The Initiative: The European Commission's Global Gateway is the European Union’s global infrastructure and investment strategy. It serves as a democratic, values-driven alternative to China's Belt and Road Initiative.
The Funding Milestone:
While the initiative originally launched with a target to mobilize €300
billion in investments between 2021 and 2027, the European Union
successfully surpassed its goal ahead of schedule, mobilizing over €306
billion
Core Focus Areas:
The program channels public and private sector investments via the "Team
Europe" framework into five major global pillars:
- Digital
connectivity (e.g., secure internet corridors,
satellite links).
- Climate
and clean energy (e.g., green transitions, renewable
power networks).
- Transport
networks (e.g., strategic corridors and
transit infrastructure).
- Health
capacities (e.g., local pharmaceutical
production and supply chains).
- Quality
education and research
https://commission.europa.eu/topics/international-partnerships/global-gateway_en
https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/global-gateway_it
https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/global-gateway_en
The European
Union’s Global Gateway initiative has surpassed its initial €300
billion investment goal and operates 256 consolidated flagship projects
worldwide, showing the most tangible progress and active delivery in specific
corridors and regions
The Global Gateway strategy has made its most
concrete and effective progress in large-scale transport corridors, green
energy, and digital links.
The Lobito Corridor (Angola, Zambia, DRC)
- What
it is: A major railway and logistics
overhaul connecting the copper and cobalt mines and
critical raw-material belt of the Democratic Republic of Congo
(DRC) and Zambia to the Atlantic coast at the Port of Lobito in Angola. It
operates as a private concession/joint venture consortium.
- Why
it works: It drastically cuts transit times
for critical raw materials and agricultural goods from weeks down to days,
boosting regional trade and building joint European, African, and American
financial backing.
- Impact: Rail and supply-chain operations have
dramatically cut transit times (reducing transport windows significantly
down from traditional overland bottlenecks) to move low-carbon metals and
agricultural logistics toward international markets.
- Key
projects: It also involves
major logistics investments like the Caála Logistics Platform,
designed to aggregate, store, cool, and process local products, and co-financing with international development banks
Coastal Protection and Trade Corridors
(West Africa)
- What
it is: Infrastructure investments along the
Lagos-Abidjan trade corridor.
- Why
it works: Partnering with groups like the
World Bank and specialized engineering firms, it addresses severe coastal
erosion while safeguarding vital West African trade and transport routes.
Green Energy and Critical Minerals
(Kazakhstan and Central Asia)
- What
it is: Large-scale renewable energy, solar,
wind, and green hydrogen frameworks.
- Why
it works: It pairs European demand for
diversified clean energy and raw materials with Central Asian
infrastructure development, though it faces ongoing civil society calls
for better local community consultation.
Digital Connectivity (Pacific and
Africa-EU Partnerships)
- What
it is: Subsea cables, satellite data
sharing, and regional digital infrastructure.
- Why
it works: It bridges digital divides by
integrating partner countries more closely into global data and
telecommunication networks.
In sub-Saharan Africa https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/global-gateway/initiatives-sub-saharan-africa_en
https://europeandemocracyhub.epd.eu/the-eus-global-gateway-needs-democracy-to-work/
https://www.swp-berlin.org/publikation/mta-joint-futures-31-eu-global-gateway-and-north-africa
The Africa-EU Partnership
https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/africa-eu-partnership_en
https://www.iss.europa.eu/publications/briefs/beyond-summits-africa-eu-partnership-priority
The EU Global Gateway includes a Global
Gateway Africa-Europe Investment Package - with EUR 150
billion worth of grants and investment supported by the EU budget.
The Africa-EU Partnership faces structural, economic,
and geopolitical difficulties that strain relations between the African Union
(AU) and the European Union (EU).
The Main Difficulties and Challenges from
the African Point of View
- Power
Asymmetries and Paternalism: Despite European claims
to the contrary, the relationship often retains an unequal dynamic where
Africa is treated as an aid recipient or security problem rather than an
autonomous, equal political actor.
- Economic
and Extractive Logic: Trade patterns continue to
focus on exporting raw materials from Africa to Europe rather than
supporting local industrialization, value addition, and the African
Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).
- Sovereign
Debt Crises: Many African nations face severe
debt burdens—such as Kenya allocating a large portion of its revenue to
debt service—limiting their fiscal space for climate and infrastructure
investments.
- Climate
and Adaptation Finance Gaps: Sub-Saharan Africa
faces massive annual adaptation funding shortfalls (estimated at $46
billion per year by 2030), compounded by differing accounting methods and
slow disbursement of promised European funds.
- Geopolitical
Competition and Fading Moral Authority: European
responses to global crises—such as vaccine nationalism during COVID-19,
shifting budget priorities toward domestic defense and the war in Ukraine,
and perceived double standards regarding international law—have eroded
trust.
- Migration
and Security Friction: Migration policies often
reflect unilateral European containment goals rather than shared,
long-term mobility and talent partnerships, while security cooperation
struggles against regional fragmentation and shifting alliances.
- Ritualistic
Declarations vs. Implementation: High-level summits
frequently produce symbolic declarations and pledges that fail to translate into
transparent, fast-tracked, and accountable execution on the ground.
Objections from human rights NGOs
The Africa-EU Partnership
faces significant structural, legal, and political difficulties when balancing
economic cooperation with human rights compliance.
Key Difficulties and Challenges
- Non-Binding
Clauses in Trade Agreements: Human rights
principles are frequently mentioned in the preambles of Economic
Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the EU and African regions, but they
are often not legally enforceable or backed by dedicated human rights
chapters.
- Tension
Between Geopolitics and Accountability: The EU often
prioritizes strategic, migration, or resource-security interests (such as
deals involving migration management or tech surveillance) over strict
human rights conditionality. For instance, transparency concerns have been
raised regarding EU-funded security cooperation or tech exports to
rights-violating governments.
- Asymmetric
Regulatory Frameworks: Critics argue that European due
diligence laws—such as the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence
Directive (CSDDD)—can risk reinforcing top-down or Eurocentric compliance
norms rather than empowering local African legal frameworks and remedies.
- Cross-Border
Accountability Gaps: Victims of corporate human
rights abuses (such as land grabbing or labor exploitation in resource
extraction) face major procedural hurdles, including high litigation
costs, complex cross-border jurisdictions, and heavy burdens of proof in
European courts.
- Suspension
Mechanisms vs. Realpolitik: While partnership
agreements (such as the EU-OACPS agreement) contain clauses allowing for
the suspension of aid or cooperation in cases of severe human rights
breaches ("cases of special urgency"), these mechanisms are
politically sensitive and rarely invoked
Other considerations
Doing business with dictatorial regimes and human
rights violators presents a complex dilemma for the Africa-EU Partnership, as
it forces the European Union to constantly balance its core democratic values
against urgent geopolitical and economic interests.
The structural and ethical difficulties of navigating
these relationships manifest in several critical ways:
1. The Value-Interest Paradox (Principled
vs. Pragmatic Foreign Policy)
- The
Normative Dilemma: The EU’s foundational framework
mandates that external partnerships promote democracy, human rights, and
the rule of law. However, strict adherence to these conditions often
alienates African regimes that face democratic backsliding or are under
military rule (such as in parts of the Sahel).
- Transactional
Realities: To curb irregular migration and
secure energy resources (such as oil, gas, and green hydrogen), the EU
frequently enters into strategic agreements with authoritarian leaders.
Critics argue that this pragmatic approach directly undermines Europe's
normative credibility.
2. High Geopolitical Competition (The
"No-Strings" Alternative)
- Loss
of Strategic Leverage: When the EU enforces human
rights conditionalities, dictatorial regimes easily pivot to alternative
global powers like China and Russia.
- Competitive
Asymmetry: China’s Belt and Road Initiative
offers infrastructure funding under a policy of
"non-interference," while Russia provides security and military
assistance without demanding governance reforms. Consequently, the EU
often loses strategic ground and economic influence by upholding strict
ethical standards.
3. Regulatory and Compliance Burdens
- Supply
Chain Due Diligence: European businesses operating
in or sourcing from authoritarian states must navigate rigorous
accountability legislation, such as strict supply chain due diligence and
carbon adjustment mechanisms. Proving that materials (like critical
minerals) were extracted without forced labor or human rights abuses is
incredibly complex in states lacking transparent legal systems.
- Dual-Use
Technology Dilemmas: Civil society groups frequently
criticize European entities for exposing the partnership to abuse by
exporting advanced surveillance or dual-use software to repressive
governments, which use these technologies to crack down on domestic
dissent.
4. Political Instrumentalization and
Weaponization
- Civil
Society Suppression: Dictatorial regimes frequently
weaponize European support for local civil society organizations (CSOs).
Authoritarian governments often paint local human rights defenders as
"foreign agents" working for Western interests, isolating local
communities and restricting safe avenues for foreign investment.
- Sanction
Backfire: When the EU implements economic
sanctions against unconstitutional governments, the measures often
inadvertently harm the civilian population and deepen poverty rather than
modifying the behavior of the ruling elite.
Direct Comparison: EU Values vs.
Commercial/Geopolitical Imperatives
|
The EU Value Objective |
The Practical Business/Geopolitical
Reality |
|
Human Rights Conditionality:
Demanding democratic governance and civil freedoms. |
Partner Diversification:
Authoritarian regimes bypass the EU for unconditional financing from
China/Russia. |
|
Migration Management:
Partnering to secure borders and stabilize transit zones. |
Authoritarian Empowerment:
Funding inadvertently legitimizes or finances repressive state security
apparatuses. |
|
Resource & Green Energy Security:
Investing in raw minerals and green hydrogen. |
Local Governance Gaps:
Extracting resources within corrupt jurisdictions invites severe legal and
reputational risks. |
Italy’s Mattei Plan
https://www.governo.it/it/piano-mattei
The Mattei Plan (Piano Mattei) is
Italy's strategic initiative for Africa, launched in January 2024 by Prime
Minister Giorgia Meloni to build equal partnerships and boost economic
cooperation. The plan starts with an initial allocation of €5.5 billion.
The third annual progress report for Italy's Mattei
Plan for Africa (updated as of June 30, 2026) was adopted at the sixth Steering
Committee meeting at Palazzo Chigi and submitted to Parliament on July 3, 2026.
Key Updates and Progress
- Partnership
Scope: The initiative has expanded its
geographical reach to include 18 partner countries in Africa,
following earlier expansions at summits in Rome and Addis Ababa.
- Funding
& Investment: Launched in January 2024 with
an initial allocation of €5.5 billion (combining climate funds and
development cooperation funds), over €1 billion in Italian resources is
already actively committed to projects on the continent.
- Global
Gateway Synergy: The plan coordinates closely with
the EU's Global Gateway initiative, securing synergies valued at over €1.2
billion.
- Core
Strategic Initiatives:
- Advancing
the Lobito Corridor infrastructure project (linking Central and
Southern Africa via companies like Webuild).
- Developing
African coffee production value chains.
- Expanding
the Blue Raman undersea cable toward East Africa.
- Operating
the Play Hub for Sustainable Development in Rome to support
African startups using artificial intelligence. [1,
2,
3]
- Key
Sectors: Projects focus on six core pillars:
education and training, health, water, agriculture and fisheries, energy
(including renewables and biofuels), and physical/digital infrastructure
https://www.governo.it/en/artcolo/mattei-plan-africa/31297
https://www.esteri.it/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/ISPI_FPC-Piano-Mattei.pdf
The Mattei Plan develops new projects and
actively implements initiatives and investments already under-way, sharing with
African nations the design, definition and implementation phases of each
project, in order to ensure economic and social returns that remain within the
country and serve as a stable source of resources for further interventions.
Alongside strategic transnational projects
for the development of Africa as a whole, and following an incremental
approach, the Plan initially involved nine Nations directly (Egypt, Tunisia,
Morocco and Algeria, Kenya, Ethiopia, Mozambique, the Republic of the Congo and
Côte d’Ivoire). This number rose to fourteen in 2025, with the addition of
Angola, Ghana, Mauritania, Senegal and Tanzania, and subsequently to eighteen
in 2026, with the inclusion of Gabon, Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of the
Congo and Zambia.
The Mattei Plan for Africa is structured
around six pillars:
1.
WATER:
projects aim to improve water management and access, addressing climate change
mitigation and adaptation and specifically tackling desertification.
Infrastructure interventions cover the entire water cycle: supply, treatment,
distribution and reuse, in particular through the design, construction,
management and maintenance of complex water infrastructure and of treatment and
water-quality monitoring facilities;
2.
AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES:
interventions aim to help strengthen the African continent’s food sovereignty
and reduce rates of undernourishment and malnutrition. In particular,
initiatives focus on promoting: cooperation with Italian centres of excellence;
the transition from subsistence farming to more efficient and profitable
techniques for farmers; the sustainable management of marine resources and
support for coastal communities; the development of local supply chains; the
training of young people in agriculture; and innovation to increase crop yields
and resilience to climate change;
3.
ENERGY:
initiatives aim to expand local populations’ access to energy, promote the use
of renewable energy, support the spread of new technologies and the development
of sustainable energy supply chains, such as biofuels, and address climate
change mitigation through more efficient electrification and forest
conservation. These projects and investments form part of the framework of
energy complementarity between Europe and Africa, in which Italy serves as the
natural entry hub for energy supplies to the whole of Europe;
4.
PHYSICAL AND DIGITAL
INFRASTRUCTURE: in addition to the infrastructure
initiatives under the previous three pillars, the initiatives in the frame of
this pillar support the strengthening of satellite connectivity, digital
transformation and the modernisation of postal services, and the development of
energy transmission and distribution infrastructure, especially from renewable
sources. The aim is to overcome physical barriers and contribute to the digital
transition, for instance through support for digital backbones and the
establishment of innovation hubs;
5.
EDUCATION, TRAINING AND
CULTURE: the aim is to strengthen human capital
across all six pillars, by promoting the acquisition of technical, professional
and managerial skills, in order to support employment, entrepreneurship and
local economic growth through partnerships between educational institutions,
the private sector and public administrations, as well as support for fair and
inclusive training pathways at all levels. Particular attention is given to
lifelong learning, the development of technical and digital skills, educational
innovation and strengthening the capacity of partner nations’ public sectors;
this pillar also includes initiatives in the cultural field, in particular
cooperation programmes for the protection, conservation and enhancement of
cultural heritage, as well as for the development of cultural and creative
industries;
6.
HEALTH:
projects aim to protect the right to health, strengthen local health systems,
improve access to care, enhance training for medical and healthcare staff, and
develop digital telemedicine platforms, with particular attention to rural
areas in order to promote inclusion and protect the most vulnerable sections of
the population. Interventions also focus on combating undernutrition,
protecting maternal and child health, and strengthening disease-prevention
programmes.
On the basis of specific needs and
requests from partners, in addition to the six main pillars, the Mattei Plan
includes further training programmes and joint initiatives in areas such as
sport and youth policy, natural-disaster risk management, and cooperation in
the space sector.
Every project and intervention under the
Mattei Plan reflects a genuine partnership approach, involving institutions,
businesses, universities, research centres, civil society and local
communities, in order to ensure effective, sustainable and long-term
development.
Projects, which aim to achieve concrete
and measurable results, are designed with a cross-cutting approach to
strengthen sustainability and allow for replicability, as part of an ongoing
expansion and diversification of cooperation initiatives between Italy and
Africa.
From https://www.governo.it/en/articolo/mattei-plan-africa-objectives-and-focus-areas/31298
As Italy’s Piano Mattei (Mattei Plan) moves from
launch to full-scale implementation in 2026, expanding its operational reach
from 9 to 18 African nations, positive opinions and assessments of Italy's
Mattei Plan in 2026 highlight its evolution into a fully operational,
multilateral strategy that marks a significant shift in Euro-African relations.
Supporters praise the initiative for moving away from traditional,
paternalistic aid models toward an "equal partnership" focused on
shared economic growth, infrastructure development, and co-creation.
However, it faces several critical structural,
political, and geopolitical challenges.
While Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s administration
frames the initiative as a "non-predatory, equal partnership", some policy
analysts and international observers highlight the following core difficulties
the plan must navigate in 2026:
1. Scaling the Financial Architecture
- The
"From Projects to Delivery" Gap:
While Italy has unrolled dozens of initiatives and committed over €1
billion, critics argue the budget remains modest compared to the vast
developmental needs of 18 countries.
- Multilateral
Integration: Italy is attempting to alleviate
financial constraints by tying the Mattei Plan to larger European
frameworks like the EU Global Gateway
and international institutions (the World Bank and the African Development
Bank). However, merging Italy's centralized national command with complex,
multi-layered international funding structures introduces significant
bureaucratic friction.
2. Accusations of "Extractivism"
and Energy Contradictions
- The
Energy Asymmetry: The plan is heavily rooted in
securing energy corridors (such as natural gas and biofuels) to turn Italy
into a Mediterranean energy hub.
- Local
vs. European Benefit: Experts from institutions like the Istituto Affari
Internazionali (IAI) point out a growing tension:
while Italy preaches "local value retention," major
projects—like Kenyan biofuels or critical minerals from the Lobito
Corridor—are primarily geared toward supplying European markets and
driving Europe's green transition, raising local concerns of neo-colonial
resource extraction.
3. Geopolitical Security and Regional
Instability
- The
Saharan and Sahelian Crisis: Implementation
areas directly border or encompass regions facing severe political
volatility, coup d'états, and terrorism. For example, Italian Foreign
Minister Antonio Tajani highlighted that security threats, such as
terrorist acts in partner countries like Nigeria, present immediate
physical and operational risks to Italian personnel and infrastructure
deployment. Civil conflict and regional insecurity represent severe
operational, financial, and strategic threats to Italy's Mattei Plan for
Africa. Because the initiative operates heavily through infrastructure,
energy, and development projects in highly volatile regions, active civil
strife, radical islamism, and political fragmentation directly jeopardize
its long-term viability. (# See the notes below)
- Crowded
Geopolitical Space: Italy must execute this plan
while competing for influence against deeply entrenched global actors in
Africa, including China, Russia, Turkey, and even fellow EU member states
like France and Spain.
4. The Unspoken Migration Agenda
- Conditionality
Apprehensions: Officially, the pillars focus on
development (water, agriculture, health, education, energy, and
infrastructure). Unofficially, the Italian government directly links the
success of the plan to the reduction of irregular maritime migration.
- Partner
Trust: African civil society groups and
leadership remain wary that development aid might be weaponized or
conditioned upon African nations acting as external border guards for
Europe.
5. Transparency and Accountability
Deficits
- Lack
of Independent Evaluation: The governance
structure is highly centralized within a dedicated steering committee
under the Italian Prime Minister's office. Independent reviews indicate
the plan still lacks clear, publicly available, and measurable key
performance indicators (KPIs). Without third-party oversight, assessing
whether the plan is genuinely improving local livelihoods or simply
functioning as a domestic political branding tool remains a major
challenge
https://www.iai.it/en/publications/c05/projects-delivery-mattei-plan-2026-and-beyond
Supporters of the Mattei Plan respond by
pointing to:
Shift from Projects to Delivery
- Tangible
results: According to the third annual progress report sent to Parliament
in July 2026, the plan has transitioned from
initial pilot phases into a fully functional operational mechanism.
- Expanding
footprint: Evaluators point out that the
framework has scaled rapidly, growing from 9 initial pilot countries to 18
partner nations with over 70 active projects across Africa.
- Substantial
funding mobilization: A strong financial framework
combining Climate Fund approvals, credit financing, and private resources
has successfully committed over €1 billion in Italian resources
alone, acting as a force multiplier for larger investments.
Integration with European and Global
Strategies
- The
EU Global Gateway alignment: Analysts emphasize
that folding the Mattei Plan into the European Union's broader Global Gateway initiative expands its reach and
coordinates efforts rather than duplicating them.
- Strategic
positioning: International observers note the
plan represents an important formalization and acceleration of European
engagement at a time when other Western nations are struggling to maintain
geopolitical influence on the continent.
- G7
synergy: Prominent infrastructure milestones,
such as Italian industrial group Webuild's advances on Africa's strategic Lobito
Corridor, align directly with G7-backed corridor investments,
demonstrating the plan's integration into global supply chain strategies.
The "Cooperation Between Equals"
Philosophy
- African
ownership: Positive feedback from North African
perspectives (including Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, and Egypt) highlights
that the plan aligns with Africa's local development priorities rather
than imposing external mandates.
- Focus on self-sufficiency: Proponents praise the framework's core principle of assisting African economies to grow through their own resources by building skills development hubs, digital infrastructure (like the Blue Raman fiber optic cable extension), and local supply chains (such as coffee production).
# The primary conflict-driven vulnerabilities
impacting Mattei Plan pilot projects and broader strategic goals include:
Geographic Vulnerabilities in Key Pilot
Countries
- Ethiopia
and the Horn of Africa: As one of the core
pilot nations for the plan, Ethiopia poses a severe risk due to unresolved
internal insecurity, persistent regional tensions, and the ongoing threat
of a broader conflict escalation. Instability here directly threatens
investments in local agriculture, water management, and institutional
training.
- The
Sahel: Italy's attempts to expand
infrastructure and migration management projects in the Sahel are severely
restricted by military coups, state fragility, and a surge in jihadist
groups operating across borders.
- Nigeria:
The Italian government has explicitly cited terrorist acts in Nigeria as
direct threats to its strategic partnership priorities, highlighting how
non-state armed actors directly undermine energy and development
stability.
Strategic and Operational Risks
- Threats
to Asset Security: The Mattei Plan relies heavily
on physical infrastructure, energy diversification (e.g., gas from
Algeria, energy transit networks), and localized agricultural initiatives.
Civil conflicts expose these high-value physical assets to sabotage,
extortion, or destruction by rebel factions or terrorist organizations.
- Aggravation
of the Migration Root Causes: A core objective of
the Mattei Plan is to stem irregular migration by addressing its root
economic causes. However, active civil conflicts drive severe displacement
crises. Political violence effectively neutralizes local development aid,
making it impossible to establish the stable, long-term employment needed
to mitigate migratory flows.
- Financial
Dilution: Critics note that €5.5 billion
spread over four years across 14 countries is already a modest budget.
When conflict breaks out, a significant portion of these limited resources
must inevitably be diverted away from core development into expensive
security protocols, asset protection, and emergency risk mitigation.
Geopolitical Friction
The vacuum created by civil conflict and Western
withdrawal in unstable target countries has increasingly been filled by rival
actors like Russia (via paramilitary presence) and China. This shifting
security dynamic severely compromises Italy's strategic autonomy and its
ambition to act as the primary, trusted mediator between the EU and Africa
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento
Nota. Solo i membri di questo blog possono postare un commento.