The EIB’s latest moves are a masterclass in greenwashing, corporate profiteering, and misguided priorities. From funneling public funds into private pockets to fueling military-industrial complex dreams, the Bank is playing a dangerous game. We discussed it with Yanis Varoufakis at the beginning of the month in one episode of our podcast, EU Watchdog Radio. (You missed? Remedy immediately and listen to it now). 

Whether it's the Global Gateway, the South H2 Corridor, or the EIB Forum’s cozy corporate partnerships, the cracks are showing. And while the EU pretends to lead on sustainable development, it’s clear: people and planet are not top of the list.

Let’s dive into it!

💎 RAW DEALS

A double-down on raw materials with old, vague commitments: During the latest Board of Directors’ meeting, the EIB has approved a new Critical Raw Materials Initiative, further cementing the role of the Bank as a major financier for projects across the global supply chain - inside and outside Europe, after a 10-year break from these activities. Yet, the Bank’s initiative merely reiterates its existing €2 billion commitment for 2025—first announced in its Strategic Roadmap and Tech-EU program. The ‘Task Force’ lacks clarity on its role, and a new ‘one-stop shop’ to manage raw materials operations offers no details on governance or oversight. What is surely not missing is the concern that these projects risk greenwashing harmful extractive activities.

Red flags again and again: Over the past six months, we’ve sounded the alarm about the EIB’s past decisions on raw materials, but the response we’ve received have been deeply deceiving, to say the least. The EIB continues to ignore the serious human rights concerns surrounding its raw materials partnerships, particularly with Rwanda, where its involvement is tied to the mineral-fueled conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Despite pressure from 64 civil society groups and a call from the European Parliament to freeze budgetary support to Rwanda, the EIB refuses to reconsider its approach.

Dodge & dismiss: The EIB’s response ignores human rights abuses, claiming its policies are strong enough, yet refuses to introduce stricter due diligence measures—even as it funds projects that risk harming communities. Furthermore, the EIB evades questions about complaints and oversight, insisting that its Complaints Mechanism is independent, despite evidence that management has too much control over the process. To make matters worse, it shuts out affected communities by rejecting calls for real transparency and Free, Prior, and Informed Consent, insisting its current process is sufficient. There is still a long way to go.

Business as usual: If the EIB and the EU are serious about securing a fair and sustainable raw materials supply, they must stop sidelining civil society and affected communities. Public finance should not support harmful mining projects that ignore human rights and environmental standards. A fair approach to securing raw materials must prioritise circular economy principles, recycling, and reducing material demand—mining should be the last resort.

📬 SIKELA, YOU GOT MAIL

Brussels 🤝 a good branding exercise, and the Global Gateway is no exception. Alongside 50+ civil society organizations worldwide, we’re calling out this initiative for what it really is: a corporate play disguised as development. The EU says it’s about "equal partnerships" and tackling global challenges—but in practice? It’s funneling public money into private profits, fuelling debt, and locking the Global South into resource extraction deals that benefit European industries, not local communities.

This wasn't a love letter for the Global Gateway—far from it. We wrote to Commissioner Sikela to sound the alarm on debt traps, backroom deals, and a development strategy that prioritises corporate profits over people. The Global Gateway is failing where it counts. What’s needed? Real investment in public services, climate action that isn’t extractive, and respect for local sovereignty. The EU can’t claim to be a development leader while turning development finance into a business opportunity. Read our letter to see why we’re pushing for change. 
Want to dig deeper? Check out our in-depth research on the Global Gateway’s real impact.

🚧  ​​A CORRIDOR BUILT ON BROKEN PROMISES

The EU finest design for industries: Alongside other +85 civil society organizations from Africa and Europe, we’re raising the alarm about the South H2 Corridor, a 3,300-km hydrogen pipeline from North Africa to Germany, fast-tracked with billions in public funds. This project is backed by Snam, TAG, Gas Connect Austria, and BayerNet—companies eager to cash in on big money on hydrogen’s fake green dreams. But scratch the surface, and it’s clear: it’s a corporate land and resource grab disguised as climate action, all while ignoring communities’ demands. The South H2 Corridor is not a solution—it’s part of the problem.

Behind the H2 letter, there’s plenty of harm: . The pipeline is set to transport over 40% of the EU’s green hydrogen import target—yet in 2022, green hydrogen made up less than 0.1% of global hydrogen production. Originally pushed through during the 2022 energy crisis as a security measure, it’s now a Global Gateway flagship project and a key part of RePowerEU. It’s also part Meloni’s Mattei Plan—Rome’s Global Gateway side hustle— a “non-predatory” partnership with Africa that turns out to be just another corporate play to extract resources while curbing migration.

The bill is handed over to (drumrolls)... communities in North Africa, where land, water, and labor will be extracted to fuel Europe’s energy needs—while local people, especially women in rural areas, face worsening water scarcity, land dispossession, and energy poverty. Elena Gerebizza from Recommon delved further in this piece. 

The EU’s greenwashing machine in overdrive: Last week, as EU Energy Ministers met to define what qualifies as critical infrastructure, fossil fuel lobbyists weren’t just influencing the conversation—they were literally in the room. Over lunch with the President of a major fossil fuel lobby group, ministers discussed policies that will dictate Europe’s energy future. Eyes open for the other 4 corridors the EU plans to build in the coming months for its own “decarbonisation.” Very likely another cozy arrangement for industry, a dire one for the planet.

🎰 ALL IN ON DEFENCE

The (anti) Russian roulette: Early this month, von Der Leyen announced ReArm Europe and, last week, Commissioner for Defence Kubilius published the White Paper for European Defence—EU’s latest push to supercharge the arms industry—cutting red tape (hello Omnibus package for defence), ramping up funding, and putting industry players in the driver’s seat. The Commission explicitly calls on the EIB’s Board of Governors to urgently step up defence industry support, particularly by narrowing the list of excluded activities and increasing available funding.

The pressure to fall in line: At the EIB Forum, President Calviño announced that the Bank’s Board is considering scrapping its €8 billion cap on defence lending, opening the door to unlimited financing for military infrastructure—barracks, surveillance tech, drone jammers—while keeping weapons and ammunition off-limits (for now). In its latest meeting, the Board of Directors approved the expansion of the eligibility for financing Europe’s security and defence industry and infrastructure, to ensure that excluded activities are as limited as possible in scope, in line with the proposals from the Commission and EU leaders.  The focus on loosening eligibility criteria and limiting exclusions suggests a clear shift toward broader military funding, potentially paving the way for direct weapons financing in the future.

An achievement not to be proud of:  The EIB’s existing €8 billion Strategic European Security Initiative (SESI) will be integrated into a permanent public policy goal, with no predefined ceiling for financing. Instead, funding will be determined annually in the EIB Group’s Operational Plan. This year, the Bank will double its investments in defence and security, reaching a new record.

War is the new business model: "We need to create demand" through war—yes, *literally* what the CSO of German Quantum Systems said during a defence-focused panel at the EIB Forum. The message was loud and clear: the arms industry thrives on conflict, and the EU is making sure the contracts keep coming. The Forum’s defence panel was a who’s who of the military-industrial complex. Arms giants took centre stage, including Leonardo’s Chairman—representing an EIB-backed company that has supplied weapons to Israel, despite concerns over international law violations. Meanwhile, arms industry lobbying has skyrocketed by 40% in just one year, shaping EU policy to fuel their profits. A strategy that seems to be working, at our expense.

Bad economics, worse ethics: Weapons don’t pay dividends. Unlike infrastructure or green energy, they don’t create enough jobs*, generate revenue, or build lasting value. Defence spending is unpredictable, tied to geopolitics, and a risky bet for a bank that thrives on stability. Pumping money into high-risk defence projects could sink the EIB’s AAA credit rating, driving up borrowing costs and draining funds away from social and climate action. 

*Want to read more about it? Studies across Europe, the UK and US show that public services, green energy, and environmental protections create more jobs and economic growth than military spending. It’s common sense: renewables cut bills and drive long-term value, while a faulty tank just burns cash.

🍽️ ​​A YEARLY BUSINESS BANQUET - AKA EIB FORUM

From March 5-7, the EIB held its annual meeting, and the theme was “Investing in a More Sustainable and Secure Europe.” But behind the buzzwords, the push for financialisation was loud and clear: blending public funds with private profits, de-risking investors at the expense of public budgets. The result? Socialised losses, privatised gains.

Profits >>>>> energy transition: The push for public-private partnerships in the energy sector revealed a troubling trend: corporate-led innovation where public funds take all the risks. The energy transition? A business-first agenda, clear as day to all involved. ArcelorMittal, a key speaker, bluntly stated that while they have the tech and funding to decarbonise—including EIB support—the business case in Europe is too weak to put in place. What’s the solution of Renault's CEO?  More  competitiveness and longer working lives as fixes to the whole car sector in crisis. To summarise it: the bill will be footed by workers and the environment.

There’s a catch: the EIB’s playbook still leans heavily on ‘green’ neoliberalism, where corporate giants call the shots, and communities pick up the tab. Large-scale, privately owned renewable projects dominate, keeping the old energy hierarchy intact—power flowing from big generators to the grid, then to consumers, while private operators rake in the profits. Land grabs, rising costs, and unchecked corporate control? All built into the market logic. We broke it down here.

Another market scheme: A €10 billion pan-European Housing Action Plan was announced at the Forum and it *could* be promising, but the Bank is opening up its lending for affordable housing to private investors and construction companies.  Real affordable housing for those who need it? Not so fast. The plan’s success hinges on who calls the shots—if construction lobbies have their way, as they did in the panel discussion, affordable and sustainable housing will stay out of reach. And, if we look at the plan, it doesn’t sound promising: private investors and construction companies are at the top of the list, while non-profit and social housing are just one of the mentioned options.

Global investments, same old extractive patterns and with the help of Export Credit Agencies (ECA)s*. The debate only strengthened the already existing cozy ties between the EIB, public banks, and Export Credit Agencies (ECAs), but that’s raising some serious red flags—especially since EU ECAs continue to back fossil fuels and corporate interests over local development. We analysed this approach in this research.

*Credit what? ECAs are government-backed entities that provide financing and insurance to companies expanding abroad, often shielding private companies from risks. While this may seem like a boost for global trade, the reality is that ECAs frequently support projects that exacerbate environmental damage (EU ECAs financing fossil-fuels activity - look into this paper) and undermine local economies, locking in harmful dependencies and making it harder to meet climate goals and deliver real social benefits.

A reminder on who holds the means of production: Both on energy and health, the topic of addressing intellectual property and technology transfer barriers was raised by speakers from the Global South, underlining that without knowledge-sharing and patent-free technology, dependencies will only deepen rather than building true energy and health sovereignty.

Minerals worth a war: this is how Vice President Beer described raw minerals, as something that "can make the difference between peace and war." In 2024, the Bank shattered its decade-long mining investment freeze, backing a lithium hydroxide plant in Finland. Euromines, the European metal and mining industry, was at the table of discussion, hailing this project as a model, swiping under the rug the violations of Sámi communities’ rights, paying the price for these extraction operations. Another evidence of how entrenched the Bank is in a profit-driven logic that fails to center social and environmental justice.

The elephants in the room: 
🐘 When pressed about market backlash against green investments, the panel dodged the question. Instead, we got vague talk about “better explanations” and “infrastructure investments”—but no real answers on how they’ll tackle banks avoiding green projects that aren’t lucrative enough.
🐘 When asked about the European Parliament's push to cancel the Bank's CRM partnership with Rwanda, officials? Crickets.

🍜 WHAT’S COOKING AT THE EIB?

This month, the EIB approved 18 projects, while signed 13*, 25 in the EU and 6 outside. Out of this, 10 were credit lines projects, 7 for transport, 4 for energy,  3 water and sanitation, 2 for education, 1 for urban development, 2 for health, and 2 for industry.

*What’s the difference between signed and approved? An approved project has been reviewed and endorsed by the EIB's Board of Directors but has not yet reached the final agreement stage, its terms and conditions are still being finalized. A signed project has gone through all negotiations, and a formal financing agreement has been concluded between the EIB and the project promoter.

🚨 In the spotlight: BAYERISCHE LANDESBANK REPOWEREU FL (Germany) - €500 million. It’s a framework loan with a German Landesbank to finance mid-size renewable projects in Europe.

REPowerEU, a plan to prop up fossil fuels: RepowerEU, as part of the EU’s decarbonisation strategy, is more about tech and infrastructure than true transformation—especially when it comes to social and environmental priorities. Launched in May 2022, the plan seeks to address energy disruptions caused by the war in Ukraine, but it’s primarily focused on tech-heavy investments to boost energy transition efforts. From diversifying energy supplies to ramping up clean tech industries, the plan looks good on the surface. But here's the kicker: focusing on innovation and competitiveness without tackling the root causes doesn’t solve the bigger issue. Yes, new technologies and some job creation are welcome, but unless we reduce resource use and ensure strong social conditions, we’re just tinkering around the edges. In fact, RepowerEU risks perpetuating fossil fuel dependence while failing to sufficiently push renewable energy forward. The EU’s external energy strategy could easily swap one fossil fuel dependency for another, while the overemphasis on green hydrogen and LNG could lock Europe into fossil fuel reliance for decades to come.

The EIB’s role in all of this is equally problematic: Their PATH Framework bans finance to fossil fuel companies without a credible decarbonisation plan, unless it is for innovative projects and renewables. 
The exception? REPowerEU. This loophole means that major oil companies can still tap into EIB funding for clean tech projects—hello, irony. And it doesn’t stop there. In 2023, the EIB upped its support for REPowerEU from €30 to €45 billion, extending funding to clean tech and critical raw materials. 
Want to dig deeper? Have a read of our report “Beyond profit: How to reshape the European Green Deal for people’s well-being”.

🤝 Signed & sealed

Related articles

Newsletter | FebruaryDylan shaw xc h G9 Dwex I unsplash

Newsletter • 27 Feb 2025

Cash flow, no glow