Zambia–Botswana rail project gains momentum, but delivery questions remain

Our Correspondence, Zambia

Zambia and Botswana’s latest Joint Steering Committee (JSC) meeting on the Mosetse–Kazungula–Livingstone (MKL) Rail Project marks another step forward in a long-anticipated infrastructure initiative with the potential to reshape regional trade dynamics in Southern Africa. 

Convened on 1 April 2026 in Kasane, Botswana, the meeting brought together senior officials and railway authorities from both countries to assess progress and chart the way ahead.

At face value, the commitments reaffirmed by both governments reflect a shared ambition: to strengthen cross-border connectivity, reduce transport costs, and unlock economic opportunities within the Southern African Development Community (SADC). 

The MKL Rail Project, spanning approximately 430 kilometres, is envisioned as a strategic corridor linking Botswana’s rail network to Zambia’s, while enhancing access to regional and international markets.

Yet beyond the formal statements and diplomatic assurances lies a more critical question—whether political will can translate into timely delivery.

Infrastructure projects of this scale have historically faced delays across the region, often slowed by financing constraints, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and shifting policy priorities.

The MKL railway is no exception. While the Joint Steering Committee acknowledged progress, its emphasis on expediting outstanding consultant deliverables and finalising the bankable feasibility study suggests that key preparatory stages are still incomplete.

This matters. Without a completed and credible feasibility study, the project cannot effectively attract the level of investment required to move from planning to execution. 

Development partners and financiers typically demand clarity on cost structures, risk assessments, and projected returns before committing resources. 

Any delays at this stage risk undermining investor confidence and prolonging implementation timelines.

Still, the renewed urgency expressed by both governments—particularly the directive to conclude outstanding studies by the end of 2026—signals recognition of these challenges. 

It also reflects growing awareness that regional competitiveness increasingly depends on efficient transport infrastructure.

For land-linked economies such as Zambia and Botswana, rail connectivity is more than a convenience; it is an economic necessity. Overreliance on road transport has contributed to high logistics costs, congestion, and accelerated wear on infrastructure. 

A functional rail corridor could significantly ease these pressures, improving the movement of both goods and passengers while supporting industrial growth.

Moreover, the MKL project carries broader regional implications. By strengthening links within SADC, it aligns with ongoing efforts to deepen economic integration and facilitate intra-African trade under frameworks such as the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). 

In this context, the railway is not merely a bilateral undertaking but part of a larger continental push toward connectivity and competitiveness.

However, ambition alone will not deliver results. Effective coordination between institutions, transparency in project management, and consistent stakeholder engagement will be critical in maintaining momentum. 

The involvement of Zambia Railways Limited and Botswana Railways is a positive sign, but sustained alignment between technical execution and political oversight remains essential.

There is also the question of inclusivity. Large-scale infrastructure projects often promise national and regional benefits, but their local impacts can be uneven. 

Ensuring that communities along the corridor benefit—through employment, improved services, and economic participation—will be key to securing long-term support and legitimacy.

Ultimately, the MKL Rail Project represents both an opportunity and a test. It offers Zambia and Botswana a chance to demonstrate that regional cooperation can deliver tangible development outcomes. 

At the same time, it will test their ability to move beyond commitments and into concrete action.

The Kasane meeting may have reinforced political alignment, but the true measure of success will lie in execution. 

In a region where infrastructure ambitions are abundant but completion rates often lag behind, delivery—not dialogue—will define the MKL project’s legacy.