In a heated parliamentary debate, Gayton McKenzie, the leader of the Patriotic Alliance and South Africa’s Minister of Sport, Arts, and Culture, called for a ban on illegal foreigners from receiving medical treatment in South African hospitals.
This proposal follows a significant cut in funding from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under the Trump administration, which has left South African healthcare services facing a funding gap.
McKenzie’s argument stems from the 17% Funding loss caused by the USAID cut, which has primarily impacted the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).
PEPFAR has long been a cornerstone of South Africa’s efforts to combat HIV/AIDS, and its loss, according to McKenzie, necessitates prioritizing medical services for South African citizens over illegal foreigners.
He called on the government to “stop giving medical help to illegal foreigners” and urged them to seek treatment in their own countries that may have better diplomatic relations with the US.
The Healthcare Crisis in South Africa: Impact on Zimbabweans
For Zimbabweans living in South Africa, this proposal could have severe consequences.
Over the years, many Zimbabweans have sought medical care in South Africa due to the dire conditions of Zimbabwe’s healthcare system, which has been severely affected by economic collapse and a shortage of medical supplies.
With the increasing difficulty of accessing healthcare in Zimbabwe, many have turned to South Africa’s hospitals, which have historically been a haven for those needing medical assistance, regardless of their nationality.
However, McKenzie’s call for banning illegal foreigners from South African hospitals could lead to discrimination against Zimbabweans who are already facing a multitude of challenges in a foreign country.
Many Zimbabweans in South Africa are undocumented, living in fear of deportation or arrest, and now face the additional fear of being denied essential medical treatment in a country where they have sought refuge for their health and safety.
For Zimbabweans, this proposal could be seen as another layer of humiliation. Having already faced prejudice and social exclusion in South Africa due to their status as foreigners, the suggestion that they would be denied medical care — a fundamental human right — would further marginalize them.
The Reality of Zimbabweans in South African Healthcare
Zimbabweans and other foreign nationals have long struggled with accessing adequate healthcare in South Africa.
While many have found support through public health services, these services are often underfunded and overcrowded, making it difficult for foreign nationals to receive timely and quality care.
The South African healthcare system, though advanced compared to Zimbabwe’s, has its own challenges, particularly in public hospitals.
Many Zimbabweans have reported long waiting times and a lack of resources.
In some cases, they have experienced discrimination from healthcare workers who view them as “illegal” or “undeserving” of care, particularly when public healthcare resources are stretched thin.
The added pressure from McKenzie’s proposal, which suggests banning illegal foreigners from accessing South African hospitals, could further exacerbate the situation.
Zimbabweans, many of whom are in vulnerable positions, would likely find themselves pushed even further to the margins of society, facing not only economic hardship but also limited access to life-saving medical treatment.
The Bigger Picture: A Regional Health Crisis
The impact of these policies may not be isolated to Zimbabweans alone. As South Africa is the most developed country in southern Africa, it serves as a medical hub for many people from neighboring nations. For Zimbabweans, who often make up a significant portion of this group, the denial of medical care would have broader regional implications. It could lead to an influx of people seeking medical attention from other countries, including Zimbabwe, which are ill-equipped to handle such a surge.
Moreover, McKenzie’s argument is not just about excluding foreign nationals from healthcare, but also the broader economic and political context.
The loss of USAID funding, particularly for PEPFAR, could result in severe cuts to programs aimed at preventing and treating HIV/AIDS in South Africa.
This would disproportionately affect South Africans and foreigners living in the country, including Zimbabweans, who rely on these critical programs.
The loss of such funding could lead to an increase in preventable deaths and the spread of diseases like HIV, which could have ripple effects across southern Africa, especially given the interlinked nature of the region’s economies and healthcare systems.
Looking Forward: A Path to Reconciliation
McKenzie’s call for a ban on illegal foreigners receiving medical treatment might stem from a need to re-prioritize resources following the USAID cuts. Still, it highlights a growing tension between national priorities and humanitarian obligations.
The situation remains precarious for Zimbabweans and other foreign nationals in South Africa.
President Cyril Ramaphosa’s government has yet to take concrete steps to resolve this crisis, but many call for a more diplomatic and compassionate approach. McKenzie has urged Ramaphosa to mend relations with the US, arguing that both countries need each other. This could be an opportunity for Zimbabweans to advocate for a more inclusive healthcare system that does not discriminate against foreigners based on their legal status.
Zimbabweans continue to face the harsh realities of being marginalized both socially and medically in South Africa. For many, access to healthcare is not just a matter of convenience but survival.
The ongoing debate over who should be allowed to receive care in South African hospitals will undoubtedly shape the future of healthcare in the region and have lasting consequences for Zimbabweans and others who rely on South Africa’s medical services.
