When the European Union launched the Global Gateway in 2021, it set out not only to mobilise investment but to redefine how Europe engages with the world. In an era of intensifying geopolitical competition, infrastructure has become a vector of influence, and connectivity a measure of strategic relevance. The initiative was conceived as Europe’s response to a global landscape increasingly shaped by China’s Belt and Road Initiative, America’s selective retrenchment, and Russia’s disruptive activities across regions. But it was also a statement of intent: that the EU can act strategically without abandoning its principles of partnership, transparency, and sustainability.
As Hildegard Bentele MEP notes in her foreword, Global Gateway represents more than an infrastructure initiative. It is the EU’s attempt to fuse development cooperation with geopolitical strategy and to turn normative power into strategic presence. This dual ambition is both the initiative’s strength and one of its greatest challenges. Four years after its inception, Global Gateway is on the one hand still defining its operational identity and on the other hand struggling for visibility and a consistent narrative: between aspiration and implementation, between policy design in Brussels and impact in partner countries.
This compendium consists of three policy-oriented summaries of longer publications, that can be read in their entirety on the website of the Multinational Development Policy Dialogue of Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung and examine this trajectory from complementary angles. Global Gateway is also a test of how the Union’s strategic ambitions can be matched with its financial instruments. It draws on resources under NDICI–Global Europe and aims to mobilize investments worth 300 billion Euros until 2027, by leveraging private investments, reflecting an effort to turn the EU’s budget for its global partnerships into a geoeconomic and geopolitical tool rather than a mere instrument of development cooperation. In this sense, the initiative’s effectiveness depends not only on political vision, but on how flexibly and coherently the EU can use the means already at its disposal. The objective of this compendium is not to provide a comprehensive and conclusive assessment of the Global Gateway Initiative but rather to highlight both some of the problems the initiative has faced in its implementation on the ground as well as highlighting opportunities for improvement in the future.
The first article, Less Paperwork, Greater Presence: Why Global Gateway Disappoints on the Ground, begins where the initiative’s credibility is decided: in implementation. Drawing on insights from practitioners and local partners, it highlights the gap that still exists between ambition and delivery. Slow decision-making, and limited visibility have weakened the EU’s ability to demonstrate results in partner countries. The author, Zsuzsa Anna Ferenczy, calls for a more agile approach, simplifies coordination, and links financing more directly to outcomes and private investment. The message is clear: Europe’s strategic presence will only be as strong as its ability to deliver on the ground.
Building on this, the second contribution, Chasing Convergence: The EU’s Partnerships in the Indo-Pacific and Implementation of the Global Gateway Initiative, looks outward to the region where Global Gateway’s potential is most visible. The Indo-Pacific offers both vast opportunities and intense competition. The authors, Olimpia Kot and Marcin Mateusz Jerzewski, show in their article how the EU’s approach to “partnerships of equals” resonates in a region that values sovereignty and diversification, while also revealing the limits of Europe’s coordination and speed. The article shows how Global Gateway can serve as a platform for cooperation with like-minded states such as Japan, Australia, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand and Taiwan. The article outlines different forms for future engagement, acknowledging the different priorities and strategies the EU’s partners are pursuing in their development or partnership policies towards this region.
The final article, Lessons from China’s Belt and Road Initiative: Strategic Pathways for the EU’s Global Gateway, places these questions in a wider strategic context. It looks at what Europe can take away from more than a decade of Chinese infrastructure diplomacy, which blended speed and visibility with strong state direction and the backing of powerful public enterprises. That approach brought clear geopolitical returns for China, but it also left a political and economic legacy in many partner countries. While the Global Gateway and the BRI mirror different political and economic contexts, and while the aim is not to emulate the Chinese model, this article will identify some lessons the Global Gateway should take away from the BRI. One issue highlighted by all three articles is the need for a better branding and visibility of the initiative.
Taken together, these three contributions, form a logical progression. They begin with the operational challenges that determine Global Gateway’s credibility, move to its application in one of the world’s most dynamic regions, and conclude with reflections on the global competition for influence that gives the initiative its strategic significance. The path from implementation to geopolitics mirrors the broader task facing the EU: to make its tools work efficiently, to apply them where they matter most, and to ensure that they advance a coherent vision of Europe’s role in the world.
The success of Global Gateway will depend on Europe’s ability to deliver strategically, visibly, and credibly. Its strength lies in combining regulatory expertise, financial capacity, and the innovation of private enterprise within a coherent strategic vision. Achieving this will require a genuine Team Europe approach that brings together EU institutions, member states, development banks, and – more than it has been done in the first years - the business community in pursuit of a shared strategic purpose. The announcement made by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at the second Global Gateway Forum on 9 October, to create a Global Gateway Investment Hub so companies can suggest investments themselves is a promising step in that direction. Ultimately, Global Gateway is about Europe’s capacity to act as a meaningful global partner: one that links values with interests and translates its ambitions into lasting partnerships. The following pages aim to contribute to a factbased, forward-looking debate and invite the reader to reflect on where Global Gateway stands today and how the potential of this initiative can be harnessed better in the future. One issue highlighted by all three articles is the need for a better branding and visibility of the initiative.
