China’s deepening presence in Africa’s maritime trade hubs is drawing increased scrutiny. A recent paper by the African Center for Strategic Studies highlights that Chinese firms now operate in over a quarter of Africa’s 231 commercial ports—a level of engagement unmatched in other regions of the world. Compared to just 10 Chinese-controlled ports in Latin America and the Caribbean and 24 in Asia, Africa has become the focal point of China’s global maritime strategy.
This extensive involvement is not just about commercial trade; it is closely tied to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its ambitions to establish itself as a dominant maritime power.
With key corridors extending through East Africa, the Suez region, and North Africa, China’s activities are reshaping the geopolitical and economic landscape of the continent. The implications of this expansion stretch beyond trade, touching on security, economic dependency, and geopolitical realignment.
China’s Strategic Maritime Footprint in Africa
China’s engagement with African ports is primarily driven by its Five-Year Plans, which define strategic priorities across various sectors, including infrastructure development and global connectivity. The current 2021-2025 Five-Year Plan outlines a framework of six corridors, six routes, and multiple ports, three of which run directly through Africa:
East Africa (Kenya and Tanzania): Key entry points for China’s trade and investment, facilitating Chinese exports and imports of African raw materials.
Egypt and the Suez region: A critical link between Asia and Europe, enhancing China’s access to Mediterranean and global markets.
Tunisia and North Africa: Strengthening China’s economic and political ties in the region, securing energy and trade interests.
These corridors position Africa as a crucial component of China’s ambition to become a global maritime superpower. The economic benefits for African nations include increased trade, infrastructure development, and job creation. However, they also raise concerns about economic dependency, debt sustainability, and local industry competitiveness.
The Military Dimension: Chinese Naval Access in Africa
While Chinese investment in African ports is primarily framed as economic, the military dimension of these engagements is increasingly evident. China’s only official overseas military base is in Djibouti, but its naval reach extends well beyond this outpost. The PLA Navy has made port calls in multiple African countries, underscoring China’s expanding strategic influence in maritime security.
Chinese firms are involved in 78 African port projects, many of which have specifications that can berth PLA Navy vessels. This has raised concerns among Western powers and African stakeholders about the dual-use nature of these ports, which could serve both commercial and military functions. Some of the notable African ports visited by the PLA Navy in recent years include:
Abidjan (Côte d’Ivoire)
Gentil (Gabon)
Casablanca (Morocco)
Tamatave (Madagascar)
Maputo (Mozambique)
Tincan (Nigeria)
Pointe-Noire (Republic of Congo)
Victoria (Seychelles)
Durban (South Africa)
Simon’s Town (South Africa)
The ability of the PLA Navy to call on these ports not only facilitates logistical operations but also enhances China’s strategic reach in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. This growing military presence has geopolitical implications, particularly in regions where Western Navies have traditionally maintained dominance.
Economic Benefits vs. Strategic Concerns
- Infrastructure Development and Economic Growth
China’s investments in African ports have led to significant improvements in infrastructure, modernization of facilities, and increased trade efficiency. This has boosted economic activity, created jobs, and improved regional connectivity. Countries like Kenya, Tanzania, and Egypt have benefited from Chinese-backed port expansions, making them key transit points for global trade.
- Debt and Dependency Risks
Despite the economic benefits, many African nations are becoming increasingly reliant on Chinese financing, often under debt conditions that raise sustainability concerns. Critics argue that China’s port investments could lead to debt traps, where countries are unable to meet repayment obligations, potentially forcing them to cede control of strategic assets. The case of Sri Lanka’s Hambantota port, which was leased to China for 99 years after debt default, serves as a cautionary example for African nations.
- Geopolitical Influence and Sovereignty Issues
China’s presence in African ports strengthens its political influence on the continent. By controlling or operating key trade hubs, China can exert economic and diplomatic pressure on African governments. This could limit the strategic options available to African countries, particularly in their dealings with Western partners.
The Response from African and Global Stakeholders
African Governments’ Balancing Act
African governments are navigating the complexities of Chinese investment with a mix of enthusiasm and caution. While many leaders welcome infrastructure development, there is a growing awareness of the need to balance foreign investments with national interests. Some countries are exploring diversified investment strategies, engaging with European, American, and regional investors to avoid over-reliance on Chinese funding.
Western and Regional Countermeasures
Western nations, particularly the U.S. and the EU, have expressed concerns about China’s growing maritime footprint in Africa. Initiatives like the U.S. Build Back Better World (B3W) and the EU’s Global Gateway aim to offer alternative investment options to African nations. However, China’s speed and efficiency in executing infrastructure projects remain attractive to many African governments.
Meanwhile, regional bodies such as the African Union are advocating for greater transparency in foreign investments, emphasizing the need for fair trade agreements and sustainable financing models.
China’s increasing control and influence over African ports reflect its broader ambitions to become a global maritime power. While this expansion offers significant economic opportunities for African nations, it also raises concerns about sovereignty, debt sustainability, and strategic autonomy. The dual-use potential of these ports further complicates the geopolitical landscape, particularly as China’s naval presence in Africa grows.
As African nations engage with Chinese investments, it is essential to develop policies that maximize benefits while mitigating risks. Transparent negotiations, diversified investment sources, and regional cooperation will be crucial in ensuring that Africa’s ports serve the continent’s long-term interests rather than becoming strategic leverage points for external powers.
The future of Africa’s maritime trade will be shaped by how governments navigate these challenges. With strategic planning and sound governance, African nations can turn port investments into engines of sustainable growth rather than liabilities of geopolitical competition.
