(Ecofin Agency) - The report recommends that African countries unite their voices to negotiate from a position of strength and hold preparatory meetings with their partners to identify projects of mutual interest in advance.

A recent Ecofin Pro report found that regular summits between African countries and global powers, such as China (FOCAC), Russia, and the U.S., perpetuate imbalanced partnerships that keep Africa in a disadvantaged position.

Titled " Summits Focused on Africa: What is the Real Impact on Industrialization and Development?", the report points out that in 2024, like in the years before COVID, African leaders traveled widely to Europe and Asia to attend these "continent-to-country" summits. As usual, these meetings ended with announcements of investment intentions and agreements worth billions of dollars.

For example, at the Italy-Africa Summit in Rome in January 2024, Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni introduced a plan to support Africa’s development, worth nearly $6 billion. In June, the first-ever Africa-South Korea Summit in Seoul led to investments of about $24 billion. By September, the Indonesia-Africa Forum concluded with 32 agreements valued at over $3.5 billion. Later, during the China-Africa Forum (FOCAC), China pledged more than $50 billion in future investments in Africa.

In total, at least $83.5 billion in investment promises were made during these international summits between Africa and foreign nations in 2024 alone.

Since 2000, major summits organized by three Western powers (the United States, Europe, and Japan) and four emerging nations (China, India, Russia, and Saudi Arabia) have resulted in over $770 billion in pledged investments to Africa. However, the report by Ecofin Pro states that these agreements mainly reflect the strategic and geopolitical priorities of the host nations, rather than Africa’s development goals.

The report notes that forums like the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) focus primarily on infrastructure and trade. While these projects aim to address Africa's infrastructure gap, they are closely linked to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, which connects China to Europe via Africa. This initiative helps secure raw material supplies and opens new markets for Chinese finished goods. China’s investments in Africa mainly concentrate on transportation, energy, and mining.

The United States, through initiatives like Prosper Africa, focuses on public-private partnerships, especially in agribusiness (786 agreements), financial services (133 agreements), and energy (116 agreements). Washington also backs logistical projects, such as co-financing the Lobito Corridor with the European Union, to secure access to critical minerals.

The Lobito Corridor helps transport minerals extracted from Zambia and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to the Angolan port of Lobito, reducing dependence on China, which dominates global mineral supply chains crucial for the energy transition. The U.S. and EU’s geopolitical goal is to diversify sources of critical minerals and challenge China’s control in the sector.

The report criticizes these summits for reinforcing an economic model that treats Africa mainly as a raw material exporter, with little emphasis on industrialization or sustainable economic growth across the continent.

In East Africa, China is investing in the renovation of the TAZARA railway, which connects Tanzania to Zambia and is essential for exporting Zambian copper and cobalt.

Meanwhile, Russia and Turkey are focusing their cooperation on security, with Russia also investing in energy and Turkey in infrastructure development.

Despite efforts to transform their economies through industrial policies, African nations find that many investment agreements from international summits do not meet their industrialization needs. Deals related to hydrocarbons and mineral extraction often prioritize raw material exports. This approach conflicts with African countries’ goals of processing their natural resources locally to move up the global value chain.

As a result, cooperation agreements with foreign powers reinforce an outward-oriented economic model that does little to promote industrialization, job creation, or technology transfer. This leaves African economies reliant on exporting unprocessed resources.

The same imbalance is evident in sustainable development. Despite Africa’s significant needs in this area, investments in renewable energy, like solar power, often involve the foreign production of equipment. This limits skill transfer and worsens trade deficits, even though it contributes to African energy autonomy.

This pattern of unequal partnerships continues to block Africa’s broader economic transformation and sustainable development goals.

Investment and financing agreements signed during summits dedicated to Africa are adding to the continent’s growing debt. Between 2000 and 2019, Angola, Zambia, the Republic of Congo, and the Democratic Republic of Congo accounted for half of the loans China extended to African countries in the transportation sector, and nearly 28% of the total value of these loans.

Angola is the largest recipient of Chinese financing in the energy sector, followed by Zambia. These nations are key players in the global market for critical minerals and energy, making them strategically important to China’s long-term interests.

Many of these agreements seem to prioritize protecting foreign interests over African priorities. For example, under bilateral investment treaties (BITs) with the United States, expropriating American investments—whether direct or indirect—is strictly prohibited unless full and immediate compensation is provided. These treaties also prevent partner countries from imposing local content requirements, mandating joint ventures, or setting obligations for research and development or exports.

A Need for Unified Strategy and Early Project Planning

The report emphasizes the need for African countries to speak with a unified voice and define their priorities and projects before entering negotiations. Without this preparation, African nations risk agreeing to terms that reinforce imbalances, increase debt, and hinder local industrialization and economic transformation, which are necessary for achieving long-term development goals.

Given that many agreements align with the strategic and geopolitical interests of developed nations and emerging powers, strengthening Africa’s negotiation capacity is a key challenge. While these summits bring a unified continent to the table with one partner, Africa’s advantageous position is often weakened by conflicting or competing interests among the 54 countries. This highlights the need for African nations to adopt a unified approach and enhance their negotiation power, with the African Union (AU) playing a more active role, especially since it now participates in the G20.

In addition to coordinating their positions, African countries must also improve their ability to negotiate with both their partners and large international corporations. They can rely on the African Legal Support Facility (ALSF), an organization created by the African Development Bank (AfDB) to provide practical assistance in negotiating agreements between African governments and investors.

It is increasingly important to rethink how summits between African nations and foreign powers are organized. For example, establishing permanent joint committees could help facilitate pre-summit discussions on projects of mutual interest. Moreover, creating a monitoring committee to track the progress of these projects would ensure they are implemented and assess their impact.