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 nationโs sovereignty, undermine its institutions, and defy basic economic logic.
AT THE CENTER of the controversy is the YekepaโBuchanan 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 operatorโan 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 Presidentโs 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 IMCCโs decision and mandating the hiring of an independent rail operatorโeffectively ordering the countryโs leadership to abandon its sovereign right to decide whatโs best for its infrastructure.
THE IRONY IN Ivanhoe and HPXโs aggressive push is that the foundation of their argument is alarmingly weak. HPXโs 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?
IVANHOEโS PUSH FOR an โindependentโ 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 Liberiaโs credibility to foreign investors. But the real threat to investor confidence is not Liberiaโs commitment to fairness; itโs 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 playโan 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.
