As the world undergoes profound transformations—technological, climatic and geopolitical—Africa has re-emerged as a pivotal arena of global competition. While diplomatic rhetoric continues to trumpet the virtues of “win-win partnerships,” developments on the ground reveal a more confrontational reality, particularly between the world’s two great powers: China and the United States. This rivalry is no longer confined to traditional theatres of diplomacy or security; it is now unfolding in the very arteries of Africa’s economic development—its transport infrastructure. From railways to ports and across logistical corridors, what is currently at stake in Africa is nothing less than a redrawing of the continent’s logistical and geopolitical map.
Strategic Transport: Infrastructure as Power
The battle for influence in Africa’s transport sector is not about short-term gains. It reflects a long-term strategic calculus in which logistics and mobility are redefined as instruments of power projection. In this sense, infrastructure becomes not just a developmental priority, but a geopolitical lever. Whichever actor controls the continent’s critical transport corridors controls its flows of goods, people, and increasingly, ideas.
China understood this dynamic early on. Since the early 2000s, Beijing has implemented a sustained policy of infrastructural diplomacy across Africa, driven by the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Railways, highways, airports, and above all, ports, have become the physical expression of a strategy that blends economic interests with political influence. The China Harbour Engineering Company (CHEC), China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC), and the state-run China Exim Bank have jointly become ubiquitous across African megaprojects, constructing not only tracks and terminals, but also loyalty and dependence.
The United States, by contrast, has historically been more cautious, often privileging aid, trade facilitation, and democratic governance over direct infrastructure delivery. However, recent strategic realignments have prompted Washington to recalibrate its approach. Under the Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII) initiative, and more recently through the Partnership for Global Infrastructure with the EU, the U.S. has launched targeted interventions to counter Chinese dominance, particularly in critical transport corridors.
Railways: The Silent Backbone of Influence
Nowhere is this strategic competition more visible than in the race for Africa’s railways. China’s portfolio is impressive. The Addis Ababa-Djibouti Railway, inaugurated in 2018, has fundamentally reshaped Ethiopia’s access to maritime trade, reducing dependence on road freight and lowering transaction costs by nearly 30%. Similarly, the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) between Mombasa and Nairobi, although controversial due to its high debt load, has altered trade dynamics in East Africa. These are not just infrastructure projects—they are declarations of presence.
In response, the United States has mobilised around the Lobito Corridor, a strategic rail and port axis connecting the Democratic Republic of Congo, Zambia and Angola. With over $4 billion in investment and the participation of the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), this initiative seeks to ensure that the export of critical minerals—such as cobalt and copper—remains outside China’s logistical orbit. Beyond infrastructure, this represents a new kind of strategic alignment: linking supply chains of the energy transition to political alliances in the global South.
Maritime Gateways: Ports as Geostrategic Outposts
Yet the real pivot of the Sino-American rivalry may well lie at sea. Africa’s ports have become geostrategic outposts, nodes in a planetary network of logistics and projection. Here too, China has moved with speed and scale.
The Port of Doraleh in Djibouti, modernised and expanded by Chinese capital, is both a commercial hub and a security asset. It lies adjacent to China’s only overseas military base, blurring the line between commercial infrastructure and strategic positioning. Similarly, the Chinese-built port of Bagamoyo in Tanzania, though stalled due to political shifts, was envisioned as a megaproject capable of outclassing all East African harbours. The investments in Lamu (Kenya), Kribi (Cameroon), and Lekki (Nigeria) form part of this broader mosaic of Chinese maritime presence.
By contrast, the United States has historically invested more cautiously in port infrastructure. However, this pattern is changing. In 2024, the Biden administration announced its support for upgrading the port of Lobito as part of its broader corridor strategy. Moreover, U.S.-based private equity and logistics firms, supported by new public-private investment vehicles, are increasingly participating in African port concessions. Washington has understood that securing mineral supply chains is of limited value if they remain bottlenecked at congested or foreign-controlled harbours.
African Agency and Strategic Non-Alignment
Crucially, African states are not merely passive arenas in this great power competition. Many are asserting their agency through diversification strategies, negotiating simultaneously with Beijing, Washington, and other actors including the EU, Turkey, India, and the Gulf states.
Countries like Kenya, Senegal and Ghana have embraced a “multi-vector” approach, securing infrastructure finance from multiple partners to avoid dependency. Others, such as Angola and the DRC, are using this rivalry to leverage better terms of trade and investment. There is also a growing discourse around local content, sustainability, and technological transfer—elements that could redefine Africa’s role from recipient to co-architect of its development trajectory.
However, the risks remain considerable. Several countries are overexposed to debt, particularly those heavily indebted to Chinese lenders. Transparency issues persist, and infrastructure projects sometimes proceed without robust environmental or social safeguards. Moreover, the return of strategic infrastructure to geopolitical bargaining—especially ports and rail lines—risks reviving old patterns of extraction and dependency, albeit under new flags.
Between Sovereignty and Interdependence
The battle for transport infrastructure in Africa is not merely a contest of cranes and concrete. It is a struggle over who defines the terms of Africa’s integration into the global economy. It touches on sovereignty, resource governance, and the capacity of states to shape their own futures in an era of multipolar competition.
China and the United States, through differing strategies, are seeking to anchor their influence in Africa not only through words, but through the very physical networks that sustain trade, mobility, and growth. In doing so, they are not simply building infrastructure—they are laying down new frontiers of geopolitical influence.
For African policymakers, the challenge is therefore to think beyond binary choices and short-term gains. The question is not whether to choose China or the U.S., but how to define an autonomous vision of infrastructure that aligns with African priorities: inclusive development, ecological transition, and continental integration. In the 21st century, the battle of transport is also the battle for sovereignty.
