A Guest Editorial
A RECENT LETTER from Ivanhoe Atlantic Inc., addressed to President Joseph Nyuma Boakai, has exposed a troubling attempt by the company and its backers, including High Power Exploration (HPX), to force the Government of Liberia (GOL) into decisions that compromise the nation’s sovereignty, undermine its institutions, and defy basic economic logic.
AT THE CENTER of the controversy is the Yekepa–Buchanan railway, a critical national asset built and rehabilitated through more than $800 million in investment by ArcelorMittal Liberia (AML). Despite this, Ivanhoe and HPX, who have contributed nothing to the development of the rail infrastructure, are aggressively lobbying for AML to be removed as operator—an alarming demand backed not by facts or fairness, but by coercive correspondence and political pressure.
THE MAY 3 letter, signed by Bronwyn Barnes, CEO of Ivanhoe Atlantic, not only disrespects the Office of the President but casts aspersions on the entire Inter-Ministerial Concessions Committee (IMCC). Barnes accuses the IMCC of acting outside the President’s directives and even questions the legitimacy of its decisions due to the reported absence of some ministers. This blatant disregard for due process and institutional integrity is unbecoming of any serious investment partner.
WORSE STILL, BARNES demands that the President issues a written directive reversing the IMCC’s decision and mandating the hiring of an independent rail operator—effectively ordering the country’s leadership to abandon its sovereign right to decide what’s best for its infrastructure.
THE IRONY IN Ivanhoe and HPX’s aggressive push is that the foundation of their argument is alarmingly weak. HPX’s Guinean subsidiary, SMFG, currently holds no mining license from the Government of Guinea. More importantly, Guinea has not granted HPX or Ivanhoe any approval to transport ore through Liberia, largely because Guinea is investing over $18 billion in constructing its own domestic rail corridor to move Simandou ore through its own territory.
THIS RAISES A serious question: On what legal or diplomatic basis is Ivanhoe demanding preferential access to Liberian infrastructure when it has neither the product nor permission to export it?
IVANHOE’S PUSH FOR an “independent” operator may sound neutral, but in reality it would mean Liberia bearing additional economic burdens hiring and paying a third-party operator for a job AML is already equipped to perform at no cost to the government. In a country grappling with limited fiscal space and competing development priorities, such an arrangement is not only economically unwise; it is irrational.
EVEN MORE TROUBLING is the attempt to frame the issue as a test of Liberia’s credibility to foreign investors. But the real threat to investor confidence is not Liberia’s commitment to fairness; it’s the perception that a foreign company can dictate outcomes by applying pressure at the highest political level.
THIS IS NOT a letter rooted in partnership; it is a power play—an effort to arm-twist a democratically elected government into accepting terms that favor one private firm over the broader national interest. Liberia has seen this play before: flashy promises of corridors and investments that never materialize, designed to derail those who have already committed capital, created jobs, and paid taxes.
