In the unfolding debate over the future of Liberia’s Yekepa-to-Buchanan railway, one principle must guide our leaders: the best interests of the Liberian people. While the country welcomes all serious investors, it cannot and must not allow itself to be pressured into decisions that mortgage our future for temporary favors.
ArcelorMittal Liberia (AML), the country’s largest foreign investor since 2007, has invested over $800 million to rehabilitate and operate the Yekepa-Buchanan rail corridor, breathing life back into an infrastructure that had been left for dead by years of civil war. In fact, AML’s operations have come at no cost to the government of Liberia, while generating significant revenues through taxes, royalties, and direct community investments.
Today, AML is advancing massive upgrades to the railway, with new stations and modern tracking systems, positioning the corridor to accommodate multi-user operations — a model that AML itself has publicly endorsed. Indeed, no serious party — not even AML — opposes the idea that the railway must be opened to multiple users. Multi-user access is not the problem. The real conflict stems from a far more dangerous proposition: the attempt by Ivanhoe Atlantic (formerly HPX), backed by powerful U.S. interests, to force the Government of Liberia to appoint a “neutral” third-party operator — conveniently one that suits their own strategic ambitions.
This push is being disguised as a quest for “neutrality” and “investment opportunity.” But the real aim is to wrest control of a critical national asset from a proven operator and hand it over to an external player, whose loyalty and profit motives may not align with Liberia’s long-term development goals.
Ivanhoe Atlantic still lacks final approval from the Government of Guinea to export iron ore through Liberia. Yet they are demanding Liberia restructure its rail management for their benefit. Why should Liberia reengineer a functioning system to accommodate a company that doesn’t even have secured resources to transport? Why should Liberia discard an operator who built and restored the railway at no cost to taxpayers, in favor of an unproven third party whose loyalty is primarily to foreign shareholders?
Furthermore, the proposal to bring in an “independent” third party is being sold as a revenue boon, promising billions of dollars in rail user fees, taxes, and community development. However, such projections, while tantalizing, are only as good as the commitments behind them — and Liberia has seen too many grand promises evaporate into thin air once contracts are signed. We must remember: paper commitments are not the same as real investments.
There is also the glaring strategic risk: ceding operational control of critical infrastructure to foreign hands without a clear track record or allegiance to Liberia’s interests. Once lost, regaining sovereignty over our infrastructure will be immensely difficult — and future governments may find themselves trapped by the very agreements we sign today.
We find it perplexing, even alarming, that the Government of Liberia — under President Joseph Boakai’s leadership — is entertaining negotiations with a company whose primary basis for negotiation is political pressure from foreign governments and social media campaigns, rather than established facts on the ground.
To be clear, Liberia absolutely deserves to have multiple serious investors — including both ArcelorMittal and Ivanhoe Atlantic — utilizing the Yekepa-Buchanan corridor under a fair and regulated system. Nobody is arguing against fair competition. What we oppose is the ill-advised rush to restructure the operational model under foreign dictate, especially when the current operator has not resisted multi-user access and has complied with agreed Rail System Operating Principles (RSOP) endorsed by the Government itself.
President Boakai must be cautious. His administration was elected to protect the national interest, not to cave into foreign pressure dressed up as investment advice. Liberia must avoid repeating the mistakes of the past, where vital resources were handed out cheaply, leaving the country impoverished while others grew rich off our backs.
If AML, after all its investments and demonstrated commitment, can be discarded so easily, what message does that send to future investors eyeing Liberia’s ports, roads, and energy sectors? It tells them that commitments do not matter — only who applies the most political pressure.
Therefore, The Liberian Investigator firmly calls on the Boakai administration to stay the course:
- Affirm the multi-user framework already agreed to,
- Ensure that Liberia retains operational sovereignty over the railway,
- Promote open access through strong, independent regulation — not through surrendering control to external operators,
- And above all, put Liberia’s long-term economic sovereignty ahead of short-term political appeasement.
Our leaders must act in the national interest, not under the dictates of external financiers seeking a strategic foothold. The rail must serve Liberia — not Liberia serve the rail.
Discussion about this post