Kruger National Park Name Change Debate: Heritage vs. Economy in South Africa Kruger National Park Name Change Debate: Heritage vs. Economy in South Africa JOHANNESBURG – South Africa’s iconic Kruger National Park, a world-renowned wildlife sanctuary drawing nearly a million visitors annually, stands at the center of a heated national debate. A proposal to rename the park—currently honoring 19th-century President Paul Kruger—has ignited fierce discussions about historical legacy, cultural identity, and the fragile state of the nation’s economy. A bust of Paul Kruger stands at one of the gates to the national park that bears his name. (Corbis via Getty Images) A Park with a Contested Past Originally established as the Sabi Game Reserve, the park was renamed in 1926 to commemorate Paul Kruger, a figure who embodies starkly different legacies depending on who you ask. For Afrikaners—descendants of 17th-century European settlers—Kruger is celebrated as a nationalist hero who resisted British colonialism. For the Black majority, however, he symbolizes a painful history of land dispossession and exclusion from political power. Since the end of apartheid in 1994, South Africa has embarked on an extensive renaming campaign aimed at dismantling symbols of colonial and apartheid-era oppression. Cities, towns, airports, and landmarks have been rebranded to reflect the country’s diverse cultural heritage. But renaming Kruger National Park isn’t just about rewriting history—it’s about weighing symbolic justice against real-world consequences. Political Momentum and a Surprising Misstep In September, during South Africa’s Heritage Month, the opposition Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) introduced a motion in the Mpumalanga provincial legislature to rename the park. EFF representative Rhulani Qhibi passionately argued, “How do we celebrate our heritage as South Africans when we still have our beautiful national parks named after the architect of apartheid Paul Kruger?” While historians note that Kruger died decades before apartheid was formally codified into law, his association with racial segregation and land dispossession makes him a contentious figure in modern South Africa. But the EFF’s proposal hit an immediate snag. In their eagerness to remove Kruger’s name, party officials suggested “Skukuza”—the Tsonga nickname for the park’s first warden, James Stevenson-Hamilton. The nickname, meaning “he who sweeps clean,” refers to Stevenson-Hamilton’s aggressive removal of poachers and Black communities who lived within the park’s boundaries. The suggestion was widely criticized as tone-deaf and historically insensitive. Tourists go to the park in their hundreds of thousands every year to view the wildlife on offer. (AFP via Getty Images) Economic Stakes in the Balance Kruger National Park isn’t just a symbol—it’s an economic powerhouse. Home to the Big Five and countless other species, the park is a cornerstone of South Africa’s tourism industry, which contributes nearly 9% to the national GDP. Tourism experts warn that a name change could jeopardize international recognition built over decades. Professor Elmarie Slabbert, a research director in tourism management at North West University, cautioned that rebranding the park could have “severe consequences… it might even dilute the international recognition of this park and South Africa as a tourism destination that we’ve built over so many years.” She added, “We’ve got such a high unemployment rate at this point in time that I believe that is where the money should go.” With more than 30% of South Africans unemployed—and youth joblessness even higher—the cost of rebranding a globally recognized destination raises difficult questions about priorities. AfriForum Fights Back AfriForum, an Afrikaner civil rights group, condemned the EFF’s proposal as “cheap politics” and vowed to mount legal challenges against any renaming effort. Marais de Vaal of AfriForum defended Kruger’s legacy, stating, “The Kruger National Park was created thanks to Kruger’s vision… to ignore Kruger’s contribution to the establishment of the country’s most important national park… is opportunistic and blatantly spreading lies.” Despite the opposition, the motion gained support from the African National Congress (ANC) and uMkhonto weSizwe in the provincial legislature. While the vote is not legally binding—any name change must follow a national process—it signals growing political will to confront colonial and apartheid-era symbols. The Paul Kruger statue in Pretoria has sometimes attracted the ire of protesters—it was daubed with red paint in 2020. (Gallo Images via Getty Images) Renaming in Broader Context South Africa is no stranger to contentious name changes. The coastal city of Port Elizabeth became Gqeberha in 2021. Jan Smuts Airport is now OR Tambo International Airport, named for the anti-apartheid stalwart. Even Pretoria, the capital, has seen its municipal name changed to Tshwane, though the city itself retains its colonial-era name. Dr. Nkadimeng Mahosi, chairperson of the South African Geographical Names Council (SAGNC), emphasized that renaming a national landmark like Kruger Park requires careful adherence to legal procedures. “What is happening here… does not go according to what the national act says… [and] is political point-scoring,” he told the BBC. The SAGNC process involves public consultations, provincial review, and final ministerial approval. For a site as prominent as Kruger, multiple government departments would also need to weigh in—making the path to a new name long and complex. The Indian Ocean city of Gqeberha was known as Port Elizabeth until 2021. (Getty Images) Looking Ahead: A Nation Grappling with Its Identity The Kruger Park debate is more than a political skirmish—it’s a reflection of South Africa’s ongoing struggle to reconcile its painful past with its aspirational future. How does a nation honor indigenous heritage without undermining economic stability? Can symbolic reparations coexist with practical needs? For now, the name “Kruger” remains on park maps and safari itineraries. But the conversation it has sparked will continue to resonate. As South Africans navigate the delicate balance between memory and progress, the fate of one of the world’s most famous wildlife reserves may well become a defining chapter in the nation’s post-apartheid story. Whether the park is eventually renamed or not, the debate has already succeeded in forcing a public reckoning with history—and a deeper conversation about what it means to build an inclusive, prosperous South Africa.
2025-10-12