South Africa demands African nations fund removal of 80,000 undocumented migrants

Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber has formally asked neighboring African governments to cover the costs of repatriating more than 80,000 undocumented nationals currently held in South Africa, directing payment requests to Malawi, Ethiopia, Nigeria, and other affected countries.

The request, made this week, asks each government to pay for airfare, ground transport, and processing costs associated with deporting its citizens. South Africa reports spending more than $18 million on deportation operations since a recent escalation of anti-immigration protests and violence. Schreiber characterized these expenses as both “unforeseen” and “unavoidable,” framing the cost-sharing appeal as a necessary step to distribute responsibility. The bills cover transportation, accommodations, and overtime compensation for immigration personnel.

The scale of removals is striking. Since March, more than 178,000 African migrants have either been forcibly removed from South Africa or departed voluntarily amid widespread persecution. Foreign-owned businesses have been looted, individual migrants attacked and killed, and organized anti-immigrant groups have issued an informal June 30 deadline for all immigrants to leave the country. That ultimatum has intensified instability across affected communities.

Law enforcement’s role in the crisis has drawn scrutiny. The South African Police Service has faced accusations of failing to adequately address the surge in hate crimes targeting migrants. Critics have also pointed to what they describe as an overreliance on raids directed at predominantly migrant communities, raising questions about the proportionality and targeting of enforcement operations.

President Cyril Ramaphosa addressed the issue at the continental level last month, calling for greater cooperation from African states during an address to the Pan-African Parliament, the legislative body of the African Union. In that speech, he condemned anti-immigration violence and acknowledged that migrants are frequently used as political scapegoats. Rights groups, however, have criticized the government’s response as insufficient, arguing that the administration’s failure to actively suppress the protests amounts to tacit complicity in the violence.

By contrast, the government has moved to formalize its enforcement posture. In July, Ramaphosa adopted a five-point plan to address irregular migration. One component is Operation New Broom, launched in May 2025 under Schreiber’s direction, which employs mass surveillance technologies to identify, prosecute, and deport migrants.

The conditions facing those caught in this system remain severe. Many undocumented workers endure economic precarity, hazardous working conditions, and wages below the legal minimum, arrangements that violate South Africa’s own labor and employment laws. Xenophobic violence has been a recurring feature of South African public life for decades, with periodic outbreaks of organized and spontaneous attacks on foreign nationals.

South Africa’s relationship with migration is not straightforwardly hostile. The country has historically served as a continental destination for people fleeing economic hardship, climate-related displacement, violence, and state repression. That history sits uneasily alongside the current enforcement drive, and it raises an open question about whether the cost-sharing framework Schreiber is now pursuing will prompt meaningful regional cooperation or simply shift a governance burden that no single government has yet shown the will to resolve.