban: Imli !led StUt tion indi (Ull; Hod Ass.: th ;1I

Afri 200

~rad:l ­

o o n

yliea l .rants Bird. ruets Itill e­' and The y I ills. rand e ign­[lling IWla-t to a ollth

and 'K, of

iCIIl lion : ans (. 10

) 011-

Imil not

II V / li llg for

n' , . ( .... )

Xem1jJl/oiJia. h llenUllirm(/{ Migralirm (Iud {)elJeio/nuell l

non-citizens to carry personal identificatioll w ith them at all limes. Finally . South Africans kd th at mig rants and rdu!-\ees should not cnjoy the sanK hasic right as citizens. As many as onc-th ird kd that visitors and refug('CS should nev(~r enjoy t h (~ sa me right In legal prOlcction . polic(' protlTtion and acccss tn social services as cirizens_ Two-thirds kd that Ihest· rights shou lll always he: denied to ' illegal immigrants' .

Smuh AfriCIll citi7.cns have a generally unfavourabk impressio n of all African migrants hlll difkrenliate hetW(TIl them on the hasis of country of origi n . Over one-third have a favourabk impression of migrants with whom tlwy enjoy the closest cultural ;md h istorica l ani ni[y ([hose from Botswana, Lesolho and Swazi land). less tha n 20% have a favourable impression of migran ts from other African countries. including the threc m:lin refugee:­gener.lting (~OIl nt rics (Angola, Ikmocratic Repl lbli c of <:ongo and Somalia) wit h a 90% unfavourahle rating, Zimbabwe (8R% unfavourabk) and, most disliked of all. Nigeria (92%). Nearly one-third (30%) of Sout h Africans said they were prepared to 'take action ' to prevent migrants from moving into their area or ope ratin!-\ a busi ness therc Sixteen pLl" cent said thcy w ou ld comhine w it h others to 'force them to leave' and 9% said they would usc vioknce . South Africans also take a much hard e r like than Indians o n allow­ing migrants entry (Tahle 5).

Implemen ting xeno phobia

In both India and South Africa , a charged l~nv ironment of negativc p ublic alt i­tudes, xenophobic stereotyping and inl1ammatory med ia reporting has spilled ov('r into violent aClion against migr.l11ts. In India , there arc increasing rq)()rts o f violcnee and persecution of Bangl,uksh i migrants and other minor­ity groups_ Two examplcs illustrate the fragile e:xistt' rKT of many migr.:mts. In mid-2005, the Assamcse youth group Chiring Chapori Yuva Mo rcha sen t ou t mass t('xt messages in the cast ern purts of the country that rcad o minolls ly: 'S;lve nation, save identity. Le t 's take an oath~no food, no job, no shelter to Bangla(k shi s ' I.eaflets urging (he 'economic blockade ' of Bangladcsh is in Ind ia werc also distrihuted and many new and temporary migrants repo r1nlly !led the: province (Indian E"I:/n'ess, 19 May 200S). WorklTs of the All Assa m St udents Il nion went door to door urging IOGlls nO[ to provide accommoda­tion to Bangladeshi s. In September 200R. vigilamc gro ups from Assames<-: ind igcn( Hls commllnilies conducted :1 state-wide drive to locate Bangladeshis (Bhaumik . 200R). The following month, dashe s hc[wn:n the ind igenous I\()d() C()Tll1llunity and Muslim migrants (includi ng Bangladesh is) in Il()rtlwrn Assam contributed to more than 50 deaths and the displaccTllcnt of m O l"{:

than 10000 Muslim migrants . Aflt·r a decade or more of i solat~..'(1 attac ks 0 11 individual migrants, So uth

Africa was rocked in May 200R hy co ulltry-w ide xenophobk violence (SAM]>, 200H: Misago ef (II .. 20(9). Over 70 people WlTe killed , h undreds were assau lt ed and iniured, the re was widespread damage to property owned by

2 17

j. Crusb olld S. R(/nUlcbandr(/u

foreign na.tionals and over 100 000 people were chased out of their homes and communitks. The mob violence lasted two full weeks hefore petering out. HoWeVtT, spor.ldic .. ttO-lcks have <."ontinueli ever since. In J .. nuary 2009, an armnJ group led by a community councillor e lll ered a building in Durban and began allacking foreign citizens_ A Tanzanian and a Zimbabwean jumped or were pushed to their de~uhs from an UpPlT floor (I)(/ilJ' News, 6 January 20(9). Atlacks on Somalis shopkeepns and traders werl· reponed through· out the count ry during 200Hj09: and in (ktobn 2009, :'000 migrants (mainly Zimbabweans) were houndcd out of an informal settlement in a farming area in the Western Cape.

Mort: research is IlIxucd on why, when and how xenophobic attitudes have turned violent One explanation attributes the growth of xenophobia alkr 1994 to ·the construction of a new national identity based on cilizl~nship .

By using citizenship as a criterion for belonging. lilt' 'fronticr guards' of South African national identity can abrogate the rights of noncitizens when policing the nations' heartland and borders' (Pebndy, 200 I, p . 29: see also Nyamnjoh. 2006: Neocosmos, 2006, 200K). A second explanation regards xenophobia as s(xondary, a surface ·sympu)m' (If matnial deprivation. In a context ofmassivt: inequality and high expectations, non-delivery by the state has produced a t:ountry ' pregnant with disafkt:ted nationals' who 'direct their resemmt:nt against immigr.lI1ts and tthnic minorities as the easiest and most olwious targets, whom they oft.en project as the cause of sodal ills· (Ilassim e{ tI{.,

2(08). This does not explain why the vast majority of South Africans hold remarkahly similar anitudes (SAMP, 200K). Nor does it. explain what would lead dtizens to attack foreigners, and only cel1ain kinds of foreigner (Ncocos­mos, 20(8). Nor docs it explain why xenophohia ofte n takes a gendered form (Ldko-Evcrett , 2(K17 ; Uaiya, 200K; Sigsworth el (II., 20(8).

Ndther explanation for the existence of xenophobia explains the moh violence that spread throughout the GlUntry in May 2008. Some have argued that the violence was the ·inevitable consequenee ' 01':1 deCide of unchec kcd xenophobic sentiment . SAMP's survey tlf South African attitudes showed that xenophobic sentiment was at an all-time high and that the vast majority of South Africans, irrespective of r.lCe . age, gcnder, education or socio­economic status, were extremely hostile to migr.mts. A signit1<-~ant minority w<:re open ly primed to take;:: violent ac tion and realized they cou ld do so with impunity.

This explanation is helpful on tilt.: pre-conditions for violence but docs not explain w hy attaeks occurred in sonK areas and not in others of similar levels of deprivation. Dodson and Odo[<;e (2002) have argut:d that. ·geogra­phy matters' in explaining xenophobia, calling for a research agenda that takes cogni7..:mce of the 'particularities of place' in understanding the experi­ences of migrants and the reactions of citiZens. Landau (2008) and Misago eI til. (2009) identify several sodal and political features common to all of the sdtiements w here violence broke (IlIt: high levels of violent crime, lIntlfficial, iJIegilim:lle corrupt. and potentially violent leadership structures, systematic exdusion of fordgn citizens from political panicipation and a culture of

2 1S

, ,

"

r I

(

I ( , , ( , (

" I (

I,

;,

Xenophobia. il1tenl(lIiOIl(l/ Migration and Developmellt

impunity w ith r~gard to public violence. This kind of analysis is hd pful in ~x plain ing w hy violence broke om in some c o mmunities, hut more resta rch is n~ed~d on the timing , coordinatio n and spatial diffusion of the xenophobic violence itsdr.

State responses to xenopho bia

Political responses to xenopho bia in India and South AfriGI hav~ similarities and some important differences. In India, for example , Ba nglatkshi migratio n is a highly polit icized issue, w he reas in Somh Africa all parties seem agr~nl that siknn is gene rally the hest polity

For many )'e;I~ , the Indian ce nt ral govcmmcnt and the major politi cal parties re mained dnV ly ambiva lent ahout Rangladeshi migr:Hlts (Wdncr. 1978, 1993). In the 1990s. howcvn. tlu.: issue became inneasingly politi· cizcd at thc in stigation of thc Hindu I:tight (sometimes d~scrihed as the Sangb Pa rh lar). From 1992, th~ situation of migrants hcgan to dc terioratt' speedily (Ramachandr:m. 2002, p . 312). Sever:d major Indian political parties long rccognizcd for the ir largcssc tow ards migrants aligncd tlu.:msclves w ith the xcnophohic rh~toric from the Hindu right. T his ' saffron surgc ' provided the Cong ress-led gowrnment with a powerful inccntivc to act against migrant s. A m()dt~r:lte sccular state 'completdy shcd its thin veneer of m:utr:llity' (Ramachandran , 2002 , p. :~ IS).

Stat~ rhelOric assigned the lahels 'ilkgal immigrant s' or ' inflitr:nors' almost excl usively to Muslim 1l:lIlgladeshi migrants. Congress swung into action hy launc hing a three-stcp 'Action Plan ' of detection. ide ntificatio n and de p()rtatillll to c urb migr:ltion from Ilangladesh. The detection and appr~h~n· silm of migr:lnts took p lace in many parts of India . 'I'actical calculat io ns, includ­ing vote-huying. identified Ncw Dcl hi as a primary im pleme ntation point for the Plan . Assc mbl y ~lect i(}ns in Ncw Ddhi in 1993 'dram aticall y set the stage for unrcstr:lincd aggressio n towards B:lIlgladeshi migran ts in the cit )'_ 'Oper­ation Pushback' hecame a ' has ty, haphazard attempt' to salvage the ruling parry's authority in thc face of Hindu nationali sm and chauvinism. It w as design~d to idemify and evict 2000- 2500 migrants per momh from New Del h i but was evcntuall y ahandoned (sec Ramach:mdr:lIl . 2002, pp. 321 - 325).

In 1 99H, the (,ovcmor o f Assam submiltc d a rcport 011 ' Illegal Migration into Assam ' to the Indi an I'residcnt. comm~Jl(ing o n the seale and impact of Bangladeshi mig ration :

The dang~rous conseque nces o f large scak illcgal migr.ltion from Bangladesh . hoth for the people of Assam and more fo r the Nation as a w hole . ne~d to he emphati cally stressed. No misconecivnl and mist:lk~n notions of se(~lIlari .sm should he allowed to conl<..: in thc way of doing so. As a f( . .:sul[ of population movt.:me nt from Bang· ladesh , the sp~etre looms large of the indigenous people of Assam heing redlln'd to a minority in thdr homc State . Thdr cultu ral survival w ill he in jeopardy, thd r political control w ill hc weakened

219

.f. Crusb ami S. f{anwcbandran

and their t:mploym~nt o pportunitit:s w ill he undermined . This silent and invidious demographic inv;tsion of Assa m may result in the: los:; of the geostr;ut.:gically vit al distric ts o f Lower Assa m . (Governor of Assam , 1998)

The proposed solutions included k ncing, hett er horder controls, army p:Ltrols of the horder. diS(:nfranchi~cmc llt of migrants and prohibitions on Illig rallts owning immovablt: p ropt:rt)'.

W h ile the government has not implemented these:: dr:lCollian p ruposals . the Indian Homt: Minis try rcjcctL'd a proposal to iSSlI t: lI: m purary e mploy­m e nt and n :side nce pt:rmit s to B;lIlgl:ldeshi migmllts in 2005. A St.'nior officia l noted that ' the:: unanimous view was that it is impossible to give work permils to Ibngl:u ... kshis as Ihey are:: illegal immigra nts anu il wo uld set a bad prt::ce­delli ' (The TeleJ.:rapb , n jUllc 20(5). The controversial Illq.~al Migrants Detcrmination by Tribunals Au (19H.:H was repealed by Ihe Supreme Cuu rt in May 2005 u n thc grounds th at it actuall y hindered the i:lrge-sclie ex p ulsion of mil-\r:lnts. Part o f the jUdgt:I1K llt argued that :

the preSt:nce of such larlJ,e n umbers o f illegal migr:lIlls fro lll Ibng­ladesh , which run into millions, is in f;ll:t an aggressiun !emph;lsis o urs ] on lilt:; state of ASS:II11 anti has also contribule d s ign ificant ly in causing se riolls internal disturha nces in th e sh ape o f insurgcncy o f alarming pro portiuns. (/IiI/fill . 14 july 2005)

T he Supn: me Court of India also responded to a Public IntlTesl Lit iga­(ion by ordering. the ccnlral go v(:rnlllent and Ek c tion Commissio n of Ind ia (0

id(:nl ify Haugladesh i migr:lI1ts and Slrike them from elector:tl regis ters. T he Oelhi I-l i~h COlLrt chidt:d the State and cen tr:11 govermm:nts st'veraltimcs for not deport ing a targelcd Ion llang lad t:shis c;lc h dOlY from The t:apil:tl (7i'iblwe, 19 Nowmbc:r 200;1.). To (I;lle, the s tate has done lin k to try and d cter migration throug h n :-g ular d c portOltions o r stringent bon.lcr (:o ntrols (K lImar, 20(6) . Even Assam has not seen 1:lrgc-.scalc expulsions o f Bang­ladeshis. In the rn~enT elections, (he Asom Galla I'arishad and Bhar:uiyajan:ua Part), bot h commiUeu 10 depon ing R;lI1ladeshi migrants and scal ing ri ll" borde::rs, and acc used lhe Congress party o f ind ulging in 'VOle bank ' politics h y nul SlOpping migration from Bangladesh . In OCLObe::r 200H, Prime Minister Manmo h:tn Sing h agrt:cd that illegal migrants w e re:: a ' pmhlcm ' and Ihat the re was 'complete:: unity' in the c oun try that illegal m igration was not somcthing that sho uld be t: neour.t).1.e d . Yet , caut ion was necessary because ' illegal miwa­tiOll ' had the potential to bec o mc a divisive.: polit ical issut: in India .

Whate ver the truth of the vote banking c harge, tht: Indian gove rnment c le:lriy docs no t havl,..· the vas t fi nancial reSOUfl.:CS th:lt would bl..." needed to c urb Hangladcshi in-migration and is rightly sct:ptical that suc h measures would work anyway. Even Ihe process uf id ent ifying people lO deport is pmh lem:ll ic. Th ere arc p hysical and l..."u ltur:11 s imilarit ies between migr:lJl ts and Indi ans, and man y Ban gl;tueshis have ada pled to local c lIltll r.il norms :tnd

220

adol' em l}anl! don inter d e nt prot

ilkn byx and :t Ill: Afri,

Cur WOI

mi!! or ;J

h as

(N I me tha tlc: t slH ' t h nil In (C

Ii!! In· 0lI

w as

P' 01

d, I' St k p f;

Is, 'Y~

ial its :e­Its

,,1

H1

~l­

to

Ie

" al "I Is g~

fa Ie

:s

" '(~

g <\-

H

o 's is .s U

XeNophobia, IlIkrnaliolltll MiKratiol1 and Development

adopted strategies to evadt: detection and deponation. Because doculllems can ht: acquired frauduknlly and ditfcrences between Indi:ms and Bangladeshis art: negligible, police often acknowled!-\c and t:ven destroy documents presented hy migrants. There is 'widespread t:orruption and "self interest ~ among agents or the state (Ramachandran , 2005, p. 16). Slum resi­dt:nts routinely pay hriht:s to local police and an.: only deported if the}' cannot produce the arhitr.lry and large sums demanded.

In response to the xe nophobic violence of May 2008, South African Pres­ident Thabo Mbeki argued that the attacks wert: criminal and not motiv;lted hy xt: nophobia (Mheh 200S).lleciaimed South Africans were not xenophohic and anyone who said so was themselves hein!-\ xenophobic. The violence was a massive embarrassment for a President who was an active proponent of Pan­African solidarity and for a country preparing to host th e 20 I 0 Football World Cup. Belin, the Pre sident probahly n;asoned , to pre se nt fhe violence as till.' w ork offringe criminal dements rAt he rthan symptomatic of ani tudes to foreign migrants in gener:ll . Xenophohia-deniaJism represents a trouhling complicity or at best an inability to exercise the kind of political will and leadership that has characterized the fight against racism in post-apartheid South Africa,

In 2007, the African Union's New Partnership for Africa 's Development (NEPAl) ' peer review ' mechanism singled out South Africa for its poor treat­ment of migrants and refugtTS The South African Peer Review Report noted that ' foreigners, mostly of AfriGm desce nt, arc hcin!-\ subjected to brutality and dete.:ntion' (African Union, 2007, par.L 956). Xenophohia was increasing and should he.: 'nipped in the bud ' . In its response, South Africa countered that 'thc assertion that illegal immigrants are subject to hmtal and inhuman treat­me nt is strongly dispmed ' (Mrican Union. 2007, Appe ndix 2, paras 1 O:~ - I OS.) In South Afrka, the reports of human rights organi7.ations told a different story (CoR MSA, 2008: L:lwyers for Human Rights (IJIR), 200S).

Deportations an~ seen by stat.es as one of their major weapons in the fight against 'undesir.lhle intihr.llion'. Yet there is little evidence in either India or SOllth Africa that either has the intended deterrelll effen or prevents migr.mts from turning around and comin!-\ str.light hack . Even if the system was tr.msparelll and efficient, most migr.mts would prohably rdurn as soon as rhe y were dumped ac ross the horder. The waste of statl.: n ;slJun:es is potentiall y e nomlOUS. The Indian government appears to realize the futility of spending millions deporting migr:ul(s.

In contr:lst to tht: Indian state, the South African state became a 'prolific dqlOrter' of foreign nationals in the 1990s (Vign eswaran , 200S, p. 783). Sincl.: 1994 ()Vl~r two million pcopk have heen deponed (mainly to neighhouring states) unde r the guise of 'crime-fighting' . The mcthods lIsed by the pol ice (0

idem if)' and deport migr:lIlts arc reminiscent of those of the apartheid ~";ll t~ 's pass laws :md inJlux controls (Klaaren and Ranii, 2(0 1). In a depressingly familiar s tatement, one Zimbahwean female migr:lIlt noted:

The police once they arrest you they don ' t give yOIl a chance to produn' your papers (lr anything, they jllSt grab yOtl by you r clothes

221

J. Crusb mul S. Ranl(lcbtm(/I"(111

and shove YO Li ins ide thdr va ns or wh:uever lhey'll he lIsing fo r transport on that day. And by the poliu.: statiun you get harassed as if you have stolen sOnlcthing. But I think if the g{)\'ernnlc nt sorts out their police mayhe things ean change . They arc treating people like animals. I don 't evell have a word to (h • .:seribe South African poliee . There arc also a few South Africans that :In: always calling me names like 'Makhalanga ' l a derogatory term] evc:n th ough I'm nul. (sec I.eIKo·Ev':felt, 2007, pp. 4/j-49)

A vast corruption industry has sprung up around the inelTcc tual deportat ions Illachinc:ry :

Th e cops arrest LIS and the citizens and thc cOlllmunity, they callus n;IOles, like kwerckwen~. Sometimes the cops take YOll to the pol iet.: stations and tlH..~}' make YOll pay somt.: money. Thallllont.:y would he a bribe for a policeman not to take you or mak e you stay in the cdl overnight. We are afraid of s taying in the c ell so we do th e payme nt sOlllewhcn: outside of the poliee station , because if they take you (0

the police station they wiIJ d eport you . They want R)UU per pcrson . ( Ldko-Even:tt , 2007, p . 44)

Those who cannot afford 10 hribe :In: deport cd. Xenophohic attiul(.ks :Ire rife in till.: ranks of the police (Mad sen , 20(H: Newham et a/., 2(06) and 'many dtizens maintain the same spurious link Ixt wcen crinlc and immigratio n dr:lwn rcgularl y by the polin~ and government oflkials' . (Misago (!l (11. , 2009, p. IH)

lluman development implications

Migr:lI1t s in formal or infurmall.'mp loy mellt do I..:ontribute substantially to the cl..:onomie dndopment of hOlh India and So uth Afril..:J but this cont r ibution is rard y acknowledged or optimizt!d. The human devdopmenr outcomcs of xenophobic altitudes and ,KtiollS arc cxtn:mcly m::garive . In both India and South Africa, they poison ordinary inter:lI.:lions belwccn locals and furt:ign­ers. liccnst: the abuse and cxploitation of migrant s, and undermine any pusi­tivc d evI,:lopmelll OUleOllles of migration. When migr;lIus arc made scap(.~go:IlS for social problems , it increases distance wi th 10GIl populations, reduces contat:1 and prevc.nts the m dcvdoping friendly relat ions that Gill

mitigat e hiasl~s and pre judiccs. In this rcspect , xenophobia has an un favour­able illlpact 011 social cohesion, contributing to shrinking tolerance and n::spct:1 fo r ot hc r c ultures and fos tcring the distrust of divers ity.

Xt:nophohia c ndorscd or de nied by the stat t: crcates a gem.: r:.11 atmo­sphcre in whicl, discrimination against, and ill tre atment of, non·dtizens hecoml~s acceptable. Xenophobia cxaeerb:m::s Ihe vulncrahi lit y of migr.ml ~roups, cxposin~ the llllO rc.:gu lar haf"'.I.ssment , intimidation, ,lIld abuSt: hy citi­zens, employe rs, and cnforcelllctll agendt.:s. T he negative human d t.:vdop .. ment outcorm:s of ill-conceived vcntures such as 0pt'r.uion Push bac k and th e

222

·Pt pre rcl r ig

sp' r;ll

an, pre si n in SOl

llIi ad' in( alll

I"t'<

t il< tal­ta!;

on rq pa: pr;

Illi; :.Inl ne, do till

is I trit eX1 1)1"1

inc so< d is lilt

Xc ;\111

" IS

It

c

c I.

:n ions

s , e II

'c rjfe many rawil 1 . 18)

olhe tlt'ion Ic.:S of I and 'cign­posi~

Iladc ions.

can vour·

and

. Imo­

.1.cns

~ rallT

, c iti­

.:101'­J the

Xellopbobia, International Migration (III(/ Development

' Pcrk«.:l SlOrm' (SAM!>. 20(8) have been massi\'l: for the victims w ho lost property. b usinesses, possessions and li ves. T heir treatment in has tily ercc(cli fell.gec.: camps was generally seen as disgr:lccful by migr.mls and human rights groups.

Migrants in both count ries arc dchuOl:mizt;d and demonized . Thcy spe nd an inordinate amOUlll of lime (a nd resoun:es) trying to stay helow the radar, 'fitling in ' and adopting local c ultural praclice;:s, enduring verhal sliglHs :md insu lts in silence. They do not cnjoy the same kind of polin: :lnd kg:!1 protection as dtizens. Reporting an a~sallit or a crime to the polio.: i ~ a risk s incc the incide nt may he turned into a prrtcx tlo arrest the migrant fo r being in th e country ' illt:gally'. Xenophobia crt.::J.les a situation in w hich increa~ed Social insecurity is experienced not only by migr.Hlt populations but hy O(her minoricy and marginalizcd ~rollpS as well. In this respect. xenophobia adverscly impacts and enhances o ther forms of discrimination . In India, prov­inct's like Assam and Mahar.l~htra that havc displayed some of the s trongest antipathy towards migr.mt Rangladcshis h an.' a lso witnessed bnltal attacks in recem times on Indian migrams from other provinces.

Mass dcportations also kad [() largc-sGlle di sruption to Iivdihood~ of thosc w ho arc arrested (am.! the people who dcpend on them for remit· tances). The deportation system itsdf encour.lges S(Huh African cmployer; to take advantage of migrant s. If they pay below minimum wage . tlu.'y know no­ont: will complain , If the)' abust: a migr.lIlt . tht:}' know tht:y will nOI ht: reponed. Or if they report an irregular employet: to tht: polict: the d :IY before pay-<I:I}'. they w ill havt: secllrt:d a month's free labour. All arc common prolcticcs in South Africa.

All of this has a major impact on the potential devclopmem illlpaU of migrollio n . Many migrants work in t:xploitativc . low-paid jobs with long hours and few benefits that provide fo r Httk heyond tht:ir immediatt: surviva l needs. Th is affC<.~ts tht:ir ability to rt:mil hOllltc . Others art: in occupation s that do not makt: lise of their training, sk ills and t:xpericnce, which 1l1<.·ans that they. too. cannot rt:mit as much as thc)' wou ld like.

Access to sllf.~ lt er and o(ht:r basic li velihood needs, including ht::l lthcare, is muc h mort..' difficult fo r migr.mts. Mi~r.mts in SOUTh M rica (rom other coun­tries, for example. have a constitutional right to medica l treatmt:1lt yet find il t:xtremdy difficult 10 access publiC health services (Pophiwa . 20(9) . Prolonged mistreatme nt of migrolt1ts in host countries exal:erbatcs social inequalities hetwet:n m igrant and non-miJ..:r.lllt populaTions and impt::dt:s tht: Sl)cial and cCililomic integr.ltit)ll of migrants in rn:eiving sockties. Continut;:d discriminatory treatment of migr.mt groups contributt:s, in the long tcrn1 . 10 tht: emerge net: of a new social umlcrdass .

Conclusion

Xenophohia in the South undermines basic principles of equali t)" fairness and social justice , comprumi!'>e!'> thc mit: of law ,md vioiatc:-I constit utional

223

). Crusb tOld S. Rtll1ll1c.bmulrau

guar.mln's and inlernational human riJ..:hts norms allli obligations. Like ra<.;i:im ;md nationalislll , x(:nophohia is a sodal and political phenomenon Ihat eontrihllles to the marginalization and/or excl usion of minority groups in socia l and national st:ltings. In India and South Afri<.'a, it is linked to nation­alism - in partic ular. its aggressivt: forms. Xcnophubi:l is not simply:1I1 attitll­din:ll orientation. Hostile and skt'wcd pcreeplions t)f Illigranl gnlups gencr:lily go hand in hand with discriminatory pr:a:tin's and poor I reatment. Aets of vioklU.:e . :tggression and brutality lowards migr:uH grou ps rt.:prcsent cxlrcllle and csealated forms of xenophobi:l , as th c cascs of both Soulh Africa and India illustr:llc.

Thc growth of xenophobia in rc.:n'iving socit.:ties seriousl y diminishes Ihe hendtts and positive:: rc mms from in lernational migration (Crush and R:ullachandran , 20(9). Guvernnu:nls , on li1l.:ir own voli tion, r:lrt:iy acl :tgainsl xenophohia wh hout nmsistcnt pressun.: from civil society organizations and thc courts. In many cases, tllt~y arc evcn unwilling to admit thaI Ihey have a problem. Cash-str.lpped non-gov .. 'rnmcnt organi7.atiolls and civi l socicty org:mizatiolls attempt 10 fill tht.' breach wilh piI..Tellle;:al progr:lOlInl..·s thai havc soml' impact bUI often p ut thcill on a din.:ct collision courSt.: with Ihe authoritil's. The cfkctivcncss of :lIlt i·xenophobia measures is compromised by Ih..: crisis·drivcn n:tturl' of the rl'sponsc. Once the eris is is over, as in South Africa. e nthusiasm for addressing the causes bt.'gins (() wane.

The failurt: of naliclI)al governments 10 s}'stcm:uically address tlu.­prohlem of xenophohia and (hcir complicity in its perpetuation suggest the n..:ed fo r a morc cotnprehtnsivc ami coord inated appro:lch. T hc causes and manifestations of xenophobia arc dearly unique 10 tach country. SUlllct imes to cach community. Rut the fact th:1l xenophohia is sprt::lding as interna­tional migration incrcases docs nOl mean tllat Ihcrl..· arc 110 potcllIial bCST­pr.u.:t icc solutions. Tlu:re is clearly :l neeu fo r a cooruinatcd respollSt' to

xcnophubia and for in le rnational organizations (0 work in tandem w ith nati\ )na l gtlVernmCn(s, rq~ion:11 hodies. non-gnvcrnmental tlrg:mizations, Community-hased Organizatiuns (enOs), migr:lIlt associalions and I..·omm uni­Iks in address ing the prohlem. Thc uucial denu::nts of such a rl..:sponse woulu indude a eoordin:ued. I..~nlllpar.llive , applied reSt.::lrch progr.lllllllt: to Ille;:asurc XI..'!lopltohia and to cyaluate the cffcclive::ness of interventions; const:lIlt monitoring of xenophobic :teliolls; political kadership and will to

addn: ss its GIUSCS and conscquen t.:l'S; laws against xt:nophobia; media eduGI­lion ; and plIl)lic nllll:alion campaigns al the local kvd. All of thcsl.." inil ia­tivt:s havc bt:en tried in pien:meal and lid /JO(' fashion .

Tht: devc\oplllt:nt bendlts and potential of increascd migr:ltitJll :Ire bdng illlTeasingly ack nowkdgcu in inlernational fontms and hy n:ltional govl~rn­

mcnts (UNDP, 1009). Huwt:\'er. thert: is a m:trkt:d tcnden .. ~y to sidesteJl o r ignore the aCl.."ompanying growth of xenophohia. Xl.."llophobic diseourst:, by ddinilion, predudcs the possibility that there arc dcvdopmcnl hl'ncfits 10 Illigr:ltion. Xcnophobia disaiJows argufllt:llts ahout the positive ht:ndits of migr:lliol1, for il sct:s nom:. llowcver. it makcs its case through misinform:t­lion , I..·xaggerat ion. sterc\)typing alld inct:ndiary language .

224

gen· Sou Cllll of , Chil on I

nali din dn'

Ad Th .. <:cr qtR

cor

He:

r\dl" ,\

Afri.

A

AIL'1

" 1I:lk· .\

Ibn I

lit."ro

IIlla S

r 1111 :1

I < :;IS

J C .. 1 Col

Crt , '\

Crt

Crt \

Lih 'noll

lUpS

lion· I i I L1 .

mps C I1 I.

scm Huh

;hes and inSi and I l' a iely hal IiiI..'

'".'<1 lith

the :hc nd lL'S

na· 'Sl·

to

ilh lS,

ni· se to

IS:

to

'a· la·

'" n·

" I)'

o 'f ,.

- - ---- - ----- - - - - - - -Xe lUlpbllbi(/, Intcrnatioual Migration and Devel/lfJll/e llf

Onc of the I1Kljor gap.s in India and SO\ llh Africa , and the Smuh mort: generally. is ,hal no·one has seriously inv(: sli~ated the outcomes of SOllth ­South migrat ion for countries of origin and destination, Somt.: rcsean..-h is emerging on the posit ive impacts of South-South remitt:tnCl~S for count ries of origin (Pendelton el aI" 2006; Kath:! and Shaw, 2007: Tevef:[ and ehikanda, 20(9), lIoweve r, much more solid and rdi:lbk evidence is m,Tded on the devc.:lopmcl1 t impacts of South- South migr:ltion on countries of d esti· nation, Without su(;h evidence, xenophobia em cont in ue 10 flourish in a cli mate of misinformation and continue to at:t ivdy undermine tl1(.: positive dcvci()pmc:nt pOlential of migration,

Acknowledgements

nle authors would like to thank the International Developmen t Kes('arch Centre (lORC) fo r its support ofSAMP resca rt:h intu tht: devdopmc:nt t:onsc· qllcnces of xenophohia . Wc wou ld like to acknowkdgc Ashley Hill for her considerahle hihliogl'aphic. c..'(litorial and research assistance.

References Adq)l>iu. 1\ . ( I YH 'j) ' lIll',l.::!ls :11111 {'xpl1lsion in Afne:!: 11ll" Ni~~'ri :1Il exrx:ril"nn: ' , /1/11'1"1/(111(111(1/

;\fi!:mfifJII I(c',Ji c ll'. I ·j(,;), pp. 42(,- 4.'( •. African Onio n (.!()O7) 'Soulh Afriu OUIIlIl)' revil-w ' , Ih'r 1(.', .";(,11' Ml'dxmi.ml RI'/H,rf No ).

IoJriGm IInioll, /\ ddis Ahah:t . AkxS/..'C\' . 0\1 . (2CM)(,) IlIImlgrtllirm 1'I)oIJia (lml fbc' .\·' 'Cllri~)' /Jill' IIII11t/: 1(1I .... 'I(f. 1:llrufH.' Wid

Ilx' I Jllill'd Sinks, C;tmbrid~c Iinivers ity Pn;ss, C:1l 11hrid~e . B:tkewdl. O . ( l Ue .. }) 'Solllh-So.,th migr.ttion :tnll hum:m d~·vclnpmt'llI : n ·nct·tions un Afri" :tn

dcvt'1opment ' , /JIIIIIUII Ih! I,do/llllellf I("S('IIITI) f'II/lN' No . .!()(JV/07, [ IN Ill' , Nt'w York . liarllah , S. ,lUU7 ' Pust·frotlf.ier hlues: low:mls :t tlew p'olky' fr.trtll"work for t1orllll':t.~1 ttltli :1",

Po/lr)' SIIIfIf.'s /'(I/I('/' ,vo . . U, f.:lst-\Vesl Cnl lt·r, W:tshinglon, D.C. Ikn:zin, M . (2UU6) 'Xenophobia and thc tll"W tl:lli/)n:lli~ms ' , in (";. Ddotl1l)· ;111~1 K. Kltm:lf

(hIs), nil' S,I(;/:· /f(///({I)""I.: of Nt/timl.' (///(1 N(I/iOlI(l/i.WI. :-;:tj.\(:, Loudon , pp . .27 .~ - 2M· ' .

Ilhaumik , s. (2()O;) ' llldi:t ' .~ tlortlH·asl. 11Ohol. l ,·' ~ l'H.'oPIi.' in tlo l11;tn ·s land ', in I'. lIanl'rjn', S. Chaudhury amI ... . ]);IS (Ed s). (/II('rll"! 1)i.~fJf(/('( 'III"1I1 ill So,,11) lI.~i{/, Sa!:c, N~'w Dt'lhi. pp.I .. ·I - I N .

lIh:lumik , s . (lUC)H) ' I'Glrs I)\'cr As .... am vij.\;l:t lll~' v iol~'rll."e ·. Iwe N.'/f'.~. H "'I."pt,·mll<: r , III! II}:! I rl<"ws.hl...: .co,1t kl L/ hj/ ...... JUIIUI.~i :tl7(,().~9 i .:'1 m I·

Ca~tle .... , s. :lIul l)clj.!:rdu Wi'it: , R. (Eds) a O(IK) M~ftr(lliflll lIlIfl 1)(',,,,/o/lIIlt'lIl: I" "',~/H.'ctin',~

fmlll (/J<' Smllh 10M, {;ene'·a. Coht·n, It ( I ')')4 ) I-"n III/ it'r.~ of 1tI('lIti~)': "/"IJ<' IIr,.tI.~1J (/1/(1 Ibt, Oll){'ys. I AIIlJ.:n1.IIl , 1.1 )filton. Ctl llMSA (lOOM) I'rol.!('lillg Nr,/lIg<'(,'S, 1I.~I'/1I1II S.'.'I.:t'''s (ll/(f IlIIlIIigrlllll.~ III SiJIII/.! I I/rlnl.

Ikpo rt b)' ( :()n.~"r1ittm for RcfuJ.:ct's anl.l Migrants in S, "uh AfriGl, J"hanncshurJ.: . Crush , J. :md p'·IHlil'lon, \V . (2U()ei) ·1{C~inl1 :ll i7.ing x,' ntlphohi:l ~ CiliZl·n :lIIintdcs 10 it1l111iJ.:r.lliotl

:tllll rd·lIJ.:':c polk)· in SOlllhert1 Afri(";I ', SAMI' M(r:.l"lllfl!ll /,,,/1(1 ' St'ries Nu. JO. sAM!', C:lpc· Town.

Crush,.1 :t1Id Itlln;,('h:mdr.m , S. (200') ' Xnltlphohi:I, int.'rnation:, ] migr.lIion and lmm:m

devdopllwnr ·, /flllll(/ll Ih'lIf.'Io/1II1£'1I1 Nt',~,'(/,.cI) 1'(I/lt'r No. .!()()'}/49, IINDI' , New York .

Crush , ) ., William,' , V . :1Ilt! I'ehcnll" S. (2eM)<;) ';\tiJ.:r.llion in ...... 1ll1111'nI AfriCI ' , 1':I I"I<'r pn'p:tn,.1 for tht, /'o li( I' (111(1 1I11t1~l'si!i R('SI'(/ r .. b /'n'Rrfllllmf', <;t .. h,,1 Commis.."i'lIl tln Inl,'m :lIintl:t1 l\IiJ.:r.tl ion , ( ;t·U,'V" .

225

j. Crush anti 5: RaI1Uu.:/)lI l1drall

D.II)'.I . K. (200M) Viu/l'lI/ lklrmgill,l!,s: l'arlilio/l. G"'lIder, fIIlll Nuliul/a' ClIlllire ill Pos/oJ/rl­I/itiliml/a. Tl'mplo.: (Jnin:rsi l), Press, I'h il:l(jdphia.

n ;m a . p, (lon,,,,) ' Push-pull f:IClIlrs nf undOCUlllC1l1nl mi!-:r.llio n fmlll lJan!-:l:tdcsh to Wl'~l

Ik'n).:al' . QIUlIi/(lliIJt' Rep{} rl, 9(l) , pp, ~.\5 - Vi8.

Dalla, I', (lU()4h) ' Undocumelll ed mi~r.llion from lI:ttl!-:ladesh fO Wl'st Ik ll~I I ', Pean' (. COl/jUt'I, 7(7), pp, 16 -1 7 ,

dc Haas. I,!, OUU7) 'The myth of i ll v:l.~ioll : irrc!-: ul :tr mignllin ll f rom WcSt Arricl to tlu: M:tgh, reh amlllw Europe:tn II ninn '. IlIlt'nll/lilJl/a/ Mi~r(/lirJJt Ii/stilllll' R('Sl'm'd) RejJort, Oxfnrd I lnivcrsit)"Oxfonl

Ik l:lIll )', ( ; , :md Millward, P. (lOU7) ' l'Usl-lihcnl allxit; lics and discour!>C 1)1' jlctlpkhood in EurullC: n;U iu nalism, xenophohia and r.lc ism', in R. Moll' ( 1'-':1.). IJisnlr.~ilJf..' (.">IlSlrIfClilJlI,~

,,/ Id<' "III)' i" 1; lIrupC,tll/ I'o{/tl('s, 1)..lI!-:r.I"c M:lcmillan, HOllndsmill , pp, 1.\7- HH. Dodson, II , ;lI1d Odfse:, C. (2002) 'Sh:l(il-S of xe!lophohi:t: in-migr.lnls .111(1 in lmigr.mts in

Miz:lmoyclhu , CalX: Town', in J. Crush ami I). "kDon:lld (his), ·/'fll/.\"lIatimItlIiSIII (/1/(/ N('I/! /Vi'iall/ IJ//II/igmlimi to Swlfb tV ika. Id;ts:! :tnd CAAS, Cape Tow lI amI TO["()ll\n, pp_ I l 'l - I ,it!.

EUMC ( !OO(I) Migrallts ' I;xperkm:e:i r!l R(/";.\"III tIIl(l Xellophobia ill I.! 1:.'11 JII('I11/U'/" SI(//('.\". Eurupc::m Moni torin).: Ccntre 1)11 Ibdsm and Xe!lophobi;t , Vicnn".

!'inc , J. ;mt! lJ ird. W. (2H06), ·SII:td<.'"S nf prcjudkt: : an inn:sti).:atiun into tlw Suuth Afri can Illl'di:t 'S CU"t:l"agl: of rJd:11 vinkm:c and xl'nuphnhia ' , Rac,. 111/(1 CitiZt' /IS/Jlp ill '1i"(lIIsitioll St'rit's, CClllfC fur thl-' Study of Vinlenn' and Reconc iliation, BrJ<lmfnntdn .

(;O\'cm.)r \)1' Assam ( 1991-1) ' lIIcgal migr~tion into A~sam ' , rcpon sllhmiu ed ") ll ll: Presidcnt of India , No\'cmher, I hIt p :/ Iwww .satp.org/s;uINrglp/cOl llll ril·sJinu ia/statcs/:I .... ~:t n l/dol"llllw n lsi pall<"rs/i llq::tl_migration_ ill_ass:un.htmJ.

Cr.lvil, It ( I ~H"i) "Tlw Nigniail IIIcg:tl Alil'lls Expulsion Order of 19H.f. A/rl('(ll/ rlJJail:~. H"i, pp. Sl.~-'d7 .

1I:tllllntaker , J., Dc 1:1 ~I unl. L alld Klaarl"l l. J. (Eds) (!()IIH) All"{//lcill~~ Nei IlKt't' l'm/e,:tiwI III Smll/) "4/ri('(I, Ikq:h:thn I}ooks, Oxfnrd.

1I:1s.~im , S" Kllp',;, T and Wnr11)' , E. (Eo-b) (1IM)8) (,'r. 1/01111: or Oie' IIl'n': Vil/kJln'. Xl'l/flpholJiu

(/J/fIIlJf! Rr.:illlJO'lltirll/ ,,/ IJij/en'/ln' ill SOlltiJ A/rlclI, Wits Univcr.;ily I'rl~s.. ... )ohalllu:shurg. llilltill (200';) ' IMD'!' Act is Ill<' h i g!-:(., ~t h~rficr 10 lkport:ttion , s~ys Sup n.:mc C(llln', I -i July. Jurcidi ll i. H. (.WO.~ ) ·Mil::r.1Il1 w()rJ,:l:rs and xo.:nophohi;t in thc Midd k East '. Pm~l"tllll I'li/X'i'

No . .1, Idctll itil:s, Conflict and Cohcsion PfOl::r.IIIl, IINRI:)!) , Gl:ncva. KI~;trcll , j. :lIld Hamji. j. (2eM) I) ' Insilll' illq;:ilily: migr.niOll policing in S\lUlh Afrka aftn 'Ipart '

hdd · . .... /rj('(/ "/"OtlllY. 41-1(;\). pp . Yi -4R KullCrldn, M. (l(M)4), ' I,i" in l-t frum wastc: li\'clihoud~ of :tcwrs involvcd in Delhi's infon n:ll

W:lst.' r •. :c..')'c!illl:: cnmom)", unpuhlisho:d l)hD d i., scrtalinn . Huprcchl K:lrls Uni \'t.'n;ily , I tciddhurg.

Kumar, II . (Ell .) ( 2IM)(i) /fI"Kal Mil-:l"tlfirlll /m/II 1I1111#(/("'~'/), Cono:pt I'lIb lbhin,:, Ncw Delhi . KWI1'lri . A. ( 1<)<)7) 'An cxplur:1II1ry s tully of tht: JlI"I)hll"ln~ of immigr:tlilS wi tll a foc IIs 0 11

11a1l).:I:tlll'shis living ill ;t Delhi slum ', lJnpll lllbhed MI'hi l disS(:nalion , Jaw:tharlal Nl'ilfll Ihlivcrsit)', Ncw Ddh i.

1~IIUbli . I.. (lOIIH) 'Aua(:ks on liJrdgners: mo rl' th~!l iu.~t xl:llophoh i:I· . .11." '111'11.1' RI'I';('II · . .... O(!). pp, I- l .... .

l.and :IU, I .. and W .. K"hwo: S:II!:lIIi , A. (Z(M)<) ' 1111111:11\ dcn:lopment irup:tcts of migr.lliu!l: Soulh Afrh.::l caS(' study', IIfIIl/(/11 1>"' I".'/O/JIfl('/lt H(',~f!tlrd) Paper Nt •. .!O()'J/();. UNDI' . Nt:w York .

Ld lm ,EVl"n:II , K. (lOI)7) ·Vuin.·~ (mill lilt' llI;tq:ins: migrant WUllI<::U 'S cX I ll'rk' l lCt:~ in SOli lltcm Afril· .. ·, .'>iI IMI' MiKl"a/io/l /'oli('v .\"I'ri!'s No. 46, SAM!" C:lpt: Town.

Lu c.:; ls~n . I .. (2(105) TJJ(' Imlfl/~l·tllIl Tbrf!lll: 'J'i)( ! 11//l',l!, rlllirJII 0/ OM mul New MiKI"Wlts ill 1Vf!.~lf!I 'll 1:'I1I"()/Jt' .'iiIlH' IH50. tlni>'Cr.;ity of Illinois I'r(.'~~, Umana and Chic.:agll .

M"tl!>Cn . 1>.1. (!(M).i) , ' u ving for Im nl(': IXllicin/-! imnlOr~lity among Ull lloo.:UlIICI1l<:1I migr.t11ls in Jnh.lIlnnhuf!::' . A/riam ,\'/fUlil!.":, 6:\(2). 1>1>. 1 7 .~ - 1 ')l.

Makina, D. (2010) 'Zimllahw,o ill ) Oh:UlIlcshufg', in). Cru~h and D. Tn'cF,j (lids), 7.illl/)(/IJII 't':~

';xrl(/'I$. Id:!S:1 l'lIlllishing , C;IP': Town .

226

,\

,\

"

M

M

N

N.

Pc

I'e

1'0

,'"If)'

"'cst

agh· ford

d in iOlls

s in 'islI/ 111 0 .

If('.~.

can 'ioll

I of nisi

IH .

till

arlo

1l~ 1

il)' .

hi. on lru

2).

111 : ."'"

~ rn

ill

ill

Xenophobia. Intern((IiOfWf Migration alld IJerle/ojJl1len/

Ma ll l'S. R .. Ta ylor. D .. 1\kDoltald. D .. !'o"n.~. A. and Rk hmo nd . W. ( 1')')<) 'St ill ", .. iling I<lr the Jlarh .. ri:lIl s: SA :milUues to immigr.ulIs :md immigr.ll ion·. SAMI' M(~r(lfiol/ ['o/;' ·/! Serie.~ No

n. SAMP. C tpt.· Town . M:lwad7-'l. A. (20 1 0) 'Metaphor:<; of migr.llion : Zimbahwctn migr.tJlts in tlw SOllfh African mnlia· .

in J. Crush and D. Tcvcr.t (his). Zim/)(lbw(I'$ I ::nll/lls. Illasa Puh lish ing. C tlw Town . Mlll"ki. T . (2008) ' Addrcss of tht, l'r<;,si(\ent of South Afri ca. TIlabo Mheki , :i1 Ihe Nation,,1

Trihute in lknll"mhr.lIlce of the Vinims of A!laeks on Foreign N<IIionals. Tshw:IIU". J July 201lH'. prcs.~ s ta lcnwn t iSSlIl,d llyTlw I' residency. Prl·loria.

McDonald, D. ,tllli Crush. J. ( t:ds) (2()()2) 1)('st;'m l iIJll.~ 1111£11011111: I'crs/x'ctilJ('S 011 Ille IImill Draill ill SOIlIlWI"I/ Africa. Afric:;a Inst itutc of South AfriGI and SAM!'. l'~tori:1 and Cl pe T, )w n .

McDonald. D. :lIllll l:Lnso. K_ (200 1). ' Writing xe nol)hohi;t: immigration and thl' print !Unlia in post-ap .. t1 Iu.:id South Afric t·. A/rial T"(I(~l'. 4H(:I). pp. I 1 ') -1 .'7 .

McDonald . D. am i j:u."o !Js. S. (2()( )5) ·(lk)wri lin ).: xenophoh;,1: ulllkrSlart(lill ).: press cover.l}:c of uoss-bordn mi}:ralion in southern Africa ', JOllrllal 0/ C()II/elll/JlJrar)' AfriHIII Sflldit'.~.

25(.-\). PI' . 29"> - 5l<; . Mis;t).:o. J.-1'" wilh LIIlU:III . L and Monson . T. ( 200<)). 'Towards IOlcranl·c. law artd d i).:n iry:

:1l1;Jn;ssing violence agai nst foreign nationals in South AfriCI '. rq)ort fo r 10M I~J' FOH:l'd

MiRr(l/iml Sfll{lil.'.~ l ' I"fJRI"lIIIIIIIf'. Wi Is l lnivcr<il)' . .rohanneshu~ Morapnli, W . (21)(17) 'I'ost -litwra rion xeno phobia in southern Africa: the CISl' of Ihl' inllux of

ullllocwnentni Zimb:lhw<;':111 immigr.mts inlo Botswaml. c. 1')')">- 201l4 · . ./O/lrn(ll flf (;'mh'm/JlJrllry Afrialll S(/ldie.~. 25(2). pp. 22'-'- 2 ">0.

Morris. A. and IJouilion . A. (Eds) (2001) Africall ImmiRnllifJlI to S()I/Ill AfriclI : FrtlllCoplJOIll' M(f'.mlioll lif Ihe 19,)Os. Prole:! ~nd IFAS. Pretoria.

N;l\'lakh,1. G. (1<)<)7) ' Bangl:l\kshis in India: the lI uml>crs ).:ame·, in"f IJosc ,lIld K. M:lCh:lnu:1 (his). Stall'S. CilizellS (111(1 Oll/sidc,.,.-: nlC rJpmoler/ Pco/J/es of SOIl/l) Asifl, South Asi:1 Forum for 1·ltlman IH).:h ls. Kath1l1:lIldll, PI' · 5').-\ - J59.

Nc{)eosmos, M. (2()06), FI"fJIII Foreigll N(Jlilll's to Nalilll' I'ol"dglwrs: li:Allfaillil(~ X('II(J/lilflhi(l i ll Cmlll'I1I/"JI"m,)' SOIlI/) 11friC(I. CODF,,"RIA, Dakar.

Neoeosmos. M. (2()()H). "The poli ticS of fe,tf and t il<; fea r o f polilics: rdknions on xl"llOphn­h ie violelln: in South Afriea·, ./o/JI"fwl o/Asilill (111(1 A/rin", Studir'.~. 4y6), pp. '5H6- '59·'.

N(:wh:tlll . G .. MaslIku, T anll Dlamini. J (2()()6) nillersi~l ' allf11hlllsjflrllUlfiOl/ ill Ow SfJ// Il> AfriclIlI Polin' S('rI 'la ' : A Sfll(~V (if I'oli':'e Per:.1Jecfi/I('.~ fJI/ Kace. Gl'//(/er (/I1l1 tbt' Gmmlll­/lily Hill tly(' .Ioi>lIIl11es/JIII"f.!. I'o/id/lg Area. repo rt for CSV H, Braamfontl'ill .

Nyamnjoh. F. (2006) IlIsiflt'YJ (111(1 Oliisit/en: Cifizl'IISbi/1 a1/(1 Xl'//o/l/)o/Ji(l ill Om/t>lII/w­

r(//)' SO/llbt'l'lI Africa. Zcd Books. IAlmlon . I'dx·nly. S. (2001 ) ' Imagining im1lligr:u ion : indusin' idc ll tit ics ami e xdusin: po licic:;s ill P()~ t-

199·1 Somlt Africl·. , lfrit:lI "today. 4&(3), p p . I "> - ~2. I'cln:ruy. S. (2009) Sl'ft'('fillg /mllligralll.~: NafiO/w/ /dell/itv (/1/(1 So/till A/ria/ 's Imllligralio/l

/'olides. I') 1f1- 200N. Wils l lnivcrsity I'n'ss. Johanneshllf}: . I'ci l. M. ( 1 <)71 ) 'G hana 's aliens', illle/"ll(/tiOlI(lI MigmlilJl/ Re/IiI'UJ. H(:H. pr. V)7 -~H I l'e1ll1klOn. W .• Crush .. .1- . C lm phdl. E .. Crl"Cn . T .. Simdallc. II. . T\'Vl,ra, D. and dl" Vlc tte r,

F. (l006) ·Migr.lIioll . rcmittanl"Cs and dl,vdo pmelll ill SOllthl, rn AfriCI ·. SAMI' Mig/"tltiflll

I'o/ie), .kl"il's No. 4·1. SAM P. Capl' Towll. Pophi\\;a, N. (2t)()<) ) '1 ll"al th lItigrallls or hcalthy rn igr:mls! Aceountinj.\ lilr the he:lltltclfl' utili­

s:lI ioll pall"ms of Zimhahwe~1I migr.tllls livin).: in SOlll lt Afrka ·. MA rl"p"t1. Wits l lnivl"r<ily . J"hanneshtlrg.

i'r.Hlla llik . II . (200(,) ' megal llligr:lIion from Ba ngladesh: a CISl' study of west Ikn).:ar . in R Kuman (1~d.). IIfl'f!,al Migmlioll/rom Il(l/I.~fd('sb. Ashtha Bharali. Ddhi. pr . 1.'7-1 47.

Ibi , B. ( 199:';) Ih.'IIIIWI"apbic tllmn'.~si()/I (lgllillSI 'I/(/ia: Muslim AlilIitmcbe /rom llatlgitu ft' ... ·IJ, liS l' uhHshcrs. Chandi).:;lrh.

Kai, II . (1 9<)4) Is 11I(/i(1II (;oillf!, IslfIJllic? liS l'uhlishers. Clwndigarh . Rallladmnd r.l n . S. ( 1<)')') 'Of hnumi;Jries and horder cro.~sings : umh,num:med lIang la(k shi

' in fi h r:llors' and the lwgelllony of lIindu nat ionalism in In(1 i;( , IlIlel"ll('lIlimls. 1(2).

PI'. 2 .-\"> - 2')~.

227

j. Crush aud S Ramacbmulran

1{:IIII,ldl:mdr:m, S. (2001) '''Operat io n PushhaL'k "; S:III),\h I'a ri v<lr, state sluills and surrqlt ;t;ollS ItUl),\I :u.kshis in Ncw Ddhi ', S;II~lIpore JOllY/wi oj'TI'IJ/Jical C;e(),r.:/'lf/J/~}', 2:K\), pp. ,\ I \-,',n.

IbmaehamJran, S. (2IK)S), ' \ml ifii.:n.:nn: , ;ll1jlotem;e ami intokr:IIlL'C transn:ll ion:llllangladeshis in Indi:I', G'1()lJtlI Mi~rtlliOIl PerspectilJCs No. 41, Gloha l COlllllIbsion ,m In te rna tiuna l Migr:uio n , Genev:1.

I{.uha , I). and Sluw, W. (2IKJ7) ' South-Soll th migmtion and remittances ', Workill~ Puper No. IO:.!, World Itlllk. Wasilinj.\ton, D,C.

Saika, A, (200,') ' (; Iol>al processes and local c once rns: lI:lIlgladcshi migrJnts in ASS<lIl1' , in A, Saik ia ( Ed. ), Populalioll , ElIlIirvllll/{'lIf (// /(1 Ill!! O~{/II'!II,r.:l' of OelldOlplI/('II/, Akallsha !'uhlishin),\ I-! OIlSl.' , Nl~W Delhi, pp. 177- ,,OJ.

Sall1addar, R. ( I')'J'J) Mm"K,illal Nalio ll: Tr(/1Isb{Jl'd(~1' :IIigl'ulirm ji'OlII IJmlgfru/i>sb 10 Wesl

Hl'II}.:"', S<lge, NL'w Vdll i, Sotnhcrn Arrican Migr:llion Projec t (Z008) 'The perkct storm: tlK n:alitics of xenophoh;,) ill

contemporary SOlllh AfriL'a ', ."AMI' M(r.:ralirm Po/ity Sl'ril's No. 50, S,\ J\.U' , Cap·" Town. Sig~wortll , It , Ngw alw, C. and Pino, A. (2Ut)H) 11)(' (iel/(il'n'(l NOI/Ill.' of Xf'lwplm/J;a ill

SrJIIlb r !/rial, (:SVR, IIrJamfo lllein. Ten:r:l. D. and Chikanda, A. (20tl9), ' Migr:llll rcm;lIanccs and houscllold surviv,)l in

i':imhabwe', SA"W Migmliv/I /'oliIY Sf'I'j(·.~ No.5 I, SAM !" CapL' TOWII ,

nil' 'f'el{'~rapb, [mlia (Z(K)'i) 'No work pennits for scltkrs ', 1.~J\lI1C , Iwww.ldegr:lphindia,L'olll/ 10'il)61,Vasp/mlti ,m/index.asp l (aLTessn J jO April 2(10).

Unilnl Nations (ZOOS) IlIif'rlw/irJl/al M(r.:mlll Slrl('k: '/1><' .lOON R{'visiulI , Unilnl Nations, New Yo rk, Ih ttp://es:I.tIll ,urg/migr:ll ion/index_asp'p:lIld o::c l l.

UN DI' (100') 'O'T IToming h:lf1;ers: human de"duprm:nt and mobility ' , .!()()'J IIU/mlll

IA'lIdo/mll'lIl Rl'pol'l, lINBl', New York. IJpadhy:lya, P. aO(6) ' Sn'uriti'"atioll m:urix in South Asia : lI:tngl,lllcshi migrJnt~ as CllelllY

alien ', ill M, Cah .. lkro-A1lI Itony, R. EllImcr~ , :lIId A, Adl:lrya ( hIs), NfJlI -Trmlitio/ltI/

S<'oll'il), ill Asia: lJilemmas;/1 SI.'(.'Ilrilizalioll, AshgatL', Burlington, pp. I,' - ,W. van Sclll'lldd, W , (ZOO I) 'Workill!; through pan il ion: making a living in tlK' Ikng .. li border,

lamb', IRSH, 46, PI', 595- 421 va ll Sdlcndd , W _ (ltKl'i ) '/1'f' Ikll~lIl Bonler/allll: /Je )'(J/u/ Siall' am/ Na/ioll ill Sr>ll/J.. il.~i(/,

AnthL'1ll I'n,ss, I ~ llldon.

V iglle,~war:tn , I), (2007), ' Frn' IllOllemCllI and tIll: lIlU velllellt ',~ forgottcn freedollls : Sumh African rcpresc(lt;Uion of umloL'unll:llIn1IlligrJn l ~', Wo/"kill~ POPI'/" Series No, 41, Refugee Studks Cent re, Oxfo rd lJni\'er~i l y, Oxford,

VignL'sw;l r.IIl, Il. (ZOOS) ' Enlluring tnrito,ri;ll ;ty: SOlllh AfriclIl illlllligr:lt ion nl1ltrol ' , l'ofili(,lI/

G('o~mfJlJJ', 27, pp. 7 S,\-HOI. Wdner, M. (197M) SOliS of tilL' Soil: Mig/'aliotl (//ltt /;'ll.lIIic erm/liel ill Illdia, I'rinLTlOn

iJn iversit y ['rL'ss, l'rinn 'ton, N-,J. WL' illlT, M ( 1995), 'Rejected [lL'opks ,Ull! unwantt'd migrJnts in SOlllh A~i~', /:'{'(moillic' (/1U1

PolilimIW('C'k(I', 11 August , pp, 17 .n -1 746, World Bank aO(9) World /Jc.'{Jdo/Jllletll Reporl .lOO'}: Reshaping Hc:<mmuic Gl'()grafJl~)',

Worlll \Jank, Washington, D.<:'

228