The strategic acquisition of new technologies could help alleviate the numerous challenges confronting South Africa’s border management environment. This is according to leading industry experts who recently participated in the second annual Border Management Conference in Pretoria.
Among those to address the conference was Milkor’s Daniel du Plessis, as well as Armscor’s Lea Peterson. They both presented a frank assessment of South Africa’s current capabilities, arguing that the scale of the challenge requires a combination of modern surveillance technologies, smarter procurement approaches, and enhanced operational integration across the border environment.
Du Plessis, Milkor’s Marketing and Communications Director, began by highlighting the immense scope of the Border Management Authority’s (BMA’s) mandate and the challenges it faces. He noted that that the BMA oversees some 71 ports of entry, of which 52 are border posts, 9 are sea ports, and 10 are international airports, notwithstanding the country’s 4800km land border and 2800km coastline. He pointed to South Africa’s vast maritime domain as an area of particular concern, noting that the country’s Exclusive Economic Zone, which spans “more than 1.5 million square kilometres,” is increasingly vulnerable to resource exploitation and expanding shipping routes. This, he argued, requires strengthened “maritime surveillance, maritime operational capabilities and response capabilities.”
Despite the BMA’s fiscal and personnel constraints, du Plessis commended the BMA’s performance to date: “The BMA has had a tremendous track record…of doing extremely good work with the available resources, both in terms of personnel and funding.” But he stressed that the scale of South Africa’s border security task exceeds the BMA’s current capacity. Drawing on international benchmarks, he noted that effective border protection “typically requires 3-5 personnel per 1km to patrol” in high-risk environments. Applied to South Africa, this suggests “a need for between 10 000 and 15 000 dedicated border personnel,” significantly above the BMA’s present staffing levels.
Du Plessis also identified equipment shortfalls as a major concern. Benchmarking against Europe, Asia and the US, du Plessis said that ideally South Africa would need to have “about 240 to 480 routine border units [vehicles]” and “100 to 150 armoured vehicles” for high-risk areas. Maritime capability, he added, would ideally involve “about 350 patrol craft and offshore vessels supplemented by 9-12 long endurance UAVs.” Current availability, he noted, is nowhere near this ideal.
While du Plessis placed a strong focus on the BMA’s various challenges, he emphasised that this assessment “is not a criticism,” but an honest reflection of its operational environment. “Current challenges are funding and staffing…it limits your day-to-day operations, limits the funding required for new technology, new equipment, and infrastructure upgrades…and limits the staff available for operations.”
Despite these challenges, du Plessis did point to a number of areas where significant progress has been made. These ranged from improved transit times at the Oshoek Border Post to the BMA’s “tremendous work in apprehending over 6 000 undocumented immigrants,” noting that while the “successes show potential they are still only the tip of the iceberg.” He said there is still a lot to be done.
Du Plessis argued that strategic investments in technology could significantly reduce undetected crossings and improve operational efficiency. Advanced unmanned systems, in particular hold significant potential for force-multiplying benefits, he argued, pointing to the Milkor 380 UAV as an example of the ideal asset required for persistent surveillance, given its “30 hours endurance, 4 000km range, and a multitude of different advanced sensors.”
“Using unmanned vehicles to overcome large areas of unmonitored land and maritime borders, with limited staff, could reduce undetected crossings by 50 percent,” du Plessis stated.
Like other industry representatives present, du Plessis called for greater collaboration with South Africa’s defence industry, noting that many of the required capabilities already exist locally. “We are exporting everything you need already to foreign countries, why not make use of this,” he said.
Moreover, he urged the adoption of public-private partnerships (PPPs), arguing that PPPs “supplement and add to the state’s capabilities” without replacing them. As an example, he proposed a pilot project for a “400 km Beitbridge security zone,” offering the use of a Milkor 380 UAV with the state only responsible for the running costs.
Procurement must become a strategic enabler
Lea Peterson, Business Enablement Projects Coordinator at Armscor, addressed the legal, technical, and operational considerations that underpin border-security procurement.
Using the recent adoption of body-worn cameras as an example, she noted that systems must meet stringent national requirements, ensuring that evidence is “handled securely, that is not altered and is auditable.” She described body-worn cameras as essential for both safety and transparency, adding that they are “foundational support for the BMA’s mandate.”
On technology acquisition more broadly, Peterson stressed that systems must be “legally sound, user friendly, and technically robust.” For drones, this includes “user controls, collision avoidance, and avoiding drifting.” She warned that funding shortages affect not just equipment, but also long-term compliance and operator performance. “We cannot swap the issue of funding for investment in equipment that makes the work of our officials easier,” she said.
The crux of her argument was that agencies, like the BMA, when approaching procurement, must think strategically. Procuring the right system, at the right price, is far more effective over the long term than buying for the sake of it. “Our commitment must be for strategic investment not just expenditure,” she emphasised. “Ineffective border technology leaves South Africa vulnerable to various illegal activities which directly erodes national security and costs the fiscus.”
