Ola Aina
Kenya’s Economic Question
Kenya has found itself at the centre of an uncomfortable but important African debate following President William Ruto’s directive for authorities to take action against foreign nationals operating certain small scale businesses in the country.
The government’s argument is that Kenyan traders, particularly young people struggling to find employment and establish businesses, should not be pushed out of economic activities that can reasonably be handled by citizens.
There is a legitimate economic argument behind that position. Every sovereign country has the right to regulate immigration, employment, taxation and commercial activity within its territory, and foreign nationals operating businesses are expected to comply with the laws of the country in which they live and work.
The difficulty begins when a policy intended to protect citizens creates fear among foreign nationals or is interpreted as a rejection of Africans from other countries. Kenya’s challenge is therefore not simply whether it has the legal authority to regulate foreign traders, because it does.
The more important question is whether that authority can be exercised without creating an atmosphere in which nationality becomes a reason for suspicion, hostility or discrimination.
When Regulation Creates Fear
The reaction among foreign traders shows why the issue requires careful handling. Reports that some Burundian and other foreign traders became frightened, closed their businesses or sought assistance from their embassies demonstrated that the government’s announcement had consequences beyond ordinary business regulation.
Hundreds of Burundians reportedly sought travel documents amid fears about what the crackdown could mean for their livelihoods and personal safety. The fact that Kenya subsequently provided a period for foreigners to regularise their immigration status and business documentation suggests that the government recognised the need to clarify the policy and prevent unnecessary panic.
There is an important distinction here that should not be lost in the wider argument. A government enforcing immigration rules is not automatically being xenophobic, just as a government insisting that businesses obtain licences cannot reasonably be accused of hating foreigners simply because it enforces those rules.
The situation changes when individuals are targeted because of their nationality rather than because they have actually violated the law. If a foreign trader has broken a law, the appropriate response is enforcement of that law. If the trader has complied with the law, nationality alone should not become a justification for harassment.
Kenya’s Youth Draw a Line
One of the most significant aspects of the current debate is the response from sections of Kenya’s youth and civil society. Instead of allowing economic frustration to develop into hostility towards fellow Africans, some Kenyans have taken to public platforms to reject xenophobia and to warn against the kind of violence that has repeatedly damaged South Africa’s reputation across the continent.
The expression, “We are not South Africa,” has become particularly powerful because it represents more than a comparison between two countries. It is also a statement about what some Kenyans believe their country should become and, perhaps more importantly, what they believe it should never become.
The position being expressed by these Kenyans does not necessarily mean that foreigners should be allowed to operate businesses without restrictions. It means that economic regulation should not become an excuse for hatred.
Kenya can insist that foreign nationals obtain the correct documents, comply with business regulations and respect its laws while simultaneously insisting that those people must be treated with dignity. That is a reasonable position, and it is one that deserves to be taken seriously.
South Africans Are Watching
The South African comparison, however, requires honesty and restraint. It would be wrong to describe South Africa as a country made up of xenophobes, because millions of South Africans have rejected violence against migrants and continue to live peacefully with people from other African countries.
There are South Africans who have repeatedly spoken against xenophobia, defended migrants and condemned attacks on African nationals. At the same time, it would also be dishonest to pretend that xenophobic violence has not become a serious and recurring problem in South Africa or that it has not damaged the country’s image in other parts of Africa.
This is why the response from some South Africans to the Kenyan youth campaign is significant. Some South Africans have expressed admiration for young Kenyans who are openly challenging xenophobia and refusing to allow economic frustration to become hostility towards foreigners.
Their reaction can be understood not simply as criticism of their own country, but as recognition that South Africa’s experience contains lessons for other African nations. For some South Africans, the Kenyan message is therefore not an insult but a warning that Kenya should avoid the mistakes that have contributed to the country’s troubled relationship with African migrants.
Kenyans Have Genuine Economic Concerns
However, a balanced analysis must also recognise that Kenyan citizens have legitimate economic grievances. A young Kenyan who has spent years looking for employment may see a foreign national operating a small shop, selling clothes, food or other goods and ask why opportunities in Kenya should not first benefit Kenyans.
That question should not automatically be dismissed as xenophobia. Citizens have a legitimate right to ask their government what it is doing to protect local businesses and create opportunities for young people.
The problem arises when legitimate economic concerns are turned into a general accusation against foreigners. Kenya’s unemployment, cost of living pressures, inequality and other economic challenges cannot reasonably be blamed on Burundian traders, Ugandan shopkeepers, Congolese entrepreneurs or migrants from other African countries.
Foreign nationals may participate in the economy, but their presence cannot automatically become the explanation for problems created by much larger structural and political forces. Kenya must therefore be careful not to allow economic frustration to produce a convenient but misleading enemy.
The Larger Pan African Question
The Kenyan debate also exposes one of the contradictions at the heart of modern Africa. African governments regularly speak about Pan Africanism, regional integration, free movement and the removal of barriers between African peoples.
Yet those same governments remain responsible for protecting their citizens, controlling their borders and managing scarce economic opportunities. Both realities are legitimate, but the tension between them cannot simply be ignored.
A Kenyan working in another African country is legally a foreign national, just as a Burundian, Ugandan, Nigerian or Congolese person living and working in Kenya is legally a foreign national.
National borders remain real, and countries have laws that must be respected. However, Pan Africanism raises a broader moral question about whether being a foreigner should also mean being treated as an outsider.
The argument that Africans should not be treated as strangers on African soil is therefore better understood as a call for continental solidarity and human dignity rather than as a claim that national borders no longer exist.
The Real Test for Kenya
Kenya now has an opportunity to demonstrate that protecting citizens and respecting migrants do not have to be opposing objectives. If a foreign trader does not have the required permit, the government should enforce the permit requirement.
If a business is operating without registration, the registration law should be applied. If taxes are being avoided, the appropriate authorities should investigate and collect what is legally owed. If immigration laws have been violated, those laws should be enforced. The same principle should apply to Kenyan citizens who violate the law.
What Kenya must avoid is allowing nationality to become the offence. A person should not be threatened, attacked, humiliated or driven from a business simply because they are Burundian, Ugandan, Congolese, Rwandan, Nigerian or another African nationality.
Once enforcement moves from addressing specific violations to punishing people collectively because of where they come from, the issue is no longer simply about immigration or economic protection. It becomes a question of xenophobia and discrimination.
Africa Is Watching Kenya
The significance of Kenya’s current debate therefore extends beyond the immediate dispute over small businesses. It is a test of whether an African country can protect its citizens without turning against fellow Africans.
Kenya does not have to choose between enforcing its laws and respecting migrants. It can do both, and the credibility of its approach will ultimately depend on whether the government can enforce its policies fairly, consistently and without allowing inflammatory rhetoric to take control of the debate.
The young Kenyans rejecting xenophobia are not necessarily demanding a Kenya without borders or immigration controls. Their message is more measured. They are saying that economic competition should not become hatred, and that the enforcement of national laws should not become collective punishment of people because of their nationality.
That message deserves attention, particularly because it comes at a time when economic hardship is making migrants increasingly vulnerable to political anger in several parts of the world.
South Africa’s experience should be treated as a warning rather than an opportunity to condemn an entire nation. Kenya can learn from South Africa without portraying South Africans as inherently xenophobic, just as South Africans can acknowledge the courage of Kenyan youths without accepting every Kenyan government policy as correct.
The real issue is therefore not whether Kenya should have rules. It should. The real issue is whether those rules can be enforced without losing sight of the African people affected by them.
Africa does not need borders without rules. Africa needs rules without hatred.
Ola Aina* is a Black British journalist based in London, specialising in African affairs. She reports on politics, social change, and culture across the continent, bringing depth and context to underreported stories. Through insightful, human-centred journalism, her work connects UK audiences with Africa’s complexities, challenges, and opportunities*
