Two elephants: The trade war headed by US President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping
could be the blessing in disguise that Africa sorely needs, according to the writer.
The geopolitical factors, including the ongoing rivalry between the United States and China on the one hand and the growing tension between the US and Europe on the other, are sources of anxiety among investors globally.
But it’s the US-China competition for economic supremacy that has animated much of the debate, as many wonder whether it could eventually lead to confrontation or cooperation. The implications have reverberated at the World Economic Forum in Davos and will certainly continue to do so at the African Mining Indaba in Cape Town.
A careful analysis by those of us who are invested in Africa would show that there are reasons to believe that the America-China rivalry could yield positive results for Africa’s mining sector. To take advantage of it, African countries must act smart and fast to improve their regulatory competencies and make it easy for all investors.
They must actively attract investors who support the development of mine-linked industrial ecosystems on the continent. This could help mining jurisdictions to achieve fast-paced economic development using mineral endowment as a basis.
The US-China Economic Security Review Commission report tabled before Congress in November 2025 shows that the US is worried about China’s global economic expansion.
It says China has developed integrated supply chains around the world, including with the US, which it leverages for its own economic benefit. This, the report says, is a threat to US economic and security interests. While the report criticises China’s global economic strategies, it also portrays America as a better partner for the rest of the world to do business with.
If African governments play their cards properly, the US-China economic competition is likely to contribute to the continent’s economic development anchored on mining.
There are already promising indications that economic competition at various levels between the US and China is benefitting the African continent. The first indication is in minerals-linked infrastructure development.
In September 2025, China’s state-owned China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation signed a $1.4 billion agreement with Tanzania and Zambia to revive the Tazara Corridor, a railway line traversing the two countries to connect copper mining areas with the eastern port of Dar es Salaam.
The Tazara Corridor announcement came after the United States and the European Union signed a partnership agreement with Angola, the DRC and Zambia to launch the Lobito Corridor project, a multibillion-dollar initiative to connect copper-rich mining region of those countries to the Lobito Port in Angola on the Atlantic Ocean.
Ellington Arnold, manager of the US-Africa Business chamber, described the Lobito Corridor plans as a game changer in infrastructure development. Lobito is considered so crucial to America that in his last few months as president, Joe Biden visited Angola to discuss business.
While the US-China Commission interprets the China-sponsored Tazara Corridor development as a rival to US-sponsored Lobito, there must be no feeling of rivalry for the African countries involved. They must reap the benefits associated with modern infrastructure development that will flow from the massive investment in both projects.
Zambia is a common denominator of both corridors, an indication that the source of investment doesn’t matter. What matters is the outcome. The Zambian government under President Hakainde Hichilema has placed investment at the heart of Zambia’s economic development. So has Angola.
African countries must harness competition between the United States and China and turn it into a positive outcome. From project finance on infrastructure development to technical support and operations, the two superpowers must demonstrate on African soil who is the best.
The second indication of a rivalry that could benefit Africa is mineral-linked peace diplomacy.
President Donald Trump and Democratic Republic of Congo President Felix Tshisekedi signed a peace deal in which the DRC offered America access to critical minerals in exchange for warding off insurgency.
Chinese companies are among the most active in mining and shipping critical mineral ores from the DRC to feed the largest mineral beneficiation capacity China has created.
America wants to compete directly in accessing DRC minerals and to develop its own value chains. Some may criticise the Trump-Tshisekedi deal as unethical because peace should be pursued for its inherent goodness, not as an economic transaction.
But economic exchanges and political diplomacy are usually inseparable. For a long time, Africa has suffered a resource curse. Instead of bringing development, African mineral endowment attracted wars.Some of the wars were made worse by Western companies who flourished amid chaos. Mineral transactions were underwritten in blood, not peace and development.
When a country is war-torn various groups run their own militia-backed extraction arrangements and impose their own taxes. Very little goes towards national development goals.If mineral extraction will now be pursued based on peace rather than war, as the Trump-Tshisekedi deal promises, then it augurs well for the DRC’s development and by extension, the rest of the African continent.
It also signals a departure from the old politics on the continent. Africa was a victim of great power competition during the Cold War. It was a battleground between the American-led Western bloc and Soviet Union-led Eastern bloc.
Africa’s struggle for independence was hijacked by global ideological enemies that offered them nothing but material support to civil wars.
The Cold War literally became hot in Africa. From the DRC to Angola, warring groups were propped up as the great powers tried to expand their respective spheres of influence.
But the new US-China rivalry is different. Unlike the US-Soviet rivalry, the US-China one is not based on ideological differences. For the US, it’s about maintaining economic supremacy while China races fast to narrow the gap.
The risk that the US-China rivalry could get out of hand is mitigated by the technological and economic inter-dependencies between them. Through their mineral endowments, African countries have opportunities to build value chains with both superpowers.
The third indication is mineral-linked sustainable development. The US-China Commission claims that Chinese mining companies are not developing local economies wherever they invest.
They are instead involved in extraction and are poor in environmental management standards. Whether this statement is true or not is another matter. China will no doubt say that its companies follow local rules.
But what is important is that the US is signaling that it wants to compete with China on being a better investor in mining. If both the US and China can push their respective companies investing in Africa to compete on being better investors, local mining communities stand to benefit from better environment management, sustainability and governance standards.
A race to the top, not the bottom, would be wonderful. This kind of constructive economic competition is what Africa needs from the two rivals.
The last indication is mineral-linked market access. Part of the rivalry between the US and China is the security of supply for minerals that are critical for the defence industry, electric vehicles and data centre-backed artificial intelligence applications.
China has secured a bulk of the supply chains and is the global leader in mineral processing capacity while the United States fights to curve out its own share.
At the height of tariff wars, Trump would not dare impose tariffs on minerals that America desperately needs.
Vuslat Bayoglu is the managing director of Menar