Keypoints:
- Malema rejects migrant scapegoating
- EFF leader targets concentrated ownership
- Colonial borders face renewed criticism
JULIUS Malema has urged South Africans to stop blaming African migrants and township shopkeepers for the country’s economic problems, arguing that public anger should instead be directed at those controlling mines, banks and other strategic assets.
The Economic Freedom Fighters leader said taking businesses from vulnerable migrants would not transform South Africa’s economy or resolve its unemployment crisis. His remarks placed the immigration debate within a wider struggle over ownership, inequality and access to the country’s wealth.
Mines, not spaza shops
In remarks circulated by Africa Web TV, Malema rejected political campaigns that focus on migrant-owned spaza shops in townships and informal settlements.
‘I’m not fighting for a spaza shop. I’m fighting for a mine. I’m fighting for a bank,’ he said.
Malema argued that seizing or closing small migrant-owned businesses would leave South Africa’s fundamental economic structure unchanged. The country’s mines, financial institutions and major commercial assets would remain beyond the control of the communities being encouraged to turn against foreign traders.
His intervention reflects the EFF’s longstanding position that economic transformation must involve public control of land, mineral resources and strategic industries.
Migrants blamed for deeper failures
South Africa’s migration debate has intensified amid high unemployment, weak economic growth and widespread frustration over access to housing, healthcare and other public services.
Anti-migrant groups have accused undocumented foreigners of taking jobs, operating businesses unlawfully and placing pressure on public infrastructure. Migrant communities, however, have also faced intimidation, forced business closures and violent attacks.
Malema said the focus on African migrants allowed those benefiting from South Africa’s unequal economic arrangements to escape scrutiny.
The departure of migrants or closure of their businesses, he suggested, would not automatically produce sustainable employment or transfer meaningful economic power to poor South Africans.
The argument echoes concerns that anti-migrant mobilisation in South Africa is increasingly being used as a response to problems rooted in governance, unemployment and economic exclusion.
Colonial borders questioned
Malema also challenged the political importance attached to Africa’s national borders, describing them as divisions inherited from colonial rule.
He argued that African leaders could not consistently condemn colonialism while treating borders created by colonial powers as permanent barriers between people with shared histories and cultures.
That Pan-African position has placed Malema among the most prominent South African political voices opposing hostility towards migrants from elsewhere on the continent.
It does not remove the state’s responsibility to enforce immigration laws. Instead, Malema’s argument distinguishes lawful immigration enforcement from collective punishment, intimidation or violence directed at African communities.
Former president Thabo Mbeki has similarly warned that governance failures are fuelling xenophobia by turning foreign nationals into convenient targets for economic frustration.
Ownership remains the central question
Malema’s remarks redirect the immigration debate towards a more difficult question: who owns South Africa’s productive economy?
Small foreign-owned shops are highly visible in struggling communities, but they do not control the mineral wealth, banking system or major industries that shape national economic power.
For Malema, attacking migrants at the bottom of the economy merely shifts public anger away from inequality at the top.
President Cyril Ramaphosa has repeatedly condemned xenophobic intimidation, while promising that immigration rules will be enforced through lawful state institutions. His government continues to face pressure to protect migrants while responding to public concern about undocumented immigration.
The test for South Africa is whether it can manage migration without allowing economic hardship to become a justification for targeting Africans.
