Qatar’s Economic Diplomacy in Central and Southern Africa

African Security Analysis Situation Report

A Bold Investment Push

Qatar is stepping up its presence in Central and Southern Africa with an ambitious economic diplomacy drive. Spearheaded by Sheikh Al Mansour bin Jabor bin Jassim Al Thani and a multi-sector business delegation, the initiative signals investments of unprecedented scale: over $20 billion for the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and between $5 and $10 billion for other countries in the region. The focus spans a range of critical sectors, including airports and aviation, energy and power, mining and mineral processing, logistics, healthcare, urban development, agri-industry, and digital infrastructure.

At its core, this effort represents a strategic attempt by Qatar to convert diplomatic influence into long-term economic footholds in key growth corridors. Analysts at African Security Analysis (ASA) interpret the scale and ambition of these projects as a bid to secure real assets over the long term, but they caution that success will depend heavily on factors such as project feasibility, governance, security, and the ability to navigate competition from other global players.

Scope and Strategy

The delegation is operating across ten countries: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, Tanzania, Burundi, Zambia, Botswana, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Angola, and Gabon. The Al-Mansour Group sits at the heart of the delegation, supported by Qatari entities in aviation, energy, healthcare, real estate, and finance, along with legal advisors and specialists in public-private partnerships. Visits are ongoing through late August 2025, with technical follow-ups expected into early 2026.

The investment strategy combines large-scale, high-impact projects with quicker, smaller-scale upgrades. In practice, this means pairing brownfield upgrades of existing infrastructure with greenfield anchor projects—air hubs, power plants, and processing facilities—that can reshape national logistics networks. Financing will involve a mix of equity and debt, public-private partnerships for strategic assets, vendor financing for equipment, and offtake-backed arrangements for minerals and power.

Strategic Objectives

Qatar’s approach is driven by several strategic considerations. Aviation is seen as a growth lever: airport concessions, flight rights, and cargo hubs create leverage over tourism, perishable goods, and high-value freight, while projecting soft power. Investments in minerals and energy offer flexibility to serve markets across Asia, the Gulf, and the West. Infrastructure delivery also serves as a form of diplomacy, enhancing Qatar’s reputation as a reliable partner in regions often adjacent to conflict. Furthermore, cross-border energy and logistics projects tap into the benefits of the African Continental Free Trade Area, potentially improving the bankability of investments.

Opportunities and Challenges Across the Region

Each country presents distinct opportunities and risks. In the DRC, Qatar is eyeing airport modernization in Kinshasa and Lubumbashi, new power transmission lines, mining-linked energy, copper and cobalt processing, healthcare, and urban housing. The main challenges are security in eastern regions, contract enforcement, grid reliability, and currency convertibility. Tanzania offers opportunities in LNG development, port-to-rail infrastructure, and airport upgrades, though PPP timelines and land resettlement issues could pose delays. Mozambique presents a chance to expand gas-to-power projects, coastal cargo hubs, and tourism infrastructure, but security concerns in Cabo Delgado and insurance costs are significant hurdles.

Other countries present similarly mixed landscapes. Zambia’s copper processing and airport-linked real estate projects are promising but require credible power tariffs and offtake agreements. Botswana can combine aviation, tourism, and agri-processing, while Zimbabwe’s prospects hinge on airport rehabilitation and mineral processing amidst a volatile policy environment. Angola, Gabon, the Central African Republic, and Burundi all offer opportunities in energy, infrastructure, mining, and logistics, each tempered by governance, security, and market constraints.

Sector Focus

Sectoral focus mirrors these opportunities. Airports and aviation projects are bundled with commercial real estate, retail, and logistics parks. Energy investments cover LNG, gas-fired plants, transmission infrastructure, and hybrid solar solutions to stabilize weak grids. Mining projects involve joint ventures for copper, cobalt, and nickel, designed to meet modern environmental, social, and governance standards. Urban and social infrastructure projects span hospitals, housing, municipal utilities, and smart-city solutions, while agri-industry initiatives focus on export crops and cold-chain logistics. Digital investments in data centres and fiber backbones support aviation, payments, and e-government systems.

Risk Landscape

The risks facing Qatar’s investments fall into six main categories: political and governance challenges, security, financing and currency issues, execution capacity, environmental and social concerns, and competition from other international players. These risks often interact and amplify each other, making careful management essential. Sudden government changes, such as cabinet reshuffles or decree-level reversals, can disrupt projects unless agreements include strong stabilisation clauses and credible dispute-resolution mechanisms, ideally with access to international arbitration.

Projects in conflict-adjacent areas, like eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo and northern Mozambique, face particularly high costs for insurance and contractor services. Returns can be squeezed unless investments are phased around clear security milestones that are actively monitored and communicated.

Financial risks also loom large. Currency convertibility and tariff policies can complicate cash flows for power and airport projects. ASA monitors tools like escrow arrangements, price indexation, and offtake commitments to gauge true project bankability. Execution is another critical constraint. Weak government units for public-private partnerships, slow permitting, and bureaucratic delays can push timelines back unless a project-management office with real authority is embedded within the host government.

Environmental and social considerations are equally crucial. Projects risk delays if issues such as resettlement or biodiversity impacts are addressed only after the fact rather than being integrated into initial planning.

Finally, competition is intense. The UAE, Saudi Arabia, China, the United States, the European Union, India, Turkey, and Russia are all active in overlapping sectors. While their involvement brings additional capital and options, it also increases the risk of inflated bids, conflicting standards, and coordination challenges across the investment corridors.

External Actors and Competitive Dynamics

Qatar is entering a crowded and competitive field in Central and Southern Africa, where multiple global players are already active in overlapping sectors. Each brings a unique approach, with consequences for both opportunities and risks.

China dominates mining, power grids, and transport engineering. Chinese firms often move quickly, backed by concessional financing, and already hold significant upstream positions—especially in copper and cobalt. Qatar’s entry could spark competition to expand processing capacity or renegotiate offtake contracts. While this can give governments more leverage over pricing, it also creates the risk of fragmented project portfolios if sponsors follow different standards for environmental protection, social responsibility, transparency, and local-content requirements.

The United States engages more slowly but strategically, using development finance instruments, critical-minerals initiatives, and governance conditionality. While American offers often require longer timelines, they can improve debt sustainability and broaden access to advanced technology and equipment. Host countries may find their project pipelines divided into fast-moving Gulf or Chinese projects and standards-heavy American or European projects, making careful coordination essential to avoid incompatible contractual obligations.

The United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia are Qatar’s most direct Gulf competitors, particularly in airports, mining, and logistics. Sovereign investors from these countries move fast and often integrate infrastructure projects with smart-city and tourism concepts. This competition can push up bids and complicate access to route rights, but it also opens the possibility of collaborative Gulf-to-Gulf investments if host governments encourage consortium-based projects rather than parallel concessions.

The European Union brings technical expertise, grant-like funding, and strict norms for grids, renewable energy, and governance. European participation can help de-risk Qatari-backed power projects, though it may also extend project preparation timelines.

India and Turkey offer competitive engineering, procurement, and construction capabilities, as well as defence-adjacent logistics. They provide fast and cost-effective second-tier contracting options for Qatari sponsors, but their involvement can complicate local-content requirements and quality control.

Russia tends to focus opportunistically on security and extractives, with limited infrastructure financing. When Russian security providers are involved, lenders often demand additional compliance measures, raising the cost of capital for all project sponsors.

ASA concludes that this multipolar competition increases the negotiating leverage of host countries but also makes project coordination far more complex. Without a coherent master plan aligning standards, timelines, and corridor security, governments risk creating fragmented, non-interoperable assets and stranded investments. For Qatar, success will depend on smart coalition-building, including selective partnerships with competitors, to secure reliable offtake agreements and reduce delivery risks.

What ASA is Watching

African Security Analysis (ASA) tracks a series of key indicators to gauge how effectively Qatar’s investments and broader regional projects are unfolding. In aviation, this includes announcements of new African routes, cargo hubs, and terminal management partnerships. In infrastructure, ASA monitors the release of public-private partnership calendars, gazetted tenders, and model contracts for airports, ports, and power assets.

Capital movements are another crucial signal: the registration of joint-venture vehicles, bank facilities, and bonds tied to African assets often indicate the pace and scale of incoming investment. Diplomatic activity also matters—ASA observes mediation and high-level convenings that coincide with major investment milestones, reflecting both political support and negotiation momentum. Finally, host-country readiness is a key factor. This includes the establishment of project-management taskforces, one-stop permitting offices, and formal security arrangements for priority corridors, all of which determine whether projects can proceed smoothly.

Implications of Multipolar Competition

The presence of multiple international actors introduces both opportunities and challenges. Competition can increase host-country leverage and drive-up valuations, but uncoordinated awards risk creating bottlenecks, such as overlapping air-rights or conflicting power-wheeling arrangements. ASA emphasizes the importance of mapping all external offers into a single, corridor-wide plan before any contracts are signed.

Differing standards for environmental, social, and anti-corruption compliance can also collide, creating cross-default risks or reputational challenges if mixed within a single project. Harmonizing on the highest common standards helps preserve refinancing options and access to Western capital markets. Debt profiles and foreign-exchange exposure are another concern. Concessional Chinese loans, Gulf equity, and Western guarantees each carry different risks, and blended portfolios only hedge effectively if financial arrangements—like escrow accounts and price indexation—are consistent across projects.

Security allocation must be carefully managed. Each external sponsor has a different tolerance for conflict-adjacent zones, and aligning measurable security outcomes prevents portions of infrastructure from becoming stranded or underutilized. In aviation, multiple Gulf carriers competing for hub status can cannibalize traffic, so interline agreements, codeshares, and slot governance should maximize national network value rather than any single airline’s footprint. For industrial policy, upstream mineral stakes must be tied to local processing and reliable power supply; otherwise, host countries risk remaining price takers. Rival interest can be leveraged to secure binding commitments on processing and grid investment as conditions for access.

How ASA Supports Projects

African Security Analysis offers advisory services for complex infrastructure and development projects across Africa, combining geopolitical, financial, and operational expertise. The firm helps design bankable project pipelines in sectors like airports, power, and processing, integrating security milestones and risk mitigation strategies from the outset. ASA conducts detailed stakeholder mapping to identify decision-makers, financial authorities, and potential blockers within governments and state-owned enterprises.

ASA also provides guidance on critical contractual and financial terms, including termination rights, step-in provisions, currency convertibility, tariff structures, offtake commitments, and environmental and social safeguards, ensuring alignment with development finance requirements. Additionally, the firm maintains monitoring systems that track political developments, tender schedules, market trends, and risks to critical infrastructure, giving project managers and investors early-warning insights to protect investments and maintain momentum.