Minister Jean-Luc Crucke (Mobility, Climate and Ecological Transition, representing Belgium) and outgoing State Secretary Thierry Aartsen (Infrastructure and Water Management, representing the Netherlands) signed a joint declaration on this matter in Antwerp.

New challenges in a rapidly changing world demand swift action, according to the signatories Crucke and Aartsen. The joint statement states that geopolitical and geoeconomic relations are changing rapidly and that this calls for increased cooperation in areas such as accessibility, security, and military mobility.

‘New impetus and acceleration’

Belgium and the Netherlands are already collaborating to strengthen cross-border connections. The challenge now is to further develop the potential of the collaboration between the two countries and remove all possible obstacles. “Our collaboration with the Netherlands has always been constructive,” says Belgian Minister Jean-Luc Crucke, “but at times it lacked ambition. Today, we want to breathe new life into it, so that we can strengthen our ties and accelerate the development of safe and efficient cross-border rail connections.”

State Secretary Thierry Aartsen agrees: “The world is changing rapidly. Good cross-border cooperation is therefore strategically important – both economically and militarily. And as a traveler, you must be able to travel to another country easily. We are now giving new impetus and acceleration to the cooperation between Belgium and the Netherlands in the field of rail. This declaration is a fantastic first step in that direction. It contributes to the new cabinet’s commitment to continue working on improving the accessibility and safety of our country in an international context.”

Ghent-Terneuzen connection

Both parties also indicate that they do not intend to limit themselves to a mere declaration of intent. They will not only focus on improving connectivity, but Belgium and the Netherlands also want to expand the capacity of cross-border lines. Furthermore, new connections such as 3RX and the rail freight connection between the ports of Ghent and Terneuzen should be considered. Furthermore, new connections between the Dutch provinces of Brabant and Limburg and Belgium are being explored. It has been decided to explore, among other things, a connection between Brainport Eindhoven and Belgium. Both countries also want to further coordinate efforts on increased capacity for cross-border military mobility and improved rail resilience.

To ensure the successful completion of these projects, both countries have agreed that the responsible ministers will meet at least once a year. This will be supplemented by biannual meetings of the Belgian-Dutch working group, as well as meetings between experts on each rail dossier. The intention is for Belgium and the Netherlands to sign a framework agreement covering a series of rail dossiers this summer.

According to the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, the agreements build on existing collaboration and on rail agreements between Belgium and the Netherlands from 2022. However, the intensification requires additional efforts and, where necessary, substantive deepening. Therefore, it has been agreed to involve regional parties and rail infrastructure managers in the approach, where necessary and relevant.

Iron Rhine and 3RX

And so, the Belgians have finally put the 3RX connection back on the Dutch political agenda . The benefits of this renewed connection primarily benefit the Port of Antwerp. The 3RX route – the Rhein-Ruhr-Rail connection – is an alternative to the Iron Rhine rail link, proposed since 2017, intended to connect the Port of Antwerp with the German Ruhr region. The route largely follows existing railway lines, unlike the original, more controversial route. Reactivating the existing Iron Rhine route is out of the question for the Netherlands because part of it runs right through the De Meinweg national park.

For that reason, the Belgians are pursuing a detour via Venlo (Netherlands, on the border with Germany): the 3RX route. Between 2016 and 2017, Transport & Mobility Leuven, part of the Catholic University of Leuven, conducted research into the reactivation of the Iron Rhine and what it would require. The lion’s share of the work – and therefore the costs – would be borne by the Netherlands.

The report concluded: “The cheapest solution for creating a line is a combination of doubling and electrifying various sections (in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany), constructing a new railway curve near Roermond (Netherlands), and various works near Venlo to divert the train. The total investment cost of this option is estimated at 770 million euros (including risk provision, excluding VAT; uncertainty margin: around 30%).”

The study’s traffic analysis already showed that the 3RX line will primarily be used for traffic between the Belgian seaports and the Rhine-Ruhr region. “It is assumed that the line will be used by an average of 17 to 20 trains daily in 2030, and by 19 to 23 trains in 2040. The traffic forecast shows that the 3RX would also relieve congestion on the Brabant Route, the Aachen marshalling yard, and the Aachen-Düren-Cologne line.”

Aside from relieving the burden on the Brabant Route, reactivating the Iron Rhine doesn’t seem to offer much benefit to the Netherlands. Will the two countries finally break the deadlock? Time will tell. Meanwhile, sister publication SpoorPro has submitted questions to State Secretary Thierry Aartsen about the silent, yet expressed, desire of Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever to merge the ports of Rotterdam and Antwerp, or at least to steer towards a more extensive form of cooperation.

This article was originally published by our sister publication SpoorPro.

Bulk cargo decline and congestion

The current conditions and latest developments led to a slight decrease (-4.3%) in the port’s total throughput in the first half of 2025, with 137,2 million tonnes. Bulk cargo was the main factor, with decreases in liquid, dry and conventional breakbulk. The port did not provide more specific data regarding rail freight or intermodal volumes in H1 2025, but said that the share of rail freight at the port in 2024 was 7%.

Moreover, the port, just like many others in northwestern Europe, had to deal with significant congestion. “As long as container volumes remain high and logistical chains remain disrupted, congestion will persist. This applies to all ports in Northwest Europe. There is no reserve capacity anywhere. The summer months will be particularly intense because traditionally less dock labor is available”, the spokesperson explained.

Small growth for container and RoRo

A few positives came from containerised traffic. Despite the stagnation regarding traffic to the US, total traffic reached 6.91 million TEUs, a 3.7% growth compared to the same period last year. RoRo traffic also posted minor growth with 1%. “Although fewer new cars were shipped, this was offset by growth in truck, high & heavy equipment, and second-hand vehicle volumes”, the port said in a press release.

Of the total sum of money from the European RRF fund, 69,2 million euros will go to Infrabel and 6,95 million euros to NMBS. The additional funds will make rail traffic safer, more sustainable and more accessible.

Out of the additional funds for Infrabel, almost 29 million euros will go to the renovation of 32 sections of track and 18 freight infrastructures. Furthermore, bottlenecks will be eliminated on a number of important lines, such as Brussels-Luxembourg. A digital rail traffic management system should ensure greater punctuality.

Line 11

A large part of the additional funds, some 31 million euros, will go towards the electrification of line 11, a key rail access to the Port of Antwerp. The electrification of the line will provide faster, quieter and more environmentally friendly rail transport. The plan for such an upgrade has existed since 2023, but European money has only been allocated two years down the line.

As part of that same plan, Infrabel wants to create a double track on a five-kilometre section towards the Dutch border, boosting rail capacity. The infrastructure manager explains that line 11 is vital for the northern part of the Antwerp port, being the only rail access to the area. Much chemical industry is located there, and Infrabel expects economic growth and increased container traffic in that part of the port.

A project for an overhead junction of lines 11 and 27b in Ekeren-Oude Landen (pictured) is also still ongoing but the permit for those works has already been annulled several times.

High-performance and sustainable rail network

Federal Minister Jean-Luc Crucke says he will continue to invest in a high-performance and sustainable rail network. “Thanks to these additional funds, Infrabel and NMBS/SNCB will be able to accelerate the implementation of essential projects. This is excellent news for the rail sector, soft mobility, the climate, safety and, above all, rail users,” the minister said.

This article was originally published by our sister publication Flows.be.

She is not the first person in Belgium to bring up the Iron Rhine. In recent times, glass producer Ciner Glass, which is building a new production facility along the old railway, proposed reopening the railway and an old intermodal terminal in the vicinity. It would have great logistical benefits for the company and the industrial zone surrounding its new plant.

With direct connections to the Antwerp port and the Ruhr region, it looks like a great deal, reactivating the line. But Belgium’s northern neighbour, the Netherlands, also has a say in the matter. It just so happens to be that a short section of the line crosses the southern part of the country, so it would need to agree and cooperate on a potential reopening.

Costs and benefits

And it is not stoked about that idea. In the past, the Hague has said that a nature reserve along the railway makes traffic impossible. That could be a legitimate part of the Dutch concerns, but there seems to be more at play.

The Dutch ministry of infrastructure explains to RailFreight.com that the cost-benefit analysis for the Netherlands does not check out. “We want to look at all options for cross-border connection between the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany together. That concerns 3RX [Iron Rhine], but also other new cross-border infrastructure projects that bring benefit to the entire region”, the ministry says.

“It is important to involve all countries well, because this really is a trilateral story, despite the very negative societal cost-benefit analysis for the Netherlands. By that, we mean that the Netherlands would mostly carry the burden of the connection and not get the advantages”, the ministry continues. It is looking for a win-win-win scenario.

Port competition

Even if they do not explicitly say it, the Dutch concerns seem to be related to the port of Rotterdam. A better connection to the port of Antwerp would give Rotterdam’s Belgian counterpart a competitive advantage – something the Dutch probably want to avoid, Belgian rail journalist Herman Welter told SpoorPro.

Besides that, both Belgium and the Netherlands are spending most of the rail budget on completely different projects, such as ERTMS and TEN-T corridors. Two billion Dutch euros will be spent on the Lower Saxony line in the north – which the country moved from another rail project’s budget. Money is tight.

The Belgian mobility minister is making an effort by putting the Iron Rhine on the agenda, but it seems unlikely that it will make a return. There are not enough financial resources, and the ever-present struggle of national thinking in European rail throws a spanner in the works of its advocates.

The first, second and third Iron Rhines

Between 1879 and 1914, the Iron Rhine served mainly as a freight line between the port of Antwerp, the Mönchengladbach transport hub and the Ruhr region. The railway ran from Antwerp via Lommel to Hamont, where it crossed the border with the Netherlands. From there, the line led to Germany via Budel, Weert and Roermond. This was, in fact, the “second” Iron Rhine, as the “first” had been running from Antwerp via Leuven, Liège and Aachen to Cologne since 1843.

At the outbreak of the First World War, the neutral Netherlands closed the second Iron Rhine at the border, as it was not allowed to allow transports between Germany and occupied Belgium. Germany, replacing the first and second Iron Rhine, built a third one: the Montzen route. It runs between the port of Antwerp and Aachen in Germany, via Aarschot, Hasselt and Tongres and Aachen, making it 50 kilometres longer than the “second” Iron Rhine, but bypassing the Netherlands.

The Montzen route has also been fully electrified since 2008 and is still in use anno 2025. In April 2022, the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport announced that Infrabel would receive five million euros from the “EU Military Mobility Fund” for the construction of four long tracks in the Montzen formation bundle to allow 740-metre trains to run between the port of Antwerp and the German border.

The new cooperation at the port of Antwerp entails the connection between PSA’s Deepsea Terminals and Combinant Rail Terminal. The PSA’s facilities involved are Noordzee and Europa Terminal, located on the right bank of the river Scheldt. This link is important for PSA as there is the Combinant rail terminal as a connection to the recently opened Duisburg Gateway Terminal, where the company invested.

“Additionally, rail operators calling Combinant can now offer connections between PSA’s Antwerp terminals and important logistics hotspots on the European continent such as Ludwigshafen, Bettembourg, Milan, Verona, Barcelona and Madrid”, PSA added.

According to the Port of Antwerp-Bruges, the European funding is a recognition of the strategic importance of the bridge for smooth rail transport in the area. The EU will cover half of all renovation costs from the Connecting Europe Facility, of which 22,43 million will be allocated to the Port of Antwerp-Bruges and half a million euros to Belgian rail manager Infrabel.

Also read:

• More electrified railway lines for southern yard in Port of Antwerp-Bruges
• Infrabel ready to unlock key rail investments with €1 billion loan

Surcharging in steps

Metrans was one of the first companies to express concern about the rising traction prices in early January 2022. Back then, it mentioned that the pricing calculations for 2022 in Hungary could not meet the increased electricity prices, highlighting that surcharges would be implemented for rail freight transport accordingly.

The next step was introducing fuel surcharges for terminal operations in CTS Salzburg and DIT Duisburg and first\last mile deliveries of international services on 21 March. Now it is time for trucking within ports to experience a price increase. Nevertheless, in contrast to Lineas, Metrans has not yet implemented fuel surcharges for international rail freight traffic.

More similar measures to come

Metrans says they will keep an eye on the market situation and adjust the surcharge per month if necessary. Petr Lanka, commercial director at Metrans, said they expect that more carriers will have to implement such a surcharge in the future.

The company says it has so far introduced a surcharge based on the requirements of the freight carriers they work with for freight transport to and from rail terminals, while it will keep an eye on the market situation and check whether it is necessary also to introduce a surcharge for the diesel required for train transport.

This article was originally published in our sister publication NT.nl.

Also read:

• Lineas applies energy surcharge: ‘we can no longer absorb the high rates’

• Companies troubled by high traction prices in Hungary

As for Birsterminal, it is a trimodal logistics platform covering an area of ​​90,000 m2 in the Swiss Rhine ports, located in Basel on the Rhine’s left bank.

One weekly departure

As part of Antwerp’s and Zeebrugge’s rail network, Terminal Container Althus has already frequent connections with them. Specifically, the destinations are connected with 12 train departures per week.

However, the link between Birsterminal and Althus is the one making the difference in this case since it is the new addition to the network. Under the name Tango Rail Line, the service will provide one weekly roundtrip between Althus and Birsfelden, focusing on containers and maritime cargo. The service will commence before the end of March.

Also read:

• Gopet Trans sets up Halkali-Antwerp connection as demand grows

• 4 years of renovation works on railway line to port of Antwerp

• Belgian authorities approve merger of Antwerp and Zeebrugge ports

The logistics provider, founded in Sofia, Bulgaria in 1995, is an expert of the Balkan transport market, while it opened its Turkish subsidiary two years ago. It started working on the Halkali-Antwerp service with some project-based shipments for a few clients in 2021, and as it saw demand growing, it decided to make it a stable connection.

First but promising service

“This is our first set up between Turkey and Belgium. In 2020 Gopet Trans opened a new subsidiary in Istanbul, Turkey. As a result, we are now developing the local range of services, and intermodal is a logical step as there is strong development potential. We are now working on expanding the portfolio of clients using this service,” says the company.

The intermodal service carries mainly 45 high cube containers since, according to Gopet, they offer a higher level of security and integrity of goods and are friendlier in terms of terminal operations. “While we are using semitrailers on other setups (especially the ones running from Romania and Bulgaria), we don’t consider at this point integrating them on this particular route,” mentions the company.

To Benelux and further

Gopet’s trains travelling between Halkali and Antwerp make a fixed stopover in Duisburg while stoping in other destinations is an open possibility according to customers’ needs. After Duisburg, trains go to Antwerp.

From there, the logistics company handles cargo directly and transports it to the port of Zeebrugge, where it is transhipped on vessels that travel to the port of Hull in the UK for further distribution.

Also read:

• DP World launches new railway line Rotterdam-Germersheim-Stuttgart
• SNCF back in the black: who would have thought?

Port complementarity

Antwerp is an important chemical transhipment centre, while Zeebrugge is Europe’s largest car import port and a vital LNG supply port. Therefore, BMA’s research shows that the two ports are highly complementary. Combining the two will also contribute to a digital and green economy transition. In addition, the two ports have always had extensive connections with China-Europe freight trains.

The two ports are expected to handle around 278 million tonnes of cargo annually. That’s still a lot less than Europe’s largest port, Rotterdam, which handled nearly 470 million tonnes in 2019. In terms of container volumes, the Belgian merged port will handle around 157 million tonnes per year. This is roughly the same with Rotterdam.

With an annual throughput of 18,1 million tons, the recently born port of Antwerp-Zeebrugge will become the largest car transhipment port in Europe. In addition, gas transhipment at the combined ports will account for more than 15 per cent of Europe’s total volumes.

No violation of competition

The Belgian competition authority assessed what the planned merger would mean for port concessions and competition in markets such as container, liquid bulk and rolling stock transport. Ultimately, the committee concluded that “this merger plan meets the requirements for approval.”

According to a decision last year, the current CEO of the Port of Antwerp, Jacques Vermeiren, will become chairman of the board of directors of the port of Antwerp-Zeebrugge. He will work on improving connections between the two ports, including rail transport, inland shipping and pipelines.

Also read:

• Railway plans for Antwerp and Zeebrugge still on the agenda

• Ports of Antwerp and Zeebrugge merge to become Europe’s biggest hub