EU visibility and competitiveness in Africa sparked a notable divergence of views between Barry Andrews (Renew, Chair) and Niels Geuking (EPP) during the European Parliament’s Committee on Development (DEVE) meeting on 2 December 2025. Andrews stressed the importance of strengthening the EU’s presence in Africa through a human-centred Global Gateway approach, aiming for sustainability and developmental impact. Geuking, however, criticized the EU’s approach as too slow and bureaucratic to effectively compete with China, urging for local wealth creation and cautioning about indirectly benefiting Chinese firms through EU-funded projects. Murielle Laurent (S&D) aligned with Andrews in emphasizing improved communication and gender-focused support.
The meeting took place within the annual exchange of views with CONCORD, the European NGO confederation, encompassing discussions on development cooperation, humanitarian challenges, and the EU’s external financial framework.
Concrete proposals emerged from several actors. Virginie De Ruyt (DG INTPA) announced guaranteed financial instruments to unlock investment in Africa’s Lobito corridor, contrasting the EU’s sustainable model with China’s extractive methods, thereby providing policy specifics on risk mitigation and development-bank engagement. Laura Vitullo (DG INTPA) outlined cooperation with Pakistan focusing on green growth, climate resilience, and governance reforms, indicating a blend of environmental and social objectives. Tanya Cox of CONCORD raised concerns about transactional trends in the Global Europe instrument, warning of increasing perceptions of exploitation around extractive industries and resource-intensive projects. Cox and Ruth Faber (VOICE EU/CONCORD) also advocated for maintaining thematic programme funding for civil society organizations (CSOs) at a guaranteed 15%, opposing the EU Commission’s shift to geographic instruments.
Regarding policy orientation, the EU institutions tended toward decisive but balanced increases in investment and engagement, emphasizing sustainability, gender equality, and climate objectives but avoiding overly rigid thematic targets, as argued by Marlene Holzner and Vincent Grimaud of the Commission. Conversely, civil society speakers pushed for clearer guarantees on funding stability and transparency to safeguard democratic oversight. Geuking’s call for local wealth creation reflects an economic growth focus tempered by skepticism about new EU project impacts. Meanwhile, Cox and Faber stressed protective measures for CSOs to sustain social welfare components amidst evolving budget structures.
Stakeholders such as EU producers and local industries in Africa might see increased opportunities through enhanced investment guarantees, yet face competition risks linked to Chinese market dominance. EU consumers and taxpayers are positioned to benefit modestly from long-term sustainable development but may encounter increased costs through expanded guarantees and risk mitigation. National authorities in partner countries must balance cooperation with multiple global actors, while NGOs and civil society groups highlight vulnerability to funding unpredictability and decreasing thematic programme visibility.
Following these debates, expect intensified institutional reviews of the Global Europe and MFF procedures, possibly leading to clearer safeguards for civil society funding and sharpened articulation of EU strategic visibility against China's influence. The Commission may also seek to clarify mechanisms balancing flexibility with partner-country predictability, as well as enhance targeted financial instruments to accelerate private-sector involvement without diluting developmental objectives.