Africa-Press – Liberia. This move comes in the face of pressure from High Power Exploration (HPX) – which aggressively pushed to take over the rail line’s operations for its own benefit.
After months of intense negotiations and corporate lobbying, the Liberian government has drawn a clear line: it will uphold its contractual commitments and national economic interest by retaining ArcelorMittal Liberia (AML) as operator of the vital Yekepa–Buchanan railway.
The Inter-Ministerial Concessions Committee (IMCC) – a high-level panel of Liberian ministers, announced the decision reaffirming AML’s role, citing the need to preserve legal certainty, maintain investor confidence, and ensure stable operations.
This move comes in the face of pressure from High Power Exploration (HPX) – which aggressively pushed to take over the rail line’s operations for its own benefit.
Liberian officials say the choice was about far more than one company; it was about sending a message that Liberia honors its contracts and protects its sovereignty. “This is more than just a policy decision – it’s a line in the sand,” one government official noted, emphasizing that Liberia will keep its word and honor existing agreements.
At the heart of the issue is a binding Mineral Development Agreement (MDA) Liberia signed with AML in 2005, granting the company rights to rehabilitate and operate the 243 km railway that links the Yekepa mines to the Buchanan port. AML has fulfilled its end of the bargain, investing heavily to rebuild the war-ravaged rail line and maintain it for nearly two decades.
Under the MDA, AML’s rights and obligations remain in force, and arbitrarily ousting the company before the agreement expires would violate Liberia’s legal commitments. Such a move could expose the government to protracted litigation, deterring usage of critical infrastructure and scaring off other potential investors.
The IMCC explicitly warned that removing AML as operator could trigger instability: it would undermine the rule of law and signal to partners that Liberia’s agreements can be overturned on a whim. Instead, by respecting the contract, Liberia reinforces that it is a reliable place to do business. As one observer noted, “No credible investor wants to operate where agreements can be overturned overnight”. The government’s steadfast stance thus projects a sense of predictability crucial for attracting long-term investment.
The economic calculus behind the decision is equally compelling. Since taking over the abandoned railway in the mid-2000s, AML has poured over $800 million into rehabilitating and upgrading Liberia’s sole iron ore railway. What was once a derelict line has been transformed into a modern, heavy-haul corridor with new bridges, steel ties replacing rotted sleepers, nine new locomotives and hundreds of ore wagons, extended passing loops, and advanced safety systems.
All of these upgrades – funded entirely by AML – have made the railway a dependable artery for Liberia’s mining economy. AML isn’t stopping there: there are reports that the company is in the midst of a $1.2 billion Phase II expansion to double iron ore output. This includes building a concentrator at Yekepa, expanding Buchanan Port, and further improving the railway to handle five long trains per day.
By late 2025, AML plans to export 20 million tons of ore annually, vastly increasing revenue for Liberia. Perhaps most importantly, these investments directly benefit Liberians – over 7,000 jobs (95% held by Liberian citizens) have been created, with thousands more expected as expansion projects progress. AML has also invested in local communities, rebuilding schools, supporting agriculture, and providing healthcare in towns along the rail route.
Against this backdrop, HPX’s proposal offered Liberia comparatively little. HPX – through its subsidiary Ivanhoe Liberia – holds rights to the rich Nimba iron ore deposit just across the border in Guinea, and it wants to ship Guinean ore through Liberia. Yet HPX has no mining operations in Liberia and, notably, has invested nothing in Liberia’s rail infrastructure to date.
The company’s interest is to use Liberia’s corridor as a transit route, not to develop Liberia’s resources. Under the deal HPX sought, it would pay Liberia only a modest transit fee – reportedly just $5–10 million per year – to move iron ore from Guinea to Buchanan. In stark contrast, AML’s pending revised agreement promises Liberia up to $200 million per year in revenues once its expansion is fully realized.
That’s on top of AML shouldering all rail maintenance costs and creating thousands of local jobs. The comparison is telling: Liberia stand to gain far more by continuing with AML’s robust investment and revenue contributions than by accepting HPX’s minimal offer. Any decision to displace AML in favor of HPX would have meant forfeiting a major economic windfall for a relative pittance – a trade-off officials deemed wholly unacceptable for Liberia’s national interest.
Multi-User Access Plan vs. HPX’s Demands
One of HPX’s main arguments was couched in terms of “open access.” The firm lobbied furiously for what it described as a multi-user regime on the railway, but in practice HPX’s demand is not simply to share the tracks – it is to remove AML as operator entirely and replace it with an “independent” operator amenable to HPX’s control. This crucial distinction did not escape Liberian decision-makers.
In reality, Liberia was already committed to the principle of multi-user access. As far back as 2006, the government negotiated terms for third-party rail use and even set a timeline for the railway to eventually revert to state control – provisions written into the first amendment of AML’s concession, ratified in 2007.
Over the years, AML has repeatedly signaled its willingness to accommodate other companies. It engaged in talks with firms like BHP Billiton (which once held Guinean iron rights) in 2010 and a junior miner in 2013 about sharing the rail. Those early discussions did not yield a transport deal – largely due to factors like valuation disputes, the Ebola crisis, or would-be users’ own shortcomings – not because AML refused access.
More recently, in 2019, Liberia and Guinea agreed on a framework to allow up to 5 million tons of Guinean ore through Liberia annually, although that was a limited arrangement and far from transformative for Liberia’s economy.
Crucially, AML has committed in writing to transparent, non-discriminatory multi-user access under government oversight, via a Rail Standard Operating Procedure (RSOP) to ensure all qualified third parties – including HPX – can utilize the railway fairly. The government is also establishing a National Rail Authority to regulate multi-user arrangements moving forward.
In other words, Liberia can have open access and retain the experienced operator that built the railroad. HPX’s insistence on ejecting AML is seen as extreme and unnecessary. Government and industry analysts noted that HPX’s push to insert its own handpicked operator – effectively wresting control of a sovereign asset – would unfairly disadvantage AML by stripping away its contractual rights.
It would also saddle the government with substantial new costs: hiring and funding an outside operator to run the railway in place of AML, and government would be moving into uncharted territories and uncertainties, as Liberia would be leaving the faith of its rail infrastructure on the decision of Guinea.
The Liberian government would end up paying for a service that AML currently provides at no charge to the state. Such duplication of efforts and resources made little sense. “If it’s not broken, why ‘fix’ it in a way that costs us millions?” asked one observer, noting that AML’s operation has kept the line running efficiently.
Indeed, under AML’s management the railway is poised to reach record capacity later this year. Changing operators midstream could disrupt that momentum, introduce logistical chaos, and jeopardize the hard-won gains in rail performance. The government’s multi-user vision does not require capitulating to HPX’s terms – Liberia can welcome new users while enforcing rules that protect its interests and those of existing concessionaires.
Regional Norms and Guinea’s Example
Liberia’s stance is further bolstered by looking at how neighboring countries handle their own infrastructure. Ironically, while HPX has been pressuring Liberia to grant it extraordinary access, Guinea itself has been pursuing a far more guarded approach. The Guinean government, which hosts the Nimba iron ore deposit HPX wants to exploit, has invested heavily in developing its own rail infrastructure rather than relying on foreign lines.
Guinea is in the midst of a massive $18 billion project to build a new “Trans-Guinean” railway connecting its inland iron ore fields to its own ports. This endeavor, involving major players like Rio Tinto, reflects Guinea’s strategic choice to control the transportation of its mineral wealth on Guinean soil. In fact, back in 2010, Guinean authorities under President Alpha Condé balked at a joint Liberia-Guinea rail venture and instead favored the vision of an internal Guinea rail route. Even when Liberia and Guinea have cooperated, it has been on a limited basis – the 2019 deal allowing up to 5 million tons of Guinean ore through Liberia was tightly capped.
To put that in perspective, 5 million tons is roughly what AML itself currently ships per year from its Liberian mine. The limited scope underscores Guinea’s reluctance to depend heavily on Liberian infrastructure.
Yet HPX seemingly expected Liberia to hand over the keys to its railway with few strings attached. As of early 2025, Guinea had not even granted HPX permission to export ore through Liberia. The Liberian IMCC formally wrote to Conakry seeking clarity on whether HPX has approval for cross-border transport – and received only silence in return. Diplomatic observers interpret Guinea’s silence as a tacit refusal; if Guinea were eager to use Liberia’s rail for Nimba ore, it presumably would have answered in the affirmative.
The “deafening” silence suggests Guinea has “no intention” of allowing HPX’s plan, according to local analysis. Despite this, HPX was urging Liberia to proceed as if Guinean approval was a given – an approach Liberian commentators labeled “a reckless gamble with Liberia’s future”. Why should Liberia rush to accommodate a deal that the ore’s country of origin hasn’t even sanctioned? Granting HPX operational access without Guinea’s consent could place Liberia in a diplomatically awkward position and potentially leave its rails underused if Guinea ultimately directs Nimba ore elsewhere. Regional norms favor caution and sovereignty: each nation safeguards control of infrastructure on its soil.
Liberia’s decision aligns with this principle, ensuring that Liberia governs Liberian rails just as Guinea insists on governing Guinean rails. It also avoids setting a precedent that Liberia’s infrastructure can be commandeered by outside corporate interests contrary to neighboring governments’ plans.
Protecting Investor Confidence and Infrastructure Governance
Beyond the immediate rail dispute, Liberia’s firm stance carries broader implications for governance and investor confidence. The country is emerging from years of economic difficulty and striving to attract high-quality foreign investment to drive growth. To do so, Liberia must demonstrate that it abides by contracts and offers a stable, rules-based environment.
The IMCC’s letter to President Joseph Boakai explicitly framed the rail decision in those terms – about preserving legal certainty and maintaining investor confidence in Liberia. Reversing a major concession on the whim of a newcomer’s lobbying would have signaled the opposite. “For a country still rebuilding its economic foundation, the stakes couldn’t be higher,” an official told FrontPage Africa. “Liberia’s credibility on the global stage…depends on how it treats those who honor long-term commitments to its people”.
Indeed, AML’s long-term commitment – however imperfect – is exactly the kind of investment Liberia needs to encourage. By standing by AML’s contractual rights, the government is telegraphing to all investors that Liberia will honor its agreements and not bend to extra-legal pressure. This reassurance “helps repair the uncertainty that crept in over the past year” during the public wrangling over the rail, the official added.
In terms of infrastructure governance, retaining AML also ensures operational continuity and expertise. AML has the experience and capacity to manage the heavy-haul railway safely and efficiently, as evidenced by nearly 15 years of successful operations. Stripping that role and transferring it to an untested third party – potentially one effectively chosen by HPX, could introduce operational risks Liberia can ill afford.
Past experiments with independent operators running Liberian infrastructure have not gone well; officials privately note that when a private company (APM Terminals) took over Monrovia’s port, state revenues fell short of expectations. They fear “history may repeat itself” if Liberia relinquishes direct oversight of the rail line to appease HPX. In the worst case, Liberia might end up subsidizing a new operator to run a railway that AML was already operating at its own expense. Such an outcome would erode a key source of government revenue at a time “when every dollar matters” for national development. By avoiding this trap, Liberia safeguards a crucial income stream and retains control over a strategic asset.
Conclusion: National Interest Prevails
In the showdown between Liberia’s obligations to a longstanding partner and the ambitions of a powerful newcomer, Liberia chose to put its national interest first. President Boakai’s administration, while welcoming of foreign investment, has sent a clear message that deals must respect Liberia’s laws and deliver real value to its people.
The government’s multi-user rail policy remains intact – Liberia is open for business, but on Liberia’s terms. As President Boakai himself has emphasized, the country seeks partnerships that are “open and transparent” and benefit the broader economy. The decision to keep AML as operator reflects exactly that ethos. Liberia gains continued investment, jobs, and revenue, while upholding the sanctity of its contracts. Meanwhile, HPX and any other third parties are not shut out; they are simply expected to work within Liberia’s established legal framework, as any investor should.
“Liberia keeps its word,” one official said of the outcome. In an era when resource-rich countries often find themselves under pressure to concede critical assets, Liberia’s resolve is being applauded at home and abroad. Legal experts have praised the IMCC’s move as a “timely reassertion of sovereign clarity” – a reinforcement that Liberia’s laws govern its resources. For ordinary Liberians, the stakes are tangible: more stable jobs, better infrastructure, and the assurance that their country isn’t being short-changed in backroom deals.
By prioritizing legal stability, economic benefit, and fair access, Liberia has demonstrated a persuasive and principled case for standing firm. The broader lesson is one of balanced governance – welcoming new investors like HPX, but not at the cost of undermining existing agreements or the nation’s long-term interests. As Liberia positions itself for future growth, its leaders have shown that while investment is welcome, the rules must be followed and the national interest will always come first.
For More News And Analysis About Liberia Follow Africa-Press
