Lobito corridor: white or black elephant?

In October 31, 2024 we published an article titled: It is time for white elephants to turn black, where we argued that while Africa has seen in the latest years significant infrastructure investment, much of it has created "white elephant" projects that primarily serve external interests rather than local needs, and this is causing growing disillusionment among the African population. We cited the Oxford Economics' 2024 Africa Risk-Reward Index, which highlighted that instead of connecting African urban and economic centers to foster regional integration, most infastructure projects have created a "spoke-and-wheel" network that facilitates exports to overseas markets. Hence, we concluded that given today's constrained borrowing environment, African governments should prioritize infrastructure projects that provide tangible benefits to their citizens and avoid costly, debt-burdening ventures. This shift is crucial to address the growing disillusionment among Africa's youth, who are increasingly questioning their leaders' development strategies. The core message of that article was that for Africa to achieve sustainable growth, it must transform these wasteful "white elephant" projects into assets that build real economic resilience for its people.

The issue of financing African infrastructure is back in the spotlight, following a recent article from Bilaterals titled "New white elephants in Africa?", which details the objectives of the third summit on financing African infrastructure development, which is set to take place in Luanda from 28 to 31 October 2025. Co-organized by the AU, AUDA-NEPAD and the government of Angola, the event aims to mobilize capital from both African and international sources to boost high-impact corridor projects that support the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

The summit will bring together a diverse range of actors, including African leaders, multilateral institutions, and foreign investors in an attempt to mobilize additional financial instruments to fill the infrastructure gap in the continent. This includes the Alliance of African Multilateral Financial Institutions, pension funds, and sovereign wealth funds. However, the presence of major international financiers from Western institutions and BRICS-aligned entities such as China Eximbank and Saudi funds, highlights a dynamic of competing geopolitical interests.

The Lobito Corridor exemplifies this dynamic. This ambitious project, backed by the U.S. and its Western allies, aims to connect mineral-rich regions in the DRC and Zambia to Angola's Atlantic port, primarily for the export of critical minerals to the U.S. and Europe. Meanwhile, China is pursuing its own rail project to connect the same regions to Tanzania's port on the East Coast, serving Asian markets. This intense competition for Africa's resources raises questions about the true beneficiaries of these initiatives.

Ultimately, these top-down megaprojects, while promoted as drivers of development, often fail to deliver tangible benefits for local communities. Instead, they can lead to colossal debt, displace local populations, and reshape economies to favor foreign corporations and export markets. All these factors are analysed a recent report, which highlighted that the corridor risks to intensify geopolitical rivalries among major powers seeking critical minerals.

This pattern of a "resource curse" disguised as development and often stemming from geopolitical rivalries among major powers raises a critical question: will the upcoming summit prioritize infrastructure that serves the interests of Africa's people and economies, or will it simply facilitate the continued extraction of the continent's wealth for external powers? The path forward must shift from building export-focused "white elephants" to creating resilient, interconnected infrastructure that truly empowers African nations to control their own destiny.