Background
Global Gateway is an initiative launched by the European Commission in December 2021 to promote global infrastructure projects. The provision of targeted guarantees, loans and grants is intended to leverage private investment and thus enable sustainable infrastructure projects that are in the common interest of the EU and partner countries. Global Gateway relies on the support and participation of EU Member States in projects (“Team Europe approach”). The goal was to mobilise a total of €300 billion in investment by 2027. In the early years, many observers described the launch of the initiative as mixed. The most common points of criticism were: lack of visibility in partner countries, uncertainty about the focus of the initiative even among EU representatives, frequent rebranding of existing projects, lack of private sector involvement, and lack of complementarity with partner country priorities.[1]
Two years after the first Global Gateway Forum[2], the EU wanted to use the second summit on 9–10 October – attended by high-ranking participants from all continents – to once again promote Global Gateway to the public and announce the completion of specific projects. The summit took place against the backdrop of the complex global geopolitical situation and the competitiveness agenda of the European Commission, which took office in December. In addition, this summer the European Commission presented an initial proposal for the European Union's next multiannual financial framework (2028-2034), which also includes a restructuring of the financing of European foreign policy. Global Gateway is set to play a central role in this.
At the start of the summit, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced that the target set at the start of 2021 to mobilise €300 billion in public and private investment by 2027 had already been exceeded by €6 billion. At the same time, she announced a new target of €400 billion to be mobilised by 2027.
High-level field of participants
A total of 12 heads of state or government, around 70 ministers, six EU commissioners, including Commission President von der Leyen, around 150 representatives from the private sector and a total of around 1,000 participants from European institutions, partner countries and international organisations took part in the forum. Compared to the first Global Gateway Forum, fewer heads of state and government were present, but more ministers. Of the EU heads of state and government, only Luxembourg's Prime Minister Luc Frieden was present; many EU countries (including Germany) were represented at the state secretary level. Many high-ranking participants came from sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, while Asia was rather less well represented than at the first Global Gateway Forum. Participants included João Manuel Gonçalves Lourenço, Chair of the African Union and President of Angola, Cyril Ramaphosa, President of South Africa, who currently also holds the G20 presidency, and Gustavo Francisco Petro Urrego, acting President of CELAC and President of Colombia. The United Nations, the World Bank, the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development were also represented at a high level.
Both the Congolese President Felix Tshisekedi and Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who has been criticised for his country's role in the conflict in eastern Congo attended the forum. Tshisekedi used part of his speech to call on Kagame to make peace – an initiative that has not yet been reciprocated in the aftermath of the forum.
Several Brussels-based ambassadors from important partner countries that did not send delegations from their capitals to the Global Gateway Forum were denied participation, which caused considerable irritation.
Key messages from the EU
In her opening speech, which focused heavily on geo-economics and competitiveness, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen highlighted the enormous changes in the global political situation since the launch of the Global Gateway Initiative. Export controls and reciprocal tariffs are used as tools of “transactional global politics”, she said, adding that dependencies are weaponized. In this context, she stressed the need for the EU to strengthen partnerships, diversify supply chains, increase Europe's autonomy in strategic areas and strengthen cooperation with the private sector. The main purpose of the forum was, according to her, to listen to international partners and the private sector. To increase the involvement of the private sector, she announced the launch of the “Global Gateway Investment Hub”.[3]
While von der Leyen emphasised the inclusive nature of the initiative, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, placed greater emphasis on geopolitics in her speech, stating that Global Gateway could improve the resilience of the EU and its partner countries. She emphasised the initiative's values-based approach and advocated concentrating projects “those who believe in what we stand for, and share the ideals we want to project”. Global Gateway is also “not a tool to feed our competitors’ companies and business interest” – an indication that Global Gateway projects should focus on areas where European companies are also competitive.[4]
In his closing remarks, Commissioner for International Partnerships, Jozef Síkela, emphasised that the EU does not want to conclude deals that are unilaterally advantageous, but rather to focus on long-term partnerships that benefit all parties in the long term. Since taking office, Síkela has been advocating for greater involvement of the private sector in the initiative: At the summit, however, he also emphasised the responsibility of companies: they cannot “capitalize the profits socialize the losses”. Rather, he said, there needs to be a fair distribution of risk. He also pointed to the importance of transparency: although this sometimes leads to more bureaucracy, the EU, as a democratic actor, must also be accountable to its citizens.[5]
Expectations of partner countries and the private sector
South African President Ramaphosa succinctly summed up expectations for higher European investment: upon entering the hall, he said he could “smell the money”. In their speeches, several heads of state and government pointed out that their countries do not want to be seen as suppliers of basic or raw materials, but as genuine partners of the EU on an equal footing, with their own priorities, political goals and ideas. Cooperation in the field of health, and particularly the production of vaccines in Africa, was repeatedly cited as a positive example. They also emphasised that they did not want to create new dependencies, but rather intended to strengthen the local economy and, above all, industry through digital networks and traditional infrastructure. Ramaphosa also referred to the unsustainable debt burden that is preventing some countries from achieving stronger growth. Other international representatives pointed to the lack of European unity on foreign policy issues (particularly regarding Israel and the (Palestinian territories). Paul Kagame criticised the fact that partnerships cannot mean that one side sets the rules and the other follows them.
Overall, the enormous diversity of expectations for the initiative became clear. Some emphasised digital connectivity, while for others, investment in traditional physical infrastructure such as ports and roads remains important for strengthening their own industrial base. The focus was on strengthening cross-border trade corridors, which are intended to strengthen regional integration and facilitate access to the global market. Several contributions also called for greater technology transfer.
In connection with Global Gateway, it was repeatedly pointed out that the processes are often lengthy and that coordination and dialogue with the EU, and particularly with the Commission, are cumbersome. The designation of so-called “flagship projects” and the general communication of Global Gateway were also criticised as opaque and poorly coordinated.
Business representatives called especially for greater involvement and simplified processes. Until now, there has been no structural opportunity for private-sector players to present projects on their own initiative, which is why the presentation of the Global Gateway Investment Hub was eagerly awaited. In addition, there were calls for the often-lengthy processes to be streamlined and for a greater strategic focus on projects that play to the strengths of European companies. Another concern expressed, in addition to the development of new markets, is access to rare earths and other raw materials.
Concrete conclusions of new projects and announcements
The aforementioned “Global Gateway Investment Hub” is intended to serve as a central point of contact for private sector actors to submit investment proposals, where they can then apply for support from the European Union, development finance institutions, export credit agencies and national governments. The projects funded should be worth at least €10 million and be backed by a “significant own contribution”. In addition, investment proposals must be submitted to so-called “Team Nationals” and not directly to the European Commission to ensure that the projects are in line with national and EU priorities and to enable the best possible funding and support for the project. Commissioner Síkela noted self-critically that he was aware that the hub was not perfect, but for him its implementation represented an important first step.[6]
The largest investment package presented on the sidelines of the summit, worth €12 billion, was agreed with South Africa. It comprises several projects listed under the umbrella term “inclusive prosperity” and covers the areas of green hydrogen, critical raw materials, renewable energies and energy efficiency, connectivity, vaccine production, and the training and further education of relevant skilled workers. Several additional investments in the Lobito Corridor, a transport route connecting Angola, Zambia and the DR Congo, were also announced. In addition to investment guarantees, just over €100 million in direct subsidies for the three countries was also communicated. In addition, there was an announcement to support various energy transition projects in Africa (Togo, Mauritania, DR Congo, Uganda, Kenya, Cape Verde, Zambia, Tanzania and Nigeria) with investments totalling €618 million. The EU will also strengthen local production of vaccines, medicines and health technology in Africa with new funding of over €50 million.
The EU also announced its intention to support electricity market integration between Latin American and Caribbean countries (LAC). To this end, the EU will provide technical assistance and support a total of 24 projects in the region. A bi-regional supercomputer network is also planned with the same group of countries.
Support is also envisaged for the expansion of an ASEAN electricity network and digital transformation within the framework of the India-Middle East-Europe (IMEC) corridor.
Other projects include support from the EU and other European actors for hydropower projects in Vietnam and Central Asia, the Kivu–Kinshasa Green Corridor and various other projects in the Democratic Republic of Congo, for refugee care and work in Rwanda, and for sustainable cocoa cultivation in West Africa.
The Commissioner for the Mediterranean, Dubravka Šuica, spoke in favour of a strategic expansion of the Medusa submarine cable system[7] to the Middle East.
The EU and European development finance institutions also concluded three new guarantee agreements worth €742 million to promote sustainable development in partner countries.[8] A deepening of the strategic partnership with the World Bank Group was announced, particularly in the areas of infrastructure and jobs.
Analysis & Commentary
The European Commission was clearly keen to present the Global Gateway initiative, which has had a somewhat bumpy start for a variety of reasons, as a success. Reaching the 300 billion mark ahead of schedule is indeed remarkable, though several projects became Global Gateway projects through “re-labelling” right at the start. The contributions to the discussion by both EU representatives and partner countries reveal that there is a clear awareness of the weaknesses and shortcomings to date: there needs to be a stronger focus on the priorities of partner countries, but also better involvement of the European private sector. It will now be crucial to ensure that this is also reflected in practice and that European companies can count on appropriate support from their Member States and the EU in their activities in partner countries. The intention, already expressed before the Global Gateway Forum, to take better account of the strengths and weaknesses of the European private sector when tendering for projects in future is commendable. The idea of the Global Gateway Investment Hub is in principle a positive step, although its implementation remains to be seen: Since investment proposals are to be pre-filtered at national level, good coordination between national and EU levels will be required. The entire initiative must also become more accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises. There is also room for improvement in coordination with partner countries in the selection of projects – and in ensuring that these projects meet the announced high standards of protection and sustainability. Participants at the third Global Gateway Forum in 2026 will be able to take stock of the (announced) improvements.
The initiative remains a priority for the Commission President in terms of EU foreign policy, and EU leaders were represented at a correspondingly high level. However, the participation of EU Member States could have been improved, with only one head of state or government attending. There is also room for improvement in terms of the visibility of the forum and the initiative itself to the outside world. Despite the satisfactory presence of heads of government and ministers from third countries, awareness outside Brussels was comparatively limited. The decision to deny participation in the forum to ambassadors from third countries that did not send their own delegations is incomprehensible and contradicts the inclusive narrative of Global Gateway. Avoiding such diplomatic missteps in the future is important in order to enhance the EU’s image as a good and reliable partner.
[1] See also: Zsuzsa Anna Ferenczy: Less paperwork, greater presence. Why Global Gateway disappoints on the ground, KAS (2025): https://www.kas.de/en/web/mned-bruessel/single-title/-/content/less-paperwork-greater-presence-why-global-gateway-disappoints-on-the-ground
[2] An analysis of the latest Global Gateway Forum is available here.
[3] Keynote speech by the President at the Global Gateway Forum
[4] Global Gateway Forum: Speech by High Representative / Vice-President Kaja Kallas | EEAS
[5] Global Gateway Forum 2025: Transforming development cooperation into strategic investment
[7] More information about the project can be found here.
