Who will control Africa’s AI infrastructure, and at what cost?
African nations grapple with balancing foreign investment in AI infrastructure against sovereignty and local control, as global competition offers leverage but also risks of dependency.
In April, African Union ministers met in Tangier, Morocco, to discuss artificial intelligence at a time when governments across the continent are racing to develop AI strategies, attract investment, and expand digital infrastructure. Beneath the enthusiasm lies a fundamental question: how much control will African countries ultimately have over the infrastructure built by foreign tech companies investing in data centers, cloud services, and AI systems?
The debate reflects a broader shift in policymaker thinking – from adoption to ownership, governance, and the terms of AI development and deployment. Several governments have framed the issue clearly. Nigeria, Kenya, Egypt, and Ghana have released national AI strategies highlighting local capacity building and reducing dependence on foreign providers. Ghana’s strategy, launched in April, describes AI as a “sovereign capability”. Forty-nine countries, along with the African Union, have endorsed the Africa Declaration on Artificial Intelligence, calling for greater investment in AI infrastructure, talent, and innovation.
Translating ambition into policy is not always straightforward. In South Africa, a draft national AI policy was withdrawn earlier this year after officials found references that could not be verified and appeared to have been generated by AI tools – an example of the practical challenges governments face in regulating rapidly evolving technologies.
Global competition over AI is intensifying, with major tech companies and governments vying for data, computing power, and new markets. For African countries, this competition may create room to negotiate. Priyal Singh, a geopolitical analyst at Signal Risk, told Al Jazeera that the fragmented nature of the global AI industry could strengthen that position. He noted that major tech companies will need to bend to local concerns more often than they might expect.
The infrastructure gap remains significant. Africa accounts for less than one percent of global data center capacity, despite being home to roughly 18 percent of the world’s population. McKinsey research shows that the continent’s five largest data center markets combined have less capacity than France. Across much of Africa, unreliable electricity supply is a major constraint on expansion.
These limits help explain why negotiations over data centers and cloud infrastructure have become increasingly sensitive. One closely watched project is a proposed $1 billion data center development involving Microsoft and Emirati company G42 in Kenya. Kenyan President William Ruto highlighted the energy demands, warning that such infrastructure would require substantial additional power generation. Kenyan officials say talks are ongoing. The episode illustrates the trade-offs governments face: attracting AI investment while weighing energy needs, financing costs, and long-term strategic dependence.
The question of who builds Africa’s digital future extends beyond Western tech companies. Sanusha Naidu, a senior research fellow at the Institute for Global Dialogue, told Al Jazeera that debates about diversification are often more complicated. Whether shifting from Western to Chinese companies, the key is what is returned through partnerships – the broader developmental impact. Naidu compared current AI infrastructure debates to earlier foreign investment waves like the textile industry in the 1990s but noted that data centers are far more resource-intensive, especially water consumption, affecting socioeconomic issues.
Concerns about dependence go beyond data centers. Over the past decade, African governments have adopted a range of foreign-built digital systems, from cloud platforms and digital public services to surveillance and smart city technologies. Debates over data governance, digital sovereignty, and where sensitive information should be stored have become increasingly prominent. Similar arguments support plans for an Africa Credit Rating Agency to provide African-led assessments of sovereign creditworthiness.
Much of the discussion on AI governance remains among policymakers, regulators, and tech companies. Joseph Asunka, CEO of Afrobarometer, warned that negotiations should not be conducted only at the elite level. If citizens do not trust their government’s actions in this space, it creates a trust gap that could negatively affect the adoption of fintech, e-commerce, and e-government tools. He added that concerns about data protection and digital security are already widespread among African populations.
The debate echoes older questions of economic sovereignty. Independence-era leaders argued that political freedom meant little without control over economic resources. Today, similar questions emerge around data, computing power, and digital infrastructure. Alongside large-scale investment, governments and development agencies explore local capacity building – for example, the United Nations Development Programme’s timbuktoo initiative, which supports African tech ecosystems through innovation and entrepreneurship. These efforts are modest compared to global AI investment but reflect attempts to ensure African countries participate as contributors, not just consumers.
Africa is unlikely to become self-sufficient in AI, nor is that the goal for most governments. The continent remains deeply integrated into global technology supply chains and will continue to rely on international investment, expertise, and partnerships. The key question for policymakers is not whether Africa will use AI but on what terms. Decisions made now could shape who controls the technologies increasingly influencing economies, public services, and everyday life.
