Rising Tensions and Calls for Stronger Diplomatic Action
A new wave of xenophobic attacks in South Africa has sparked widespread anger among Nigerians, both within the country and in the diaspora. Many are criticizing the Nigerian government’s response as weak and ineffective, especially when compared to the swift actions taken by Ghana to protect its citizens. This growing frustration highlights a perceived gap in Nigeria’s diplomatic strategy when it comes to safeguarding its nationals abroad.
The situation escalated after the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NiDCOM) issued an advisory urging Nigerians living in South Africa to stay indoors, avoid protests, and temporarily close their businesses. This warning came following reports from the Consulate General of Nigeria in Johannesburg, which noted that violent demonstrations had occurred in cities such as East London, Cape Town, Durban, and parts of KwaZulu-Natal. These incidents led to looting, property damage, and injuries.
In a statement, NiDCOM confirmed that intelligence from the consulate indicated further protests were planned in Gauteng Province between April 27 and 29, 2026. The demonstrations were aimed at pressuring the South African government over the presence of foreign nationals. While NiDCOM described the advisory as a precautionary measure, many Nigerians argued that it reflected a troubling pattern of “passive diplomacy” in the face of repeated attacks.
Outrage Over the ‘Stay Indoors’ Directive
Nigerians in South Africa expressed frustration with the government’s response, arguing that it placed the burden of survival on victims rather than addressing the root causes of the violence. A Nigerian resident, who identified himself as Augustine, said the situation had persisted for years without meaningful intervention. He pointed out that while Ghanaians received immediate support, Nigerians were being told to stay indoors.
On social media platforms like X, similar sentiments were shared, with users accusing the government of indifference. One user wrote, “It is no longer about documents. It is now ‘leave our country.’” Another user added, “Our government has failed us. Just imagine if these attacks were against citizens of powerful countries.”
Many users also lamented the absence of strong presidential intervention, warning that continued silence could embolden further attacks. They emphasized that if the attacks were against American citizens, the government would take decisive action. “This government will do nothing to rescue its citizens; they are after the next election,” one user said.
Ghana’s Swift Response
The criticism of Nigeria’s response intensified following Ghana’s handling of a recent xenophobic incident involving one of its citizens. Ghana’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Samuel Ablakwa, announced that the government would relocate the victim, Emmanuel Asamoa, at full cost after he faced threats and harassment. The Ghanaian government also engaged directly with South African authorities, leading to official apologies and diplomatic meetings.
Ablakwa stressed that the victim was a law-abiding resident and demanded accountability for the attack. “We are demanding swift investigations and sanctions to serve as a deterrent,” he said. His approach contrasted sharply with Nigeria’s more passive stance, drawing attention to the importance of political will in protecting citizens abroad.
Experts Fault Nigeria’s ‘Nonchalant Posture’
Foreign policy experts and civil society actors have criticized Nigeria’s handling of xenophobic attacks as reactive and lacking strategic depth. A security analyst, Sadiq Lawal, argued that Nigeria’s approach had failed to deter recurring violence. “What we are seeing is a pattern. Nigerians are attacked, statements are issued, and then nothing happens. There is no follow-through, no consequences, and that sends the wrong signal.”
Lawal suggested that Nigeria must adopt a reciprocity-based diplomatic strategy. “When other countries know that there will be consequences, diplomatic, economic or otherwise, they will take the protection of Nigerian citizens more seriously,” he added.
Similarly, public affairs analyst Dr Amina Yusuf noted that Nigeria’s global standing had weakened due to inconsistent foreign policy responses. “Nigeria used to be a dominant voice in Africa. Today, smaller countries are taking firmer positions on issues affecting their citizens abroad. That tells you something has changed,” she said.
Yusuf warned that repeated attacks and perceived weak responses were eroding Nigeria’s influence on the continent. “When your citizens are consistently targeted and your response is limited to advisories, it diminishes your credibility. Other nations begin to see you as unable or unwilling to protect your own,” she said.
Political Undertones Behind Attacks
Emerging insights suggest that election-related tensions in South Africa may be fueling anti-foreigner sentiments. Olusola Agbeniyi, President of the Association of Yorubas in Diaspora, South Africa, said political actors often exploit economic concerns, particularly unemployment, to incite hostility against migrants. “It is not that South Africa has a problem with Nigeria. Some political groups use the issue of unemployment to mobilise support by blaming foreigners,” he said.
Agbeniyi noted that such protests often began as peaceful demonstrations but were later hijacked by criminal elements. “When elections are approaching, these things intensify. It becomes a tool for political advantage,” he added.
Calls for Stronger Diplomatic Engagement
Nigerians are now urging the Federal Government to rethink its approach, moving beyond advisories to more assertive diplomatic engagement. They called for stronger bilateral discussions, clear demands for accountability, and protection frameworks for Nigerians abroad.
“There must be consequences for these attacks. Until then, they will continue,” said Lawal. As tensions persist, many Nigerians in South Africa say they remain uncertain about their safety, hoping for a response that goes beyond warnings to decisive action.
