A heated and high-stakes debate over Nigeria’s response to xenophobic violence in South Africa took centre stage in the Senate, drawing strong emotions and sharp policy proposals from lawmakers. Leading the charge was Adams Oshiomhole, who delivered a robust and historically grounded address urging the National Assembly to consider decisive economic retaliation against South African business interests operating in Nigeria.
Rising during plenary, the Edo North senator framed his intervention within the broader context of Nigeria’s longstanding role in Africa’s liberation struggles. He reminded colleagues that Nigeria had played a pivotal and often costly role in supporting the dismantling of apartheid in South Africa, both diplomatically and economically. According to him, the current wave of xenophobic violence targeting Nigerians represents not only a humanitarian concern but also a troubling contradiction of the solidarity that once defined relations between both countries.
Oshiomhole recalled Nigeria’s firm anti-apartheid stance under former Head of State Murtala Mohammed, noting that the country took bold and sometimes controversial decisions in pursuit of justice and African unity. He referenced historical tensions between Nigeria and Western-aligned nations during the apartheid era, emphasizing that Nigeria did not shy away from confronting powerful global interests when moral principles were at stake.
Expanding on this point, the senator cited Nigeria’s readiness at the time to consider the nationalisation of foreign business interests linked to apartheid sympathisers. He specifically mentioned the case of British Petroleum, which was once targeted due to its perceived support for the apartheid regime. For Oshiomhole, this historical precedent underscores Nigeria’s capacity to take bold economic measures when its values and citizens are under threat.
His remarks come amid renewed reports of xenophobic attacks in South Africa, where Nigerians and other foreign nationals have reportedly faced harassment, destruction of businesses, and, in some instances, loss of life. These incidents have repeatedly drawn condemnation from Abuja and raised concerns about the stability of relations between Africa’s two largest economies.
While acknowledging the complexities of diplomatic engagement, Oshiomhole expressed frustration that Nigeria’s past sacrifices and leadership in Africa’s liberation struggles appear to be underappreciated in contemporary relations. He argued that the perception of Nigerians as a burden in South Africa is both unfair and historically insensitive.
“I understand the pain,” he said, noting that Nigeria’s efforts to build strong bilateral ties are now being met with hostility in some quarters. He stressed that diplomacy is governed by the principle of reciprocity and suggested that Nigeria must begin to reassess its foreign policy posture if its citizens continue to face targeted violence abroad.
The senator also pointed to internal political dynamics within South Africa as a contributing factor to the situation. He referenced campaign rhetoric suggesting that foreign nationals are responsible for unemployment among South Africans, arguing that such narratives have fueled public hostility and constrained the government’s ability to respond decisively.
According to him, political leaders in South Africa may be under pressure to align with public sentiment, even when such sentiment is driven by misinformation or economic frustration. This, he suggested, has contributed to a muted or inadequate response to xenophobic violence.
Despite these challenges, Oshiomhole mounted a strong defence of Nigerians living and working in South Africa. He rejected claims that they are taking jobs away from locals, instead highlighting their contributions to the economy. He explained that many Nigerians are engaged in small-scale trading, entrepreneurship, and skilled labour—sectors that often complement rather than compete with local employment.
“These Nigerians are not in South Africa on holiday,” he said. “They are there to work, to earn a living, and to contribute to the economy.” He emphasised that their presence should be viewed through the lens of economic participation rather than as a threat.
In a bold policy recommendation, Oshiomhole called for retaliatory economic measures, specifically targeting MTN Group, one of the largest South African investments in Nigeria’s telecommunications sector. He argued that the company generates significant revenue from Nigeria and should not be insulated from the consequences of deteriorating bilateral relations.
“My view is that it is time to reciprocate,” he declared, proposing that Nigeria consider nationalising MTN’s operations and revoking its licence. He suggested that such a move would not only send a strong diplomatic signal but also create opportunities for Nigerian companies and workers to take over the business.
Oshiomhole further claimed that key South African political figures have vested interests in MTN, implying that economic pressure on the company could influence policy decisions in Pretoria. While his proposal has sparked debate, it underscores the growing frustration among Nigerian lawmakers over the perceived lack of protection for their citizens abroad.
As of now, the Senate has not adopted a formal resolution on the matter. However, the intensity of the debate signals a potential shift in Nigeria’s approach to addressing xenophobia. Lawmakers are expected to continue deliberations, carefully weighing the implications of economic retaliation against the need to maintain diplomatic stability.
The unfolding discussion reflects a broader dilemma: how to balance principled foreign policy with pragmatic economic interests. On one hand, there is a clear imperative to protect Nigerian lives and uphold national dignity. On the other, there are concerns about the potential economic fallout of targeting major foreign investors.
Ultimately, the Senate’s response in the coming weeks could redefine Nigeria’s diplomatic posture toward South Africa and set a precedent for how the country addresses similar challenges in the future. For now, Oshiomhole’s intervention has brought urgency and historical perspective to a debate that continues to resonate across the nation.
