On the record

“Global Gateway does not bring new financial means — there is no additional money when it comes to the EU level.”

“There's no new money in the Global Gateway. And I've always held the view that if there's no new money, there's no new policy. This is a communications exercise. It's a strategy to put together what was already going to happen and present it as something new. And if our partners are tricked by this, then more fool them.”

“It was never clear what was additional about Global Gateway. It draws heavily on existing programmes and initiatives that would have moved forward even if Global Gateway did not exist. It was sold as a viable alternative to China's Belt and Road Initiative — an alternative driven by values, like transparency and sustainability. It has not gone beyond just words.”

“European Union is good at financing roads, but it does not make sense for Europe to build a perfect road between a Chinese-owned copper mine and a Chinese-owned harbour.”

“Europe's dealing with Africa is characterised by a continuous trend of instrumentalising EU development aid for the purposes of pursuing European economic and security interests, and 'protection' against real or perceived threats emerging from neighbouring countries.”

“Look closely and you will see a close link between the Lobito Corridor and Europe's mapping of critical raw materials. Its key interest is to use it to transport minerals and materials from Angola, the DRC and Zambia all the way over to the EU and the US.”

“The GG investments are Europe's bid to win over the African nations by building transport corridors which encompass airports, railways, roads and ports — critical infrastructure for bolstering national economic progress… eight of the above-mentioned 18 countries have huge troves of critical mineral reserves, the most in any African region.”

“The EU hopes that like the Lobito Corridor's MoUs, African stakeholders involved in these projects will agree to export critical minerals or the processed products thereof, to the coasts of Europe and its allies. This will bolster the EU's energy security agenda and reinforce its geo-economics position vis-à-vis the showdown with Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.”

“Over the years, the EU has instrumentalised its international development policies to suit a combination of foreign policy and commercial interests. The geopolitics of the Global Gateway relies on the promise of financing an initiative that is qualitatively superior to the Chinese-led BRI. The Gateway's added value is said to rest on democratic values, high standards, good governance and transparency. However, our research has thrown into question many of these bold claims and instead raises many questions about the real story behind the rhetoric.”

“The redirection of development funds to achieve commercial competitiveness and geopolitical objectives goes against the principle of international development as a publicly-funded good for poverty alleviation. It is not clear how the Global Gateway's ambitious proposal for global connectivity demonstrates development.”

“An alternative to China's Belt and Road Initiative, the Global Gateway was to be a 'template for how Europe can build more resilient connections with the world'. The Global Gateway has been criticised for many reasons, including that rather than raising a lot of new cash for international partnerships, it repackaged many funding streams that already existed in the EU budget.”

“The Global Gateway is a chimera. What is being hailed as a new flagship strategy and paradigm shift for the EU is essentially a continuation of approaches and projects from recent years. The Global Gateway initiative is known for its lack of both transparency as well as targets and metrics.”

“With this strategy, the EU is pursuing a geopolitical, geoeconomic, and geostrategic approach clear on advancing European interests. The frequent claims announcing a shift away from a "donor-driven approach" to a "partnership-based relationship" are hardly realized. In essence, the Global Gateway is continuing down a well-trodden path: the financialization of developmental policy.”

“In the late 1990s, Western academia and policymakers had deemed Africa the 'Lost Continent.' Today, as the world runs out of essential natural resources, the West has no option but to enhance economic ties with African countries and turn the 'Lost Continent' into the 'Land of Opportunity.'”

“Both the Global Gateway and the China Belt and Road Initiative (partly) aim for de-risking, and both practice mercantilism to secure critical raw materials and energy. The difference is that Brussels admits to de-risking while Beijing does not. De-risking speaks more to the EU's own interests than to those of the partner countries.”

“Currently, Brussels is building the Trans-African Corridor connecting southern Democratic Republic of Congo and northern Zambia with a port in Angola. This project is only enriching the European and not benefitting the local society.”

“The Global Gateway promotes the EU's commercial and geopolitical interests, encourages the privatisation of infrastructure and public services in the energy sector in the Global South, and risks increasing the debt burden of partner countries. A question arises as to whether the priority of the Global Gateway is to enable EU investments globally or to fight poverty and inequality worldwide.”

“The Global Gateway was unilaterally introduced by the European Commission and the High Representative, excluding Global South countries from its design, governance, and priority-setting process from the start. Elected bodies, civil society, and independent experts in recipient countries have no meaningful role in decision-making or accountability.”

“Business trips, missions, and activities focused on supporting EU corporate interests related to Global Gateway projects should not be financed by the EU development budget.”

“The Global Gateway doesn't provide mechanisms for meaningful engagement with developing countries despite 'partnership' claims, while the rules are primarily dictated by the EC and EU Member States who hold decision-making power and control over how resources are allocated.”

“The emphasis on green hydrogen projects, influenced by the EU Global Gateway, raises fears of exploitation and the creation of sacrifice zones. There is apprehension that our renewable energy resources might be used for the benefit of the Global North, echoing historical patterns of resource extraction and colonisation that prioritise profit over our citizens' needs.”

“An initiative that contributes to the development of emerging market and developing countries.”