I almost missed this story but I think it’s really important to look at it and analyze it carefully. A Chinese company, China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation (CCECC),has expressed its interest in building a railway connecting Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi. The project is supposed to link Dar es Salaam, Kigali and Musongati in Burundi.

Historically, railways symbolized more than just a means by which people, goods and animals would travel from one city to another. It was, to some particular extent, a symbol of freedom. Under colonialism, movement and mobility in general were severely restricted. People were not allowed to travel freely which meant that the post-colonial project to build railways and roads that would actually be sued by Africans was greeted with high optimism.

It was more about the idea of a railway than the actual fact of using it.

Of course, this has not always been the case. In Tanzania, for example, when the damaging effects of the structural adjustment programs hit the country (in the ‘80s) the state canceled some of the train stops along the TAZARA railway as some government representatives rightfully labeled them unproductive because of the small number of people hoping on and off the train in those stations. The decision was met with a very high resistance as locals demanded the decision to be reversed.  One of the people I interviewed a couple of years ago in the region told me: “We were appalled that the state would cancel our right to freedom. The railway was not important for the railway. It was important because it was a symbolic victory of my people.”

Nowadays, the symbolic meanings trail the more concrete and urgent goals of sustainable development. Countries like Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi, with limited access to foreign developmental sources must make difficult decisions and decide what works and what doesn’t. Within this new narrative, one thing becomes rather clear: a railway that would connect the three countries would be a symbolic victory yet an economic disaster. Why?

First, because the strategic goals of the TAZARA railway, for example, no longer apply. None of the three countries mentioned are isolated or in danger of not being able to achieve its economic goals because of lack of mobility. More importantly, the three countries are already interconnected through a very steady network of roads which, more often than not, have been built by Chinese companies.

Second, it is actually cheaper to ship goods by using the cargo companies in the three countries than to ship them by train cargos. What’s my evidence? Well, for now at least, if you want to ship one tone of goods from Dar es Salaam to Lusaka, it is 30 percent cheaper to rent a large truck than to ship it by train.

Third, it would take less time to get from Dar es Salaam to Bujumbura by car than by train.

However, there are also some pros for this project:

• No bribes (in theory). If you drive from Dar es Salaam to Kigoma, I think it is almost impossible not to be stopped by policemen who would demand some type of bribe (not too much for a Western – up to 10,000 shillings or 8 dollars but certainly something troublesome for a local). If one takes a train, one would at least in theory be able to avoid paying bribes.
• Decrease the risk of private damage. Roads are still very bad both in Tanzania and Burundi (not so much in Rwanda). By taking the train or by shipping a cargo, a local entrepreneur / company / firm would reduce the risk of paying for collateral damages.
• Part of Tanzania is not quite served by public transportation on a daily basis. In some cases, buses only stop in certain locations once every two days.  Sometimes, villages are served only once a week. It is likely that if the railway is built then some residents might actually benefit from the project. However, I strongly believe that this would primarily be used for short distances more often than not and only on occasion.

That being said, I think that while this project might be appealing to the leaders of the three countries, it isn’t really a good deal. The TAZARA project already proved to be inefficient from an economic point of view. Supporting yet another similar project is not in East Africa’s best interest.