SubTel Forum Magazine #135 Finance & Legal

FINANCE

LEGAL AND

EXORIDUM

FROM THE PUBLISHER

WELCOME TO ISSUE 135, OUR FINANCE & LEGAL EDITION

FEATURING ICPC PLENARY ’24 PREVIEW!

When I first arrived in Southampton in 1991 to take over BTM’s Marketing Department, one of my first tasks was to finish a company history effort that had started months before. By that time my work simply consisted of signing off printing invoices; so, in truth my involvement was negligible. But what I did have sitting next to my desk were a number of boxes that contained much of the source information the writers had used, and being someone who loves digging through old, musty archives I couldn’t help myself from exploring its contents. In those boxes I learned about much of the early history of the company, which for much of its time had been the General Post Office. I learned about the early days of WWI and how GPO cableships severed Germany’s cables, or how D-Day -1 its ships sat offshore awaiting a cleared beach for landing. I also learned how one of its cableships had been lost a little earlier, probably as an unfortunate result of friendly American fire. I am reminded of these things as I watch the recent events in the Red Sea unfold. We seem to be entering a new chapter in our industry. What we do every day is already dangerous. I pray for sanity to prevail.

2024 SUBMARINE CABLE MAP

We are thrilled to announce the upcoming release of our updated 2024 Submarine Cables of the World printed wall map, an essential resource for industry professionals. This carefully crafted map provides a visually stunning and highly detailed representation of global submarine cable networks, serving as an invaluable tool for anyone involved in the field with the updated map set to be unveiled at Submarine Networks EMEA and Submarine Networks

World, guaranteeing extensive visibility among key industry stakeholders. Additionally, we are opening the door for more advertisers to join us in this venture. This opportunity offers unparalleled exposure to a focused audience deeply engaged in the submarine cable and telecommunications sector. Interested in advertising? Contact Nicola Tate at ntate@associationmediagroup.com.

SUBTEL FORUM APP

Our innovative app, designed specifically for the submarine telecommunications industry, has been successfully operating for the past month. In this short time, a significant number of professionals have added it to their smartphones, propelling us full steam ahead. This app offers users real-time updates, comprehensive data, and interactive features tailored for those involved in submarine cable projects. Seamlessly integrated with our website, the app delivers an intuitive user interface and streamlined access to vital industry insights. However, it’s more than just a source of information; it’s an interactive platform designed

to facilitate learning and collaboration. It includes features like real-time project tracking and AI-driven analytics, ensuring it evolves to meet the changing needs of its users. (https://subtelforum.com/stf-app/)

“THIS WEEK IN SUBMARINE TELECOMS”

Since the beginning of the year, our “This Week in Submarine Telecoms” email digest has been serving approved users with a weekly curation of the latest developments in the submarine telecommunications industry, directly to their inboxes or on the App. This digest is carefully designed to present essential news, insights, and updates, offering subscribers a concise overview of the most significant events each week. Our objective is to ensure our users remain informed and ahead in the rapidly evolving submarine telecommunications sector. If you’re interested in staying on the pulse of industry trends and developments, consider subscribing to our service. (https://subtelforum.com/register)

THANK YOU

Thank you to our awesome authors who have contributed to this issue of SubTel Forum. Thanks also for their support to this issue’s advertisers: AP Telecom, AP Procure, Fígoli Consulting, IWCS, and WFN Strategies. Of course, our ever popular “where in the world are all those pesky cableships” is included as well.

www.subtelforum.com | ISSN No. 1948-3031

PRESIDENT & PUBLISHER:

Wayne Nielsen | wnielsen@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 444-2527

VICE PRESIDENT:

Kristian Nielsen | knielsen@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 444-0845

ANALYTICS: Kieran Clark | kclark@subtelforum.com | [+1] (540) 533-6965

SALES:

Nicola Tate | ntate@associationmediagroup.com | [+1] (804) 469-0324

DESIGN & PRODUCTION: Weswen Design | wendy@weswendesign.com

DEPARTMENT WRITERS:

Anjali Sugadev, Andrés Fígoli, Ella Herbert, John Maguire, Iago Bojczuk, Isabelle Cherry, Isabel Jijon, Kieran Clark, Michael Brand, Nicola Tate, Philip Pilgrim, Syeda Humera, and Wayne Nielsen

FEATURE WRITERS:

Andrés Fígoli, Andrew D. Lipman, Anjali Sugadev, Brittany E. Buhler, Dean Veverka, Denise S. Wood, Evelyn Namara, Fernando Margarit, Isabelle Cherry, John Tibbles, Kristian Nielsen, Michael Brand, Michael J. Sanchez, Michelle Elsa George, Patricio Rey, Sonia Jorge, Tahani Iqbal, and Uriel A. Mendieta

NEXT ISSUE: May 2024 – Global Capacity

AUTHOR & ARTICLE INDEX: www.subtelforum.com/onlineindex

Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc.

www.subtelforum.com/corporate-information

BOARD OF DIRECTORS:

Margaret Nielsen, Wayne Nielsen, Kristian Nielsen and Kacy Nielsen

SubTel Forum Continuing Education, Division of Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc. www.subtelforum.com/education

CONTINUING EDUCATION DIRECTOR:

Kristian Nielsen | knielsen@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 444-0845

Good reading – Slava Ukraini STF

Wayne Nielsen, Publisher

Contributions are welcomed and should be forwarded to: pressroom@subtelforum.com.

Submarine Telecoms Forum magazine is published bimonthly by Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc., and is an independent commercial publication, serving as a freely accessible forum for professionals in industries connected with submarine optical fiber technologies and techniques. Submarine Telecoms Forum may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form, in whole or in part, without the permission of the publishers.

Liability: While every care is taken in preparation of this publication, the publishers cannot be held

responsible for the accuracy of the information herein, or any errors which may occur in advertising or editorial content, or any consequence arising from any errors or omissions, and the editor reserves the right to edit any advertising or editorial material submitted for publication.

New Subscriptions, Enquiries and Changes of

Address: 21495 Ridgetop Circle, Suite 201, Sterling, Virginia 20166, USA, or call [+1] (703) 444-0845, fax [+1] (703) 349-5562, or visit www.subtelforum.com.

Copyright © 2024 Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc.

ISSUE 135 |

6 QUESTIONS WITH RYAN WOPSCHALL

52 42 48

IRUS AND FIBER OPTIC CABLES

55 59 40

GOOD PRACTICES FOR SUBSEA CABLE POLICY

By Sonia Jorge, Evelyn Namara, and Tahani Iqbal WHY ATTEND 2024 ICPC? PLUS ICPC PLENARY SCHEDULE

By Fernando Margarit, Uriel A. Mendieta, Brittany E. Buhler and Michael J. Sanchez

GLOBAL NATIONAL SECURITY AND SANCTIONS

By Andrew D. Lipman and Denise S. Wood

THE ROLE OF REGULATION IN RECOVERING DECOMMISSIONED SUBSEA CABLES

62

INTRODUCING THE SUBTEL FORUM APP

By Kieran Clark

66

FREE TRADE CHALLENGES IN THE SUBMARINE CABLE INDUSTRY

By Patricio Rey

69

THE GLOBAL SUBSEA NETWORK

2024: A PERSONAL VIEW

By John Tibbles

72

FORECASTING THE VOYAGE

By Syeda Humera and Kristian Nielsen

DEPARTMENTS

2 EXORDIUM

Find out about advertising opportunities to connect with our specialized audience.

3 IMPRESSUM/MASTHEAD

Meet our team, from editors to designers, establishing our commitment to transparency.

6 SU BTELFORUM.COM

8 INTERACTIVE CAB LE MAP UPDATES

Get the latest on global submarine cable infrastructure from our interactive map.

9 SUSTAINABLE SUBSEA

Discover industry innovations for reducing environmental impact and protecting marine life.

14 WHERE IN THE WORLD ARE ALL THOSE PESKY CABLESHIPS?

Follow the missions of cableships crucial to undersea connectivity.

20 CAPACITY CONNECTION

Learn how collaborations and advancements are boosting global network capacity.

26 ANALYTICS

Delve into the latest trends and data shaping the future of submarine telecoms.

76 BACK REFLECTION

Explore the history and evolution of the submarine telecoms industry.

82 LEGAL & R EGULATORY MATTERS

Understand the legal and regulatory issues affecting the submarine telecom industry.

86 ON THE MOVE

Track the career movements within the submarine telecom sector.

87 NEWS NOW

Stay updated with the latest developments in the submarine telecom world.

88 ADVERTISER CORNER

Find out about advertising opportunities to connect with our specialized audience.

INSIDE THE WORLD OF SUBTEL FORUM: A COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE TO SUBMARINE CABLE RESOURCES

TOP STORIES OF 2019

The most popular articles, Q&As of 2019. Find out what you missed!

NEWS NOW RSS FEED

Welcome to an exclusive feature in our magazine, where we explore the captivating world of SubTelForum.com, a pivotal player in the submarine cable industry. This expedition takes us on a detailed journey through the myriad of resources and innovations that are key to understanding and connecting our world beneath the oceans.

mapping efforts by the analysts at SubTel Forum Analytics, a division of Submarine Telecoms Forum. This reference tool gives details on cable systems including a system map, landing points, system capacity, length, RFS year and other valuable data.

blending real-time updates, AI-driven analytics, and a user-centric interface into an indispensable resource for industry professionals. More than just a technological advancement, this app is a platform fostering community, learning, and industry progression. We encourage you to download the SubTel Forum App and join a community at the forefront of undersea communications innovation.

DISCOVER THE FUTURE: THE SUBTEL FORUM

Keep on top of our world of coverage with our free News Now daily industry update. News Now is a daily RSS feed of news applicable to the submarine cable industry, highlighting Cable Faults & Maintenance, Conferences & Associations, Current Systems, Data Centers, Future Systems, Offshore Energy, State of the Industry and Technology & Upgrades.

APP

PUBLICATIONS

2024 marks a groundbreaking era for SubTel Forum with the launch of its innovative app. This cutting-edge tool is revolutionizing access to submarine telecommunications insights,

Submarine Cable Almanac is a free quarterly publica tion made available through diligent data gathering and

Submarine Telecoms Industry Report is an annual free publication with analysis of data collected by the analysts of SubTel Forum Analytics, including system capacity analysis, as well as the actual productivity and outlook of current and planned systems and the companies that service them.

YOUR DAILY UPDATE: NEWS NOW RSS FEED

CABLE MAP

The online SubTel Cable Map is built with the industry standard Esri ArcGIS platform and linked to the SubTel Forum Submarine Cable Database. It tracks the progress of

Our journey begins with the News Now updates, providing daily insights into the submarine cable sector. Covering everything from the latest technical developments to significant in-

dustry milestones, this feed ensures you’re always informed about the latest trends and happenings. It’s an essential tool for professionals who need to stay on top of industry news.

THE KNOWLEDGE HUB: MUST-READS & Q&AS

Dive deeper into the world of submarine communications with our curated collection of articles and Q&As. These insightful pieces offer a comprehensive look at both the history and current state of the industry, enriching your understanding and providing a broader perspective on the challenges and triumphs faced by submarine cable professionals.

IN-DEPTH PUBLICATIONS

• Submarine Cable Almanac: This quarterly treasure trove provides detailed information on global cable systems. You can expect rich content including maps, data on system capacity, length, and other critical details that sketch a vivid picture of the global network.

• Submarine Telecoms Industry Report: Our annual report takes an analytical approach to the industry, covering everything from current trends to capacity analysis and future predictions. It’s an invaluable resource for anyone seeking to understand the market’s trajectory.

VISUALIZING CONNECTIONS: CABLE MAPS

• Online SubTel Cable Map: An interactive tool mapping over 550 cable systems, perfect for digital natives who prefer an online method to explore global connections.

• Printed Cable Map: Our annual printed map caters to those who appreciate a tangible representation of the world’s submarine fiber systems, detailed in a visually appealing and informative format.

EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES: CONTINUING EDUCATION

SubTel Forum’s commitment to education is evident in our courses and master classes, covering various aspects of the industry. Whether you’re a seasoned professional or new to the field, these learning opportunities are fantastic for deepening your understanding of both technical and commercial aspects of submarine telecoms.

FIND THE EXPERTS: AUTHORS INDEX

Our Authors Index is a valuable tool for locating specific articles and authors. It simplifies the process of finding the information you need or following the work of your favorite contributors in the field.

TAILORED INSIGHTS: SUBTEL FORUM BESPOKE REPORTS

• Data Center & OTT Providers Report: This report delves into the evolving relationship between cable landing stations and data centers, highlighting trends in efficiency and integration.

• Global Outlook Report: Offering a comprehensive analysis of the submarine telecoms market, this report includes regional overviews and market forecasts, providing a global perspective on the industry.

• Offshore Energy Report: Focusing on the submarine fiber industry’s oil & gas sector, this report examines market trends and technological advancements, offering insights into this specialized area.

• Regional Systems Report: This analysis of regional submarine cable markets discusses capacity demands, development strategies, and market dynamics, providing a detailed look at different global regions.

• Unrepeatered Systems Report: A thorough examination of unrepeatered cable systems, this report covers project timelines, costs, and operational aspects, essential for understanding this segment of the industry.

• Submarine Cable Dataset: An exhaustive resource detailing over 550 fiber optic cable systems, this dataset covers a wide range of operational data, making it a go-to reference for industry specifics.

SubTelForum.com stands as a comprehensive portal to the dynamic and intricate world of submarine cable communications. It brings together a diverse range of tools, insights, and resources, each designed to enhance understanding and engagement within this crucial industry. From the cutting-edge SubTel Forum App to in-depth reports and interactive maps, the platform caters to a wide audience, offering unique perspectives and valuable knowledge. Whether you’re a seasoned professional or new to the field, SubTelForum.com is an indispensable resource for anyone looking to deepen their understanding or stay updated in the field of submarine telecommunications.

SUBTEL CABLE MAP UPDATES

The SubTel Cable Map, built on the industry leading Esri ArcGIS platform, offers a dynamic and engaging way to explore over 440 current and planned cable systems, 50+ cable ships, and more than 1,000 landing points. This interactive tool is linked to the SubTel Forum Submarine Cable Database, providing users with a comprehensive view of the industry.

Submarine cables play a pivotal role in global communications, acting as the backbone of the internet. They are responsible for transmitting over 99% of all international data, connecting continents and enabling global connectivity. Without these underwater highways, the speed and efficiency of global internet communication that we enjoy today would not be possible.

The Esri ArcGIS platform, upon which the SubTel Cable Map is built, is a powerful geographic information system (GIS) for working with maps and geographic information. It is used for creating and using maps, compiling geographic data, analyzing mapped information, sharing and discovering geographic information, and using maps and geographic information in a range of applications. Its robust capabilities make it an ideal platform for the SubTel Cable Map, allowing for dynamic, interactive exploration of complex data.

With systems connected to SubTel Forum’s News Now Feed, users can easily view current and archived news details related to each system. This interactive map is an ongoing effort, updated frequently with valuable data collected by SubTel Forum analysts and insightful feedback from our users. Our aim is to provide not only data from the Submarine Cable Almanac, but also to incorporate additional layers of system information for a comprehensive view of the industry.

We encourage you to explore the SubTel Cable Map to deepen your understanding of the industry and to educate others on the critical role that submarine cable systems play in global communications. All submarine cable data for the Online Cable Map is sourced from the public domain, and we’re committed to keeping the information as current as possible. If you are the point of contact for a company or system that needs updating, please don’t hesitate to reach

out to kclark@subtelforum.com.

Below is the full list of systems added and updated since the last issue of the magazine:

MARCH 18, 2023

SYSTEMS ADDED:

• Trans Americas Fiber System

SYSTEMS UPDATED:

• AAE-1

• Alpal-2

• EAC-C2C

• EIG

• MainOne

• OMRAN/ EPEG Cable System

• Raman

• SAEx East

• SAEx West

We hope the SubTel Cable Map serves as a valuable resource to you and invites you to dive into the ever-evolving world of submarine cable systems. We invite you to start your exploration today and see firsthand the intricate network that powers our global communications. Happy exploring! STF

KIERAN CLARK is the Lead Analyst for SubTel Forum. He originally joined SubTel Forum in 2013 as a Broadcast Technician to provide support for live event video streaming. He has 6+ years of live production experience and has worked alongside some of the premier organizations in video web streaming. In 2014, Kieran was promoted to Analyst and is currently responsible for the research and maintenance that supports the Submarine Cable Database. In 2016, he was promoted to Lead Analyst and his analysis is featured in almost the entire array of Subtel Forum Publications.

Do you have further questions on this topic?

ASK AN EXPERT

PTC 2024: A REVIEW FROM GEN Z

BY MICHAEL BRAND, ISABELLE CHERRY, ELLA HERBERT, AND ISABEL JIJON

For our small group of undergraduate students, the first few steps walking into PTC 24 felt like a jump into the deep end of the telecommunications industry. The four of us had come here from the University of California, Berkeley. Before we began working for the SubOptic Foundation’s Sustainable Subsea Networks research team, we had never even known about subsea internet cables, data centers, and the maritime industry. What we had thought about, though, was how our young generation was going to fight climate change and make our built environment more sustainable. We had joined Sustainable Subsea Networks in the hope of finding new ways to reduce the carbon emissions of what, we learned, was critical infrastructure.

Since August each of us had been working diligently to learn all we could about the history and importance of the digital infrastructure industries–especially the subsea cable sector. By the time PTC rolled around in January, we were eager to learn about how this critical industry could do its part to halt the escalating climate crisis. Each of us sat dutifully at a variety of sessions across the days of the conference, typing frantically to record as much information as possible about the state of the industry and its sustainability initiatives.

But before this, much to our surprise, at the very first session our group was spotlighted for our young age and the novelty of our research. It became apparent to us that this industry welcomed young, creative minds who were unafraid to propose new ideas to address the increasingly complicated environmental challenges that the world faces. In the later sessions of PTC, many people mentioned that sustainability was important. What we were looking for was a clear and detailed plan to achieve it – we hope we can help be part of that plan.

After attending PTC, we felt inspired and confident that our generation, and young people more broadly, will be capable of addressing the challenges that the industry

faces. Below we describe some of these challenges, including power generation, artificial intelligence, and geopolitics, that were discussed at the conference. These challenges, from our perspective, are all connected to the issue of sustainability, which is both affected by power, technology, and politics, and will shape their future. We hope to grow with the industry into the next chapter of its development – one where careful approaches to sustainable initiatives, economics, and politics can all be implemented together.

THE SHIFTING LANDSCAPE OF POWER GENERATION

Power is at the heart of sustainable development, and throughout the

conference we were keen to note the different discussions and attitudes towards it. We realized that the digital infrastructure industry in general was quite concerned with power: it was at the core of several panels and sparked discussions and controversy. The location, source, and efficiency of power were the primary focal points of these discussions. We were interested in observing how sustainability plays into these discussions and the degree of impact that concern for the future of our planet would hold against other considerations such as economics and growth.

The discussion of power was connected to 5G and the advent of artificial intelligence (AI), the latter of which consists of not only machine learning, but also human labor and digital infrastructure. Discussions about 5G all pointed out that it will require an increase in capacity. For AI, panelists speaking about topics ranging from data centers to fiber manufacturing all identified that it will play a critical role in the development of new digital infrastructure. However, all noted that the extent to and ways in which AI will impact the telecom industry is yet to be determined.

So far, all that is known about AI is that it has a high power demand, could increase manufacturing demand, and presents the opportunity for new projects and jobs. The question remains, however, where we are going to see AI’s infrastructure being built. Many participants noted that digital infrastructure development, especially of data centers, is no longer simply being driven by the location of end-users, but also by the location of power.

Following a surge in demand during the COVID-19 pandemic, alongside 5G and AI, there has been a larger and larger demand for data

SUBSEA

centers. As a result, the industry has turned to developing new hyperscale data centers as well as upgrading the capacity of old ones. This demand has become so large, Chris Downie of Flexential, a hybrid digital infrastructure provider, observed that for the first time in his company’s history they were “pre-selling inventory 275 days in advance.” All of these facilities will require more and more power, and the cost and availability of this power will become increasingly important. What we took away from this is that now is the perfect time to prioritize sustainability initiatives that balance peoples’ needs for capacity and power, and the planet’s need for carbon emissions reduction.

of hyperscale data center campuses, noted, is that “there isn’t enough green power to go around.” This is particularly concerning since with the advent of AI, says Carl Grivner, CEO of Global Cloud Exchange, capacity is going to increase by at least 10 times as much as there is currently. Therefore, hyperscalers and the industry as a whole are going to see changes in the location of and type of power generation.

Following a surge in demand during the COVID-19 pandemic, alongside 5G and AI, there has been a larger and larger demand for data centers. As a result, the industry has turned to developing new hyperscale data centers as well as upgrading the capacity of old ones.

With this focus on power, we saw industry leaders call for the use of renewable and alternative energy. One of the primary challenges with embracing renewable energy, as Jeff Tench of Vantage Data Centers, a provider

Members of the industry believe that natural gas and fossil fuels are essential power sources for now, but many were hopeful that data centers would be powered by a variety of sustainable power sources including solar, wind, geothermal, and nuclear in the future. There appeared to be a consensus that fossil fuels must be phased out soon, but there wasn’t a clear agreement on how to do this. When considering which types of power to use, industry leaders consistently noted the importance of considering the localities they were operating in. We observed that while renewable energy was a prominent discussion point, most of these discussions revolved around the economic aspects of this change, with less focus on many of the other aspects of sustainability–such as the need for a cultural shift, regulatory shifts, and coordination with adjacent industries. Additionally, the conflict between growth and sustainability was a critical challenge to the implementation of renewable power. The amount of sustainable power available currently simply does not align with the level of corporate commitments to reduce carbon emissions.

Another area of focus was the potential centralization of energy generation around data centers. Centralization will mean serious power demands and real challenges in

terms of resiliency. With the increased need for power, many conversations arose about the possibility of building power plants for data centers that were separate from the grid. Joe Kava, Vice President of Global Data Centers at Google, noted that AI training at scale tends toward infrastructure centralization whereas application and consumer-end tends toward decentralization. Kava also pointed out that obtaining power needed isn’t guaranteed because the grid can’t support all power needs. We saw this reiterated in discussions throughout the conference: most smaller markets do not have the capacity to generate sufficient power and this would require outsourcing. Some observed that there was no regulation against operators building their own plants, and argued that the industry had to find ways to make its own power. While it is yet to be seen if AI and 5G will stimulate a turn toward further centralization of energy generation around data centers, it is certain that any development will be a sustainability issue.

In addition to considering what type of power data centers should be using, there was a heavy emphasis on efficiency of facilities. Across the conference, industry representatives referenced battery systems that could make data centers more efficient and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Sanjay Bhutani of AdaniConneX, a hyperscale data center provider, argued that the main issue for the industry was efficiency, rather than who was building or generating the power. Joe Reele, Vice President, Solution Architects at Schneider Electric, an energy management company, noted that many data centers were underutilized by consumers, with some statistics showing that only 60% of the power going to data centers is actually used.

Some argued that a new focus on power capacity effectiveness could increase the efficiency of data centers and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We reflected that power efficiency in data centers was likely such a central topic because it is an area of alignment between economic and sustainable goals.

Finally, throughout the conference and across industry subsectors, there were persistent calls for collaboration. Many of the challenges in obtaining renewable and alternative energy, such as permitting, sourcing, and localizing, are shared across the digital infrastructure industries, making it essential that companies come together to overcome them. In addition to focusing on the sustainability of data center operations, the industry also noted the importance of examining the sustainability of the supply chain. While many industry leaders were concerned about how the increasing demand for data centers has led to shortages of essential materials, they

pointed out that it is also important to consider the environmental impacts of sourcing all of those materials.

While many industry leaders were concerned about how the increasing demand for data centers has led to shortages of essential materials, they pointed out that it is also important to consider the environmental impacts of sourcing all of those materials.

We attended panels on subsea cables where sustainability was also highlighted as an important issue. However, the challenges facing renewable power for data centers compared to cable operations differ substantially in terms of scale. Cable landing stations typically consume far less power than data centers, and as a result, there are not the same opportunities in terms of the centralization of generation, although some cable landing stations are currently sourcing power renewably and considering onsite installations. Their smaller-scale infrastructure means that cable owners and operators may need to think differently about sustainability than the data center industry, even as they draw lessons from it. Regardless, we observed that subsea cables are key to two forms of green transition: on one hand, laying more subsea power cables between green sites of generation and sites of consumption (transporting the energy). On the other hand, there is the option to lay more subsea cables to data centers powered by renewable sources (transporting the bits).

As members of Generation Z, it might be assumed that we would care more about increased capacity through 5G and being able to use AI no matter the cost, even if that meant the data centers that these technologies are dependent on are powered by natural gas and fossil fuels. However, we are more concerned with ensuring that the infrastructure we depend on will be sustainable enough that it can help stop the climate crisis. This will ensure that there is a healthy world for us to thrive in and thus be able to utilize 5G and AI.

SUBSEA

NAVIGATING INTERNATIONAL AND GEOPOLITICAL CHALLENGES

As cables span the globe, landing in many countries and crossing many territorial waters, the subsea cable industry must navigate regional and international tensions, State interests, and policy and permitting restrictions. Although we did not see much discussion of sustainability in relation to geopolitics, we know from our environmental education that sustainability regulation is only growing globally. How, we wonder, will these new regulations–which are taking different shapes all over the world–layer on this geopolitical landscape?

Repeatedly noted in the conference, the subsea cable industry is becoming entangled in the growing Sino-American technological and geopolitical rivalry, especially in the Pacific. This has major consequences for companies working in East and South East Asia. Paul Abfalter, Head of North Asia & Global Wholesale at Telstra, stated that 2023 was a record year for cable-cutting incidents and permitting issues and delays in the South China Sea. At the same time, divisions in the marketplace are emerging, especially between American and Chinese companies, pushed towards decoupling by their respective States. With heightened earthquake activity, and the aging of existing, overcrowded cable routes, companies are grappling with a contentious economic, political, and geographic zone. In overcrowded areas such as the Taiwan Strait, a significant number of cable repairs also means a greater climate impact since there are more emissions generated by maintenance ships. Simultaneously, rising demand has outpaced supply, and investors and entrepreneurs are now diversifying connectivity projects in South East Asia and South Asia.

In some panels of the conference, participants also discussed the new opportunities and challenges presented by a “New Asia Opportunity.” Growth is happening not only in historical connectivity hubs such as Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Sydney, but there has also been sustained demand in large “second-tier

Indeed, with the rise of temperatures, sea levels, and the progressive heightening of frequency and intensity of natural hazards, infrastructure including subsea cables, landing stations, and data centers must be able to face surges, waves, cyclones, earthquakes, floods, and tropical storms.

markets” in countries such as India, Malaysia, and Indonesia, driving new investments. Many large cities such as Mumbai, with a population of over 20 million, have long been underrepresented in the digital infrastructure industries in terms of the level of data center infrastructure. This is now changing. In these geographies, governments are adopting the path of digitalization, and trying to attract data centers. However, we heard that deployment into these markets is challenging because of power, land,

and regulatory challenges.

In all of these discussions, the importance of “resilient systems” was highlighted. Indeed, with the rise of temperatures, sea levels, and the progressive heightening of frequency and intensity of natural hazards, infrastructure including subsea cables, landing stations, and data centers must be able to face surges, waves, cyclones, earthquakes, floods, and tropical storms.

Yet even with the expansion of digital infrastructure, we still heard many participants discuss major disparities in terms of access to connectivity. Indeed, there remain many underserviced areas, such as the Arctic, where historically challenging terrain, uncharted waters, extreme temperatures, long distances, and a sparse population have made the development of connectivity infrastructure difficult. This remains a difficult place to build. Emerging federally funded projects in Alaska and Canada will have to surmount high costs and risks related to installment and maintenance of cables, limited accessibility, and the need for multivessel operations. Environmental concerns are also especially prevalent in this fragile area, with its unique and delicate biodiversity. To ensure the sustainability of new infrastructures, Steve Arsenault, VP at IT International Telecom, explained it is “key that engagement with local communities, scientific, research, multilateral and regional organizations is done early on.” Upholding the strict and unique Polar Code, and ensuring a sustainable framework, will be crucial to respect indigenous livelihoods, biodiversity, and the important role of this geography in maintaining the world’s climate balance. Such careful work is also necessary in other under-connected and fragile zones such as the Amazon basin. Erick Contag

of the SubOptic Foundation introduced us to The Amazônia+Conectada project, a major river cable infrastructure project, currently being deployed with support from USAID and Grupo +Unidos, a Brazilian non-profit civil society organization.

From our perspective, we see sustainability connected to each of the concerns that arises in the navigation of geopolitical terrain. In the intra-Asia cable landscape, we wonder what will happen when sustainability regulation enters the scene? Will this compound existing tensions? Can sustainable practices–such as removing and recycling systems from overcrowded routes–create a little more room for everyone? The importance of balancing connectivity with sustainability is essential, and this is nowhere more apparent than in the Arctic. Are there lessons learned here that would help the digital infrastructure industries in other parts of the world? As young researchers passionate about sustainability in the subsea cable industry, we are eager to keep tracking the emergence of sustainability initiatives and regulations at local, regional and international levels, and study how they intertwine with geopolitical developments.

ON THE FUTURE

While our research team primarily focuses on environmental sustainability, in conclusion we would like to turn to the digital infrastructure industries’ sustainability in a broader sense. Over the course of the conference we heard concerns across all parts of the digital infrastructure landscape, from cable manufacturers to data center operators to academic researchers, pointing out the relative absence of youth in the industry. Many people across these sectors worry that there are not

enough young people in both the subsea cable and data center industries to support their resilient development in the coming decades. This is especially true given the industry’s need for specialized knowledge and skills.

We want to help build a resilient network, connecting people around the world, in the most sustainable way possible.

Throughout the conference, we collectively met with dozens of members of the digital infrastructure industries, both data center operators and those in the subsea industry. In every conversation we felt like our opinions and ideas were valued, and we were excited to learn more. The more immediate step, however, is getting more young people into the room in the first place and then providing opportunities for knowledge and skill acquisition. We wondered: how would we communicate to our friends about what we had seen here? How would other students both learn about these industries, and what would make them want to join?

One thing that is very important not only to us, as we study the environment, but to our generation as a whole, is sustainability. This is something that our friends and peers care about. We know that climate change will impact our lives for many decades to come. We want to help build a resilient network, connecting people around the world, in the most sustainable way possible. We hope that this

will not be a passing focus at PTC, but that these conversations will continue to grow. We will be there to listen. STF

MICHAEL BRAND is an undergraduate student at the University of California, Berkeley pursuing a B.S. in Environment Economics and Policy. He is also a research assistant on the Sustainable Subsea Networks research team. His research focuses on the intersection of behavioral economics, environmental policy, and public communication for the development and regulation of digital infrastructure.

ISABELLE CHERRY is an undergraduate student pursuing a B.S. in Environmental Policy and Management at the University of California, Berkeley. As a research assistant on the SubOptic Foundation’s Sustainable Subsea Networks research team she explores sustainability metrics relating to the global manufacturing, deployment, and disposal of subsea telecommunications cables. Her research has a particular focus on how regulations impact cable recycling efforts.

ELLA HERBERT is an undergraduate student at the University of California, Berkeley pursuing her B.S. in Environmental Science. She is currently a research assistant for the Sustainable Subsea Networks research team, focusing on data center sustainability by exploring metrics, industry trends, and publications within the field of telecommunications.

ISABEL JIJON is an undergraduate student pursuing a B.A in Political Philosophy and International Relations at Sciences Po Paris and the University of California, Berkeley. She is a Research Assistant for the Subsea Sustainable Networks research team. She focuses on topics related to the International Maritime Organization and regulatory bodies, cable-laying ships, and the consideration of sustainability in the maritime sector of the subsea cable industry.

Do you have further questions on this topic?

ASK AN EXPERT

WHERE IN THE WORLD ARE THOSE PESKY CABLESHIPS?

BY SYEDA HUMERA

MARITIME NAVIGATION DATA INSIGHTS: A POWER BI VISUAL ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION

In an era where data reigns supreme, the maritime industry stands to benefit significantly from harnessing the power of analytical insights. Navigating the vast oceans efficiently and safely is paramount to maintaining the lifeline of global commerce. With this premise, our Power BI report delves into the ocean of data provided by the Automatic Identification System (AIS), presenting a distilled narrative of ship movements, traffic patterns, and navigational trends.

The purpose of this report is to unlock the potential of AIS data, transforming raw numbers into a strategic asset. Through a carefully crafted set of Power BI visuals, we offer stakeholders a dashboard of knowledge, from real-time positional mapping to historical trends of vessel operations. Each visual is a piece of the larger puzzle, providing insights that can lead to enhanced route planning, improved fleet management, and optimized maritime operations.

As we chart the course of this analytical journey, we invite you to explore the intricate dance of submarine traffic through our visual representations. From the macroscopic views of global ship distributions to the microscopic details of individual vessel attributes, our report is tailored to aid decision-makers in steering through the competitive waters of the maritime industry with confidence and foresight.

Let’s set sail into the data-driven decision-making horizon, where every point of data is a beacon guiding us

to smarter, safer, and more efficient maritime navigation. In the fabric of our hyperconnected realm, the submarine telecommunications network emerges as a critical enabler of our digital dialogues. This network’s vast, unseen channels of communication underpin the ceaseless pulse of the global economy, making it an essential infrastructure of the modern world. Our report for 2024 delves into the dynamic confluence of innovation, demand, and strategy that shapes the submarine telecommunications landscape.

Beneath the ocean’s expanse lies a complex matrix of cables, slender yet formidable, forming the underpinnings of our digital age. These conduits carry the lifeblood of our connectivity, embodying the relentless exchange of information that bridges distances and dissolves borders.

The appetite for data and connectivity burgeons, driven by an ever-growing demand for digital services. Our analysis navigates through the burgeoning requirements for bandwidth and the industry’s agile expansion to keep pace. Submarine cables have also risen as geopolitical vectors, with nations recognizing their strategic importance in the digital power play. Concurrently, environmental consciousness steers the course of expansion, integrating sustainable practices into the development of these undersea arteries.

VISUALIZING THE CABLE SHIP FLEET

Our visuals map out the intricate web of submarine cables that traverse the ocean floor, a reflection of 2024’s connectivity grid. The industry’s timeline is chronicled through pivotal advancements, painting a picture of technological progress and the evolution of a network that undergirds the communication capabilities of nations and enterprises alike.

Amidst the bustling activity of the maritime industry, the vitality of data stands undiminished as it courses through the veins of global trade and communication. Within the grand scheme of marine navigation, the analysis of vessel speeds presents a compelling narrative, one that is crucial for understanding the dynamics of sea traffic. It is on this premise that we anchor our focus on a particular temporal marker—January’s Day 20. Commanding a 7.62% share in the average AIS.SPEED, this day emerges as a pivotal point, warranting a comprehensive examination of its prominence and the factors contributing to this statistic.

As the month of January sets the tone for the year, Day 20’s impact on speed averages is not merely a figure but a reflection of underlying trends and operational forces at play. This report sails through the granular details of this specific day, exploring the confluence of variables that conspire to influence vessel velocity and, by extension, the very rhythm of maritime telecommunications.

The significance of the 7.62% rise on this January day is multifaceted. To unravel its essence is to engage with a myriad of potential drivers—from environmental influences

and seasonal weather patterns that favor expedited travel to the strategic deployment of vessels in response to market demands or geopolitical events. Each percentage point encapsulates an aspect of the operational environment, painting a complex picture of maritime mobility.

Delving into the data, we seek to understand whether this increase is an anomaly or part of a predictable pattern influenced by recurring factors. Does this surge correspond with specific routes or regions? Is it a testament to technological advancements in navigation systems or propulsion efficiency? Or does it align with a surge in economic activities post-holiday season, as the industry revs its engines in response to the uptick in commerce?

The heightened average speed on Day 20 reverberates through the industry, echoing in the operational protocols and strategic decision-making frameworks of maritime entities. It influences scheduling, fuel consumption, port operations, and even the supply chain logistics that hinge on the timely arrival of cargo. In recognizing the ripples caused by this surge, industry players are better positioned to anticipate similar trends, allocate resources more efficiently, and optimize route planning.

By situating Day 20 within the broader context of January’s operational lan dscape, we not only benchmark this increase but also set a precedent for predictive analysis in maritime operations. The data captured on this day becomes a touchstone for comparative analysis, serving as a gauge for the performance and efficiency of the industry at large.

The exploration of January’s Day 20 and its 7.62%

CABLESHIPS

ascendancy in average AIS. SPEED transcends mere number crunching. It is a quest to distill actionable insights from the depths of data, to chart a course through the complex waters of maritime navigation with a compass oriented by knowledge. For the stakeholders of this industry, such insights are not just statistical waypoints but navigational aids that direct strategic thinking and operational finesse. As the year unfolds, this report will serve as a lodestar, guiding the maritime telecommunications industry toward informed, data-driven decision-making and robust industry analysis.

In the complex tapestry of global maritime operations, the nuanced dance of vessel statuses unfolds, a vital narrative captured by the Automated Identification System (AIS). Diving into this profound sea of data, our analytical odyssey charts the diverse vessel states that rhythmically pulse through the arteries of maritime commerce and navigation.

Emerging prominently in our analysis is the “Moored” status, a behemoth among vessel states with a towering count of 3,403. This figure is not a mere statistic; it embodies the multitude of vessels nestled within the embrace of the world’s ports. “Moored” represents more than a temporary halt—it is a symphony of orchestrated efforts involving crew rest, cargo transactions, and critical maintenance. In essence, this state is a cornerstone of maritime operation, facilitating the seamless flow of global trade.

In a poignant contrast lies the status “Not Under Command,” with a solitary count of 1. This state often signals a vessel’s compromised maneuverability, a testament to the unpredictability of maritime journeys. Though statistically minimal, this outlier offers a stark reminder of the inherent perils of seafaring, highlighting the singular moments when even the mightiest giants of the ocean find themselves at the mercy of nature’s whims.

The breadth of AIS data casts a light on a spectrum of 7 navigational statuses, delineating a rich landscape of operational dynamics. Of these, the status corresponding to “Moored” stands out, accounting for 35.73% of the total count—a testament to its predominant role in maritime operations.

The extreme disparity between the highest and lowest counts of status—3,403 for “Moored” and 1 for “Not Under Command”—presents a striking 340,200.00% difference. This dramatic range encapsulates the operational diversity of the maritime sector, from serene harbors to vessels adrift, governed by a myriad of factors including environmental conditions, regulatory frameworks, and the pulsating demands of global logistics.

As we distill the essence of AIS data into coherent narratives, we uncover more than just figures—we navigate through the lifeblood of maritime operations. This exploration into the realm of vessel states is not merely analytical. It is a saga of the strategic, operational, and logistical fibers that weave together the complex fabric of international maritime travel.

With these insights, the AIS data stands as a navigational beacon, guiding the maritime industry toward a horizon marked by increased safety, efficiency, and environmental responsibility. It underscores the importance of understanding not only where we are but also where we are heading— charting a course for the future of maritime navigation that is as informed as it is ambitious.

In closing, the voyage through maritime data is a continuous journey, one that highlights the robustness and adaptiveness of this essential industry. Each data point, each trend, is a narrative of resilience, a chronicle of the strategic ingenuity that propels the ceaseless journey of our global fleet.

In the intricate world of maritime navigation, understanding the operational capabilities of vessels is paramount. This report delves into the relationship between two critical attributes: SPEED and DRAUGHT, focusing on FAIR-

WIND LEGION and POLARIS 3 for their exemplary performances in these areas.

FAIRWIND LEGION: THE SPEED PRODIGY

FAIRWIND LEGION distinguishes itself with an unparalleled average SPEED of 11.60, setting a benchmark in maritime velocity. This exceptional speed not only highlights the vessel’s adeptness at navigating vast oceanic expanses swiftly but also marks it as a leader in the race against time on the high seas. On the scatter plot, we expect FAIRWIND LEGION’s data points to shine towards the upper echelons of speed, embodying its status as the speed champion.

POLARIS 3: MASTER OF THE DEPTHS

In contrast, POLARIS 3 commands attention with the highest average DRAUGHT of 9.21, showcasing its significant underbelly depth. This measure is crucial for assessing a vessel’s ability to navigate through various marine environments, underpinning its operational depth and cargo-carrying capacity. On the scatter plot, POLARIS 3’s data points are anticipated to cluster at the higher end of the draught axis, highlighting its substantial load-bearing prowess.

The scatter plot analysis serves as a visual narrative that brings to light the interaction between SPEED and DRAUGHT for these vessels. This comparative analysis aims to uncover potential correlations or patterns, offering insights into how these two dimensions coalesce to define the operational envelope of FAIRWIND LEGION and POLARIS 3.

A critical aspect of this analysis is the identification of outliers, which may reveal instances where FAIRWIND LEGION and POLARIS 3 exceed typical operational parameters. These outliers are not mere statistical anomalies but gateways to understanding exceptional operational capabilities or innovative navigational strategies employed by these vessels.

This exploration into SPEED and DRAUGHT, with a focus on FAIRWIND LEGION and POLARIS 3, illuminates the vast spectrum of navigational dynamics in the maritime industry. By mapping these attributes on a scatter plot, we not only celebrate the unique characteristics of these vessels but also enhance our understanding of the complex interplay between speed and draught in maritime operations. This analysis stands as a testament to the diversity and richness of operational strategies within the maritime domain, offering valuable perspectives for optimizing vessel performance and efficiency.

Understanding the distribution of vessel types through AIS

CABLESHIPS

data is critical for numerous stakeholders within the maritime industry, including regulatory bodies, shipping companies, and maritime safety organizations. The AIS.TYPE classification serves as a key indicator of the composition of the maritime fleet, offering insights into shipping trends, operational priorities, and potential areas for policy development.

The analysis focused on the count of instances across different AIS.TYPE categories within the dataset. The findings reveal a distinct pattern of distribution, emphasizing the predominance of specific vessel types.

• Highest Count Observed: The dataset indicated that category “90” recorded the highest count with 4,526 instances. This figure significantly surpasses the counts of other vessel types, marking category “90” which is other ship of all types as the most prevalent within the maritime data analyzed.

• Percentage Share: Remarkably, category “90” which is other ships accounted for 47.52% of the total AIS.TYPE count observed in the dataset. This substantial proportion highlights the central role of this vessel type in maritime operations, suggesting a widespread application and critical importance in the industry’s ecosystem.

COMPARISON WITH OTHER CATEGORIES

• Following Leaders: While category “90” which are other ships leads in prevalence, categories “Dredging or under-

water ops” and “Cargo “ also emerged as notable vessel types within the dataset. Though these categories do not match the volume represented by other ships, their presence underscores the diversity and range of vessel operations captured through AIS data.

• Operational Implications: The variation in the count of AIS.TYPE categories reflects the multifaceted nature of maritime operations. The high prevalence of category “90” which are other ships might indicate specific operational or logistical preferences within the industry, potentially driven by factors such as vessel functionality, regulatory compliance, or market demands.

• The analysis of AIS.TYPE distribution within the maritime dataset underlines the significant predominance of category “90”, which are other ships marking it as a cornerstone of maritime operations. The overwhelming representation of this category has profound implications for understanding the operational landscape of the global maritime fleet.

• Strategic Insights: Stakeholders can leverage these insights to strategize fleet management, regulatory oversight, and safety measures. The dominance of a particular vessel type may inform targeted strategies for enhancing operational efficiency, compliance monitoring, and safety protocols.

• Future Research Directions: The findings also open avenues for further research into the specific characteristics, uses, and operational patterns associated with the leading vessel types. Understanding the reasons behind the dominance of category “90” which are other ships and its implications for maritime logistics and safety represents a valuable area for in-depth investigation.

This detailed analysis of AIS.TYPE distribution not only enhances our understanding of the current maritime operational landscape but also informs future strategic decisions and policy development within the maritime sector.

The network graph presented herein aims to elucidate the intricate web of relationships between cable ships and their operational zones as captured by the Automatic Identification System (AIS). This analysis is pivotal for deciphering the complex interaction patterns that underlie maritime operations, specifically in the domain of global communications infrastructure. The dataset central to this analysis encompasses a myriad of zones that represent the diverse operational areas serviced by cable ships. These zones span a broad spectrum, from regional seas like the Aegean and Baltic to significant oceanic expanses such as the North Pacific Ocean and the Indian Ocean. In telecommunications, these could parallel data centers and connectivity nodes, serving as origination and termination points for data transmission.

Upon examining the network graph, one observes a constellation of nodes, each representing a maritime zone, with the cable ships serving as the dynamic links that form the edges within this network. The prominence of a node is a function of the volume of connections it boasts, indicating the frequency and strategic importance of cable ship activity in that region.

Certain maritime zones manifest as pivotal hubs within the network. Notable among these are the Gulf of Mexico and the East Asia zones, distinguished by their dense nexus of connections. These hubs are instrumental in sustaining the global communications network, ensuring operational continuity across the board. The direction and density of connections between nodes shed light on the operational patterns of cable ships. High-density routes may signify areas with elevated data transfer demands or regions prone to cable faults requiring frequent maintenance.

The graph reveals clusters indicative of regional networks, where cable ship operations are particularly interwoven. For instance, the North Sea and the Baltic Sea exhibit a tightknit community of activity, possibly reflective of a localized network with high interdependency.

OPERATIONAL INSIGHTS

• Strategic Importance of Cable Ships: The analysis underscores the strategic importance of cable ships in ensuring robust global connectivity. These vessels embody the linchpins of the physical internet, their operations critical to the resilience and integrity of international data exchange.

• Risks and Challenges: The report also brings to the fore the myriad challenges these vessels encounter. From geopolitical tensions affecting certain maritime zones to the environmental hazards of the open sea, each factor significantly influences operational strategies.

• Navigational Data Utilization: Leveraging AIS data for this analysis affords a rich perspective on navigational trends and the operational health of the maritime telecommunications infrastructure. Such insights are invaluable for strategic planning, risk assessment, and reinforcing the infrastructure against potential disruptions.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

This network graph analysis provides more than just a visual representation; it offers a narrative on the critical role played by cable ships in the interconnected world. As they traverse the globe, these vessels not only connect disparate zones but also uphold the unseen yet essential framework that supports the world’s growing connectivity needs. In the context of an increasingly data-driven future, such analyses have become imperative for enhancing the resilience and efficiency of global maritime operations. The network graph of sources and destinations provides a valuable visual representation of the connectivity and relationships within a complex system. By analyzing this graph, we gain insights into hubs, flow patterns, and potential communities within the network.

This analysis serves as a foundation for making informed decisions, optimizing operations, and enhancing the resilience of the system. As we continue to navigate and understand complex systems, network graph analysis remains an indispensable tool for uncovering hidden patterns and connections. STF

SYEDA HUMERA, a graduate from JNTUH and Central Michigan University, holds a Bachelor’s degree in Electronics and Communication Science and a Master’s degree in Computer Science. She has practical experience as a Software Developer at ALM Software Solutions, India, where she honed her skills in MLflow, JavaScript, GCP, Docker, DevOps, and more. Her expertise includes Data Visualization, Scikit-Learn, Databases, Ansible, Data Analytics, AI, and Programming. Having completed her Master’s degree, Humera is now poised to apply her comprehensive skills and knowledge in the field of computer science.

CAPACITY CONNECTION

DYNAMICS OF THE SUBMARINE CABLE BANDWIDTH MARKET: HOW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS INFLUENCE COMMERCIAL CONDITIONS – 2ND EDITION

BY JOHN MAGUIRE

INTRODUCTION

In this edition of Capacity Connections, we look at the commercial impact of relentless technological development in Internet, Communications and Technology (ICT), as it affects the submarine cable sphere. It is a heavily inter-dependent system, so we also touch upon governance and regulation—and the market. In a piece this short, we must focus on a detail, the better to observe the evolution in a narrowly defined segment. Accordingly, I have elected to focus on the Transatlantic market.

At the submarine cable route level, note that demand and prices can vary widely depending on the system, route, capacity purchased, contract term, market conditions, and so on. Additionally, as new cable systems are deployed, with continuously increasing capacity and efficiency, the unit cost of submarine cable bandwidth reduces—and we expect bandwidth prices to reflect this continuous downward trend, albeit at a rate that can independently vary significantly depending on any number of factors, including the quantum of advancements, extent of overbuild, relative speed of parallel growth in market demand and, indeed, political and geopolitical factors.

THE DAWN OF SUBMARINE COMMUNICATIONS 1

The emergence and evolution of submarine cable technology has been pivotal in shaping the modern world, enabling global connectivity and the near seamless flow of information between countries and continents. Submarine cables emerged during in a time of massive industrial and scientific development towards the end of the industrial revolution and, particularly, following the invention of the telegraph.

1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_communications_cable, especially citing Haigh, Kenneth Richardson (1968). Cable Ships and Submarine Cables. London.

As early as the 1840s, German engineers were experimenting with underwater cables across the River Rhine. In 1850, the first cross-channel submarine cable was laid between France and England. The first Transatlantic telegraph cable was laid between Valentia Island, off the south-west coast of Ireland, and Newfoundland, by the appropriately named Atlantic Telegraph Company. The system achieved RFS in August 1858 and its in-service life ended a brief three weeks later. Its short life did little to encourage immediate re-building, but even its brief life, notably by means of a congratulatory telegram from Queen

Victoria to President Buchanan, set the stage for a long and continuing series of ever more technologically advanced successors.

The earliest commercial driver was a desire to grow the reach of telegraph services, internationally. The Transatlantic telegraph cable was a massively expensive facility and throughout the period until the advent of coaxial cables and telephony global electronic communications was the province of governments and large corporations, ordinary citizens accessing services, expensively, only on a limited time-share basis.

In 1865, the International Telegraph Union (ITU) was formed. This body’s purpose was to set technical and operational standards as well as regulations for international telegraphy, including a form of universal access obligation and, of course, tariff and accounting rules2

2 https://www.itu.int/en/history/Pages/ITUsHistory. aspx https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Telecommunication_Union

The ITU was renamed the International Telecommunication Union in 1932, reflecting the technical evolution of the sector, and in 1949 became a specialized agency within the United Nations system.

THE INTRODUCTION OF COAXIAL CABLES AND THE ADVENT OF TELEPHONY

The first Transatlantic telephone cable system employing coaxial cable technology (TAT13) was laid between Oban, Scotland, and Clarenville, Newfoundland. With capacity of 36x 4kHz channels, it went RFS in September 1956. This system marked a significant milestone in telecommunication history, enabling the first sustained transatlantic communications link. The system was built by the U.K.’s General Post Office (GPO), the U.S.’s AT&T and Canada’s Overseas Telecommunications Corporation, at a staggering cost of GBP 120 million4

3 TAT1 was, in fact, a pair of separately laid parallel cables: one transmitting in each direction.

4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TAT-1

At this stage, submarine telecommunications comprised exclusively of telephony. It is notable that the TAT1 shareholders were by now government-owned or regulated monopolies. International telephone accounting processes and rates were set by the ITU and that, while this is clearly a commercial enterprise, it is heavily regulated and highly profitable. There is, as yet, little we might consider dynamic about it.

THE ARRIVAL OF OPTICAL FIBER CABLES AND COMPETITION IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS

The 1980s ushered in a technical revolution in telecommunications generally, and in submarine cable technology particularly, with the advent of fiber-optic cables. In parallel, an equally powerful and necessary revolution was occurring in markets and regulation.

Fiber technology dramatically increased the data transmission capacity of submarine cables. This leap in

Figure 1: Map of the first Transatlantic cable

CAPACITY CONNECTION

technology was made possible by the development of laser-based transmission systems and optical amplifiers, which allowed for the transmission of data, at close to the speed of light, through glass or plastic fibers. The vastly increased capacity of fiber meant that more data could be transmitted through a cable, significantly reducing the cost per bit of data transmitted, opening the door to more accessible and affordable global connectivity.

These potential benefits could not be expected to accrue, however, to users of services in a monopoly environment.

The introduction of competition to national telecom markets was an equally important milestone in the development of the sector. As we focus on the Transatlantic market, the evolution of competition in the U.S. and the U.K. sheds useful light on the market’s evolution into the open competition we see today.

IN THE UNITED STATES

Telecom competition was unleashed in the U.S. following a 19745 MCI Communications lawsuit against AT&T, then a privately held but regulated monopoly. This case prompted an FCC investigation that ultimately led to the landmark event that was the breakup of AT&T, following a successful U.S. versus AT&T anti-

5 https://casetext.com/case/mci-communications-corpv-am-tel-tel-co

TABLE 1: COMPARISON OF SYSTEM THROUGHPUT FOR TRANSATLANTIC CABLES UP TO TAT141

1 https://atlantic-cable.com/Cables/speed.htm For comparison, in 2021, Meta’s MAREA cable was been tested to 240 Tbps (or about 4 million telephone channels equivalent) https:// subtelforum.com/ice6-trial-on-marea-trans-atlantic-cable-yields-two-record-results/

trust lawsuit in 19826. This resulted in AT&T’s divestiture of its local operating companies in 1984, creating local exchange carriers (LECs) to provide local service while AT&T continued to provide long distance and international service. The breakup opened the door to competition in long-distance and local service markets, with the birth of competitive local exchange carriers (CLECs), laying the foundation for the diverse telecom landscape in the U.S. today.

IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

In the U.K., the process of telecom deregulation and the introduction of competition started around the same time as in the U.S. Before the 1980s, telecommunication was dominated by the state-owned entity, the GPO, later British Telecom (BT). The U.K. government began the process of liberalizing the telecom market with the Telecommunications Act 1981, which allowed for the licensing of competitors. This was a significant step towards introducing competition. The most notable early competitor was C&W’s Mercury Communications, launched in 1983 as a direct competitor to BT for national and international telephone services.

IN GOVERNANCE AND REGULATION

The arrival of competition within the industry now presented a challenge to the rulemakers, the ITU. The Union is a body built on large scale consensus, with members from nearly every country in the world—and initially only a single member from each,

6 https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/ politics/1982/01/09/us-ends-antitrust-suits-againstat38/6545a672-b488-4915-9064-8baf4da21590/

usually the national PTT 7. Those slower to embrace competition sought to hold back the unstoppable tide and to impose the ITU’s rigidly defined telephone accounting rates structure upon the competitive environment. Almost immediately, however, the ITU’s “Telephone Accounting Rates”, “Official Transit Fees” and “Return Traffic Arrangements” (along with the SDR 8) came under irresistible pressure and were to yield to what we know today as the wholesale voice market: “refile”. Competition in telecommunications had broken free of international regulation.

In the early 2000s, the so-called dot-com boom led to a surge in demand for bandwidth, prompting a significant increase in submarine cable deployment.

There is a data business in global telecoms now, but it is small and still to some extent, and perhaps because of the nature of submarine cable investors, based in the old, heavily regulated “half-circuit” regime. An operator at each end of an international circuit (still heavily regulated in its home market) provided service to

7 Postal, Telegraph and Telephone Authority, e.g., in the case of the U.K., the GPO, later BT. In most cases, then, still a state-owned monopoly.

8 Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) were, along with the Gold Franc (GFC), the common ‘currency’ of ITU accounting. https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/special-drawing-right and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_franc

some notional mid-point of a circuit-based link.

ENHANCED CAPACITY AND A BURGEONING MARKET

As optical fiber technology continued to evolve, subsequent generations of submarine cables saw further increases in capacity and reductions in unit cost. Techniques such as wavelength division multiplexing (WDM) enabled multiple signals to be transmitted simultaneously over a single fiber, multiplying the data capacity of submarine cables without the need for additional physical cables. This capacity expansion further drove down data transmission costs which, by virtue of competition, benefitted consumers, businesses, and economies globally. In parallel, and with experience, engineering improved incrementally and cables, while still expensive, became more reliable—and much more numerous.

THE DOT-COM BOOM AND BEYOND

In the early 2000s, the so-called dot-com boom led to a surge in demand for bandwidth, prompting a significant increase in submarine cable deployment. Initially, this resulted in a sharp drop in bandwidth prices as cable capacity outpaced demand. Later, in the mid- to late-2000s, after the bubble burst, there was an oversupply of bandwidth, which led to a further decrease in prices and the failure of a range of service providers including those that were overly financially engineered and those without access to “eyeballs”, or end-user customers, and relying completely on a wholesale business. Technological advancements continued to improve the efficiency and capacity of submarine cables, con-

CAPACITY CONNECTION

tributing to the increased downward pressure on prices.

The Internet boom was reinforced by a similar boom in mobility. Rapid generational change in mobile technology, coupled with ever-increasing penetration and massive growth in the number and variety of data-based mobile services, compounded the growth rate of the market.

CONSOLIDATION AND EXPANSION

Following the boom and inevitable bust, the 2010s were a period characterized by consolidation in the submarine cable industry, with key players expanding their networks. Despite the consolidation, the introduction of new technologies like coherent optical transmission and ultra-long haul cables continued to drive down the cost per bit. The mobile market, and its attendant content plays, regardless, continued to grow rapidly.

THE FUTURE OF SUBMARINE CABLE MARKET

TECHNOLOGY FUTURES

The trend of decreasing prices continues today, with continuous advances in technology. New cable systems are being designed with even greater capacity, utilizing spatial division multiplexing (SDM) and other innovations to meet the soaring demand for data driven by cloud computing, video streaming, and other bandwidth-intensive services. Innovations in materials science, such as the development of hollow-core fibers, promise even greater efficiencies and lower attenuation rates, which could translate into lower operational costs and lower bandwidth costs for developers.

MARKET EVOLUTION

The market is also undergoing significant change. As we emerged from the dot-com boom and bust, a new category of operator became involved in submarine.

As mobile had grown, the ability of mobile operators to corral customers within walled-garden mobile environments was quickly shown by global players specialising in content, not carriage, to be virtually non-existent. These players, who came to be known as over-the-top service providers (OTTs) quickly established a substantial presence in the ecosystem. Their services were at the heart of the development of the cloud as they sought to get ever closer to their end users. And as the number of end-users grew, and the end-users’ individual appetite for bandwidth grew with it, the OTT players, operating from their own data centers, became large providers of content and service. They began to invest in submarine cables and their commitments underpinned many new cable builds. Today, referred to as hyperscalers in the infrastructure sector, they have gone beyond building in cooperation with global telecom providers and are lead developers, becoming sellers where they used to buy.

CONCLUSION

The evolution of submarine cable technology from simple telegraph cables to sophisticated, high-capacity optical fiber systems is the very essence of global connectivity growth and has been a key driver of worldwide economic development. Without parallel sloughing off of unnecessary regulation and innovation in Internet, cloud and mobility, however, there would have been no traffic to fill the

cables—and a very different commercial ecosystem.

With 5G now emerging—the commercial 5G roaming realm has yet to be defined—we find ourselves today in a world where mobility players ponder the extent to which their subscribers utilise mobile services only to gain access to what, in mobile terms, are OTT services such as Tik-Tok, YouTube or WhatsApp.

Simultaneously, global connectivity players, historically the lead developers of submarine cables, may need to look to these hyperscalers as emergent providers of underpinning infrastructure. Is the path of the global network provider to prove similar to that of its mobile subsidiary (or parent?): a provider of first- and last-mile access?

The impact of all this activity on demand, pricing and other commercial dimensions in subsea is still unfolding but, to the extent that all the world’s a stage, we are indeed players—and awaiting our cues. STF

Currently Director, EMEA, with APTelecom, JOHN MAGUIRE has experience gained across a broad spectrum of telecommunications roles and businesses over the past 30 years. He has sold security and network control software to mobile networks worldwide; established a regional federation fibre network across a family of affiliated telcos and, several times, established interconnect networks and wholesale structures for leading telco brands in new entry and emerging markets. He’s done this in roles across the business: using satellite and cable technology, for OEM and service provider companies and in fixed and mobile domains—including for start-ups and mature companies. His roles have encompassed general management, sales management, direct and indirect sales, business development, market development and operations. A native of Dublin, Ireland, he’s also lived and worked in Australia, UK, Singapore, Hong Kong, Thailand, Qatar, UAE and Malaysia. John holds a B.Tech. degree from University of Limerick in Ireland and an M.A. from Macquarie University Graduate School of Management in Sydney, Australia.

October 14–17, 2024 | Providence, Rhode Island, USA

TECHNICAL SYMPOSIUM

DISCUSSIONS WITH EXPERTS

PLENARY & KEYNOTE

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

EXECUTIVE SESSION

RELATIONSHIP BUILDING SUPPLIER EXHIBITION™

Generate premiere exposure for your work by participating in the leading forum for the exchange of information on technical innovations and solutions for the cable and connectivity industry.

Abstracts for Technical Papers are sought from academic or industry professionals with work that is relevant to cable products, materials, processes, and applications worldwide.

Authors of accepted Technical Papers are invited to present or display a poster at the IWCS Cable & Connectivity Industry Forum and papers will be published for additional exposure.

SUBMIT A TECHNICAL PAPER ABSTRACT

• Get your work published in the IWCS archives and select journals

• Help advance the worldwide cable and connectivity industry by sharing your research

• Gain international recognition for yourself and your company—opportunities to receive prestigious awards

VISIT IWCS.ORG/PRESENT TO VIEW A COMPLETE LIST OF SUGGESTED TOPICS AND SUBMISSION DETAILS

www.iwcs.org

HISTORIC FINANCING PERSPECTIVE

In the dynamic world of submarine cable projects, financing serves as a critical determinant in shaping these essential infrastructure developments. As we step into 2023, an examination of financing trends offers some compelling insights.

Self-Finance emerges as the predominant method for funding submarine cable systems, boasting an impres-

sive total count of 412 financings to date. This approach underscores its viability and appeal as a self-sustaining funding mechanism.

However, it’s crucial to recognize the variety of financing strategies at play in the industry. Debt/Equity Finance is a notable alternative, with a respectable count of 111 instances, indicating that collaborative and exter

Figure 44: Financing Type of Systems, 2013-2023

nal financial backing is still widely utilized. Additionally, Multilateral Development Banks contribute to the landscape with 48 instances of financing.

Beyond raw numbers, average counts offer further valuable perspectives. Self-Finance not only leads in total counts but also maintains a strong average annual count of 37.45. Debt/Equity Finance and Multilateral Development Banks follow with average annual counts of 11.10 and 6.86, respectively. These figures highlight the enduring appeal and consistency of Self-Finance as a funding strategy.

These financing dynamics play a pivotal role in shaping the future of the submarine cable sector. They mirror the evolving needs and preferences within the telecommunications industry. As cable systems continue to grow and adapt, the choices in financing methods will remain a critical component of their success.

The realm of submarine cable financing is characterized by both stability and adaptability. Self-Finance stands out as a robust and self-reliant option among a

range of financing strategies. These choices are instrumental in guiding the direction of global telecommunications networks, emphasizing their importance in a world that is becoming ever more interconnected. STF

REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF FINANCING

MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANKS

Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) are specialized financial institutions that offer both financial and technical support to developing nations. Created by coalitions of countries or regions, MDBs aim to foster economic development and alleviate poverty within their member states. They finance a wide array of development projects, spanning from infrastructure and education to healthcare and environmental sustainability.

Over the last decade, MDBs have funneled a significant $2.1 billion into submarine telecommunications cables. This investment has been geographically diverse, showcasing MDBs’ dedication to boosting global connectivity and infrastructure.

Figure 45: Investment Distribution of Systems, 2013-2023

ANALYTICS

The EMEA (Europe, Middle East, and Africa) region has been the principal recipient, capturing 42.50% of the total MDB investment. The Americas follow with a 24% share, while the Transatlantic region accounts for 23%, largely due to key projects like the SAIL system, which directly links South America to Africa. AustralAsia has received 14% of the total investment, indicating a deceleration in growth as many of its critical connectivity requirements have been met. Conversely, the Indian Ocean region has historically seen minimal MDB investment. Notably, the Transpacific and Polar regions have yet to attract any MDB funding, likely due to a combination of logistical and economic considerations.

These investment patterns are consistent with MDBs’ global commitment to infrastructure development, contributing to both global connectivity and economic growth. The substantial focus on the EMEA and Americas regions emphasizes their importance as primary beneficiaries of MDB financing. Meanwhile, the attention given to the Transatlantic region, particularly through projects like the SAIL system, accentuates its strategic relevance. On the other hand, the reduced investment in AustralAsia reflects its more mature connectivity landscape, and the limited investment in the Indian Ocean region remains a point of interest.

DEBT/EQUITY FINANCING

From 2013 to 2023, the Americas led in Debt/Equity-financed systems, accounting for 26% of the total, followed by AustralAsia at 19% (Figure 24). Systems in these regions often involve collaborations between local telecom companies and governments to connect various parts of their respective areas. Due to the complexity and scale of these projects, they tend to be quite costly.

Transpacific systems came in next, making up 16% of new system activity. Despite having fewer systems, the Transpacific region is home to some of the world’s largest transoceanic systems, which inherently come with higher costs. The EMEA and Transatlantic regions accounted for 14% and 13% respectively. While the EMEA region shares similarities with the Americas and AustralAsia, investment from local telecoms and gov -

Figure 47: Distribution of Debt/Equity Financed Investment, 2013-2023

Figure 48: Distribution of Self-Financed Investment, 2013-2023

ernments has slightly declined, giving way to increased funding from Hyperscalers. This shift explains its relatively lower investment percentage. The Transatlantic region, on the other hand, has seen multiple new cable systems in recent years and continues to experience high-capacity demand, leading to a significant amount of new Debt/Equity investment, despite the already extensive cable infrastructure in the region.

The Indian Ocean and Polar regions are the least active globally and generally attract lower investment interest. Investors in these regions typically look for strong commercial cases to justify capacity sales, which are often lacking due to the regions’ lower activity levels.

SELF-FINANCED

Between 2013 and 2023, the EMEA region led in Self-Financed system investment, contributing 23% of the total funds. This is attributed to its extensive geographical reach and the presence of point-to-point systems that don’t require large consortiums for development (Figure 25).

Australasia followed closely, accounting for 22% of Self-Financed systems. This region often features government-backed systems that don’t rely solely on capacity sales for their justification.

The Indian Ocean region contributed 17% to the Self-Financed investment pool, largely due to expansive inter-regional SEA-ME-WE-type systems that cross the area and involve multiple stakeholders. These systems are often viewed more as utility infrastructure than as revenue-generating assets, given the typically low activity in the region.

The Americas and Transpacific regions secured the next highest shares of Self-Financed system investment, at 15% and 14%, respectively. Systems in the Americas often serve as revenue generators and are more likely to be financed through Debt/Equity means. Despite their higher costs, Transpacific systems see limited rapid development, which curtails further investment.

In the Transatlantic region, Self-Financed systems constituted 7% of the total investment. This is primarily because only a few Hyperscaler-driven systems had the capacity to self-finance.

Lastly, the Polar region continued to account for the smallest investment share, at just 2%. This reflects the developmental challenges and lower overall demand in this region compared to others. STF

CURRENT FINANCING

From 2012 to 2023, the submarine cable industry has seen significant financial activity, totaling $21 billion in investments (Figure 26). This financial journey has been far from linear, revealing intriguing trends and shifts that illuminate the sector’s economic landscape.

A pivotal shift occurred in 2023 when investments of completed systems reached a significant $5.2 billion, marking it as an important year for the industry. This is in stark contrast to 2015, which represented the industry’s financial nadir with just $0.5 billion in investments.

The financial trends of the industry underscore its cyclical nature, characterized by cycles of investment peaks and valleys approximately every eight to nine years. Currently, the sector is navigating a period of reduced investment, but historical patterns suggest a likely upswing between 2024 and 2025. This anticipated rise aligns with projections for increased global bandwidth demand, reinforcing the indus-

try’s cyclical economic dynamics.

Overall, the financial landscape of the submarine cable industry demonstrates its resilience and adaptability to evolving technological and market trends. The scale of investment is a direct reflection of the industry’s commitment to meeting the world’s burgeoning communication needs.

Over the past decade, the submarine cable industry has overseen the installation of an estimated 670,000 kilometers of cable, averaging around 67,000 kilometers per year (Figure 27). This consistent trend highlights the industry’s stable operational growth.

When examining the correlation between the level of financial investment and the amount of cable installed, a striking similarity is observed with the eight-to-nine-year investment cycle previously mentioned. This correlation emphasizes the industry’s cyclical nature in both financial

ANALYTICS

and operational aspects, showcasing its ability to adapt to fluctuating market conditions.

From 2019 to 2023, the submarine cable industry saw a substantial global investment of $6.8 billion. Australasia led with 27% of the total investment, emphasizing its growing role in global connectivity (Figure 40).

The Transpacific region followed with 18.5%, and the Americas contributed 13%, highlighting their continued development driven by connectivity needs between East Asia, North America, and Europe.

The EMEA region, despite being the largest geographically, accounted for 15% of the total investment over the past five years. This is set to change, especially with expansive projects like Equiano and 2Africa nearing completion.

The Indian Ocean and Transatlantic regions captured 14% and 8% of the investment, respectively. The Polar region rounded out the list with 3.5%, indicating its relatively lower recent demand. Nonetheless, the future may see increased investment in the Polar region as new projects emerge. STF

Figure 50: System Deployment by Year, 2013-2023

Figure 49: System Investment, 2013-2023

Figure 51: Regional Investment in Submarine Cable Systems, 2019-2023

ANALYTICS

Submarine cables continue to play a key role as critical global communications infrastructure. Accordingly, discussions and regulatory changes in this industry will persist at both regional and national levels around the world in 2023. The good news is that many governments have now recognized the importance of these subsea assets, especially if they are ever affected. As a result, new regulatory initiatives are underway, and more international stakeholders are entering the arena to support further protection and harmonization with other seabed user industries. Below are some potential breakthroughs and trends in the legal and regulatory landscape of telecom submarine cables:

BIODIVERSITY OF AREAS BEYOND NATIONAL JURISDICTION

Indeed, the event of the year was the approval of the “High Seas Treaty,” focused on safeguarding Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ). This treaty, under discussion for nearly two decades, sets up a procedure for establishing large-scale marine protected areas in the high seas. It was finally approved at

an intergovernmental conference in New York, USA, on June 19, 2023.

During this period, numerous national environmental authorities globally have heightened their focus on the environmental impact of submarine cable installation and maintenance. This includes stipulations for environmentally friendly cable materials, noise levels that affect marine mammals, the use of low-frequency sonar, and the adoption of best practices in installation and maintenance to minimize disruptions to marine ecosystems.

Subsequent to the treaty’s approval, several bodies will be established to enforce its provisions. This will prompt further interpretation and implementation in the intricate realm of submarine cable permitting. Any future cable owner crossing the high seas will keenly observe these developments, especially regarding whether Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) requirements are imposed, particularly in the new marine protected areas designated under the treaty.

Similarly, the cable industry continues to liaise with the International Seabed Authority (ISA), an intergov-

ernmental body composed of 167 member states and the European Union. The ISA is responsible for authorizing and regulating mineral-related activities on the international seabed. Close monitoring is essential to prevent any interference between submarine cables and deep seabed activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction, as this could set dangerous precedents and discourage future cooperation between the two sectors.

Currently, the majority of ISA member states believe that commercial seabed mining should not proceed until proper regulations are established. In accordance with recent meetings held in July 2023, the ISA aims to continue the development of such regulations, targeting their final adoption by 2025.

IMPROVING NATIONAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS

To modernize its regulatory landscape, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) initiated a consultation process, soliciting feedback from stakeholders through written comments and counter-comments.

In June 2023, TRAI released its recommendations on the “Licensing Framework and Regulatory Mechanism for Submarine Cable Landing in India.” (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, 2023)

for innovative new entrants in markets already dominated by OTTs or incumbent operators. Among the issues under discussion are the separation of ownership of cable stations from national and international segments, mandatory environmental impact assessments, and the rights of non-discrimination for local backhaul providers.

These public initiatives present an opportunity for cable owners to seek expedited procedures for new cable landing licenses and maintenance permits. They also allow for clarification on tax issues related to cable depots and operational requirements for repair vessels in jurisdictional waters. Recommendations from the International Cable Protection Committee (ICPC) serve as valuable references for any government official looking to update national regulations.

Currently, the majority of ISA member states believe that commercial seabed mining should not proceed until proper regulations are established. In accordance with recent meetings held in July 2023, the ISA aims to continue the development of such regulations, targeting their final adoption by 2025.

While these recommendations address various aspects—ranging from licensing requirements for cable and landing station owners to ownership obligations in different segments (national/international)—barriers remain. These need to be balanced between major stakeholders, such as Over-The-Top (OTT) service providers and national carriers, and new market entrants. This balancing act is a recurring subject in discussions about India’s aspirations to become a hub for submarine cables.

TRAI further recommended that submarine cables and their landing stations be designated as critical information infrastructure. The layout, maintenance, and repair of these cables should be recognized as essential services, a status that would entail additional security and resilience measures such as redundancy, backup systems, and disaster recovery plans.

This regulatory debate is not unique to India; similar conversations are happening globally. Countries are grappling with how to craft regulations that attract investment while not creating insurmountable barriers

Other countries, like Ireland, have established specific government bodies such as the Maritime Area Regulatory Authority (MARA), founded in July 2023. MARA is tasked with granting maritime licenses for activities like new submarine cable projects.

In the United States, there is ongoing debate about which agency should spearhead cable protection policy. A report published by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) in August 2023, titled “Protection of Undersea Telecommunication Cables: Issues for Congress,” (Congressional Research Service, 2022) has added to this dialogue. The outcome could formalize the U.S. Coast Guard’s (USCG) role in protecting submarine cables in U.S. waters or delegate this responsibility to other agencies or entities like Team Telecom.

As countries begin to draft new legislation to protect submarine cables or expedite their installation, consultations are in the final stages with various stakeholders. The announcements of these final bill drafts will undoubtedly influence regional regulations and future investment in their respective countries.

FUNDING FOR NEW PROJECTS

The European Commission’s Global Gateway program remains a major source of external funding for new cable projects aimed at bolstering backbone connectivity within the European Union (EU) and enhancing its ties with third countries. This strategy is mirrored by other regional

ANALYTICS

investment banks and development finance institutions, which aim to develop their members’ connectivity markets through new submarine cable tenders.

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) have emerged as a viable option for governments interested in investing in these critical infrastructures to safeguard digital sovereignty. Other innovative financing models, like the formation of a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV), serve to complement traditional consortium agreements, delineating the rights and obligations of cable owners.

A consistent aspect across these various funding avenues is the prerequisite for the proposed new cable project to maintain good regulatory standing to be eligible for continued financial support. This is particularly crucial in regions with disputed waters or in relatively unexplored routes, such as the Arctic or Antarctic.

NEW SECURITY CONCERNS

marine cable projects remains active and varies considerably from one country or region to another. It often hinges on striking a balance between national security interests and the ambition to foster economic growth and innovation through international collaboration. As the telecom sector and geopolitical dynamics evolve, rules concerning foreign ownership of submarine cables are likely to remain subjects for ongoing debate and modification.

The European Commission’s Global Gateway program remains a major source of external funding for new cable projects aimed at bolstering backbone connectivity within the European Union (EU) and enhancing its ties with third countries.

Simultaneously, scholarly discussions are intensifying around the proper legal instruments for addressing deliberate cable damage during peacetime. Debates are underway to determine which international organization should lead updates to these instruments, with potential candidates ranging from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to other UN bodies concerned with global security.

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR CYBERSECURITY REPORT

This year has seen a surge in initiatives focused on the protection of subsea energy and telecommunications infrastructure, including research articles, forums, and high-level government meetings globally. Such attention is beneficial for the telecom industry, as it underscores the critical nature of these assets to global communications and elevates their protection on political agendas.

In February 2023, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) announced the establishment of a Critical Undersea Infrastructure Coordination Cell at its headquarters. This cell aims to safeguard submarine cables and pipelines, facilitate industry engagement, and unify key military and civilian stakeholders.

By May 2023, the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) had formed the Quad Partnership on Cable Connectivity and Resilience, acknowledging the urgent necessity to support robust undersea cable networks in the Indo-Pacific region.

Some governments have opted to integrate submarine cables into existing critical infrastructure plans or even deny landing permits based on these plans. Others are drafting specialized legislation specifically aimed at telecommunications infrastructure.

The debate over foreign ownership restrictions on sub-

In August 2023, the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) released a report addressing key cybersecurity challenges in the subsea cable ecosystem. (European Union Agency for Cybersecurity, 2023) The report aims to assist national authorities in EU Member States who are tasked with overseeing public communication networks and core internet infrastructure, as outlined in the European Electronic Communications Code (EECC) and the Directive on Security of Network and Information Systems (NIS2 Directive).

One significant conclusion of the report is that there’s ambiguity at the national level within the EU about which authority should supervise subsea cables and receive related incident reports. As a result, it’s crucial for EU Member States to specify at the national level which entity holds the responsibility and mandate for the protection and security of these cables.

In addition to ENISA’s report, other EU-led initiatives are underway. These include the Permanent Structured Cooperation plan (PESCO), spearheaded by the European Defence Agency (EDA). PESCO aims to enhance defense cooperation among the 26 EU Member States. Notably, one of the PESCO projects for 2023 is the Critical Seabed Infrastructure Protection or CSIP, led by Italy.

SCIENCE MONITORING AND RELIABLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS CABLES

The growing dependence on submarine cable systems for global communication and data transfer has led to the development of Science Monitoring And Reliable Telecommunications (SMART) cables. These technologically advanced cables come with integrated environmental sensors for climate monitoring, early warning systems, and enhanced cable protection. SMART cables promise numerous advantages such as better operational efficiency, improved maintenance, and increased reliability for submarine networks.

While the initial deployments of these systems will establish important precedents, ongoing efforts are required to develop broader solutions. To fully realize the potential of SMART cables, a supportive legal and regulatory framework must be created that promotes their deployment and ensures their safe and effective operation.

tive projects, beyond direct agreements with the countries involved in laying the cables and current industry support.

This regulatory development is especially crucial for certain areas in the Pacific, where identifying climate change hotspots is vital for improving the resilience of future cable installations.

The growing dependence on submarine cable systems for global communication and data transfer has led to the development of Science Monitoring And Reliable Telecommunications (SMART) cables. These technologically advanced cables come with integrated environmental sensors for climate monitoring, early warning systems, and enhanced cable protection.

LOOKING AHEAD

Furthermore, there is still a regulatory gap that needs to be addressed to encourage the use of SMART cables. Specifically, there needs to be clarity on their classification as either a marine scientific research activity under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) or some other category. This is crucial to ensure there are no additional legal or permitting constraints on these innova-

The submarine cable industry is at a crossroads, marked by significant regulatory changes, geopolitical considerations, and technological advancements. From international agreements like the High Seas Treaty to national initiatives in countries like India and the United States, the regulatory landscape is rapidly evolving. Funding mechanisms are becoming more sophisticated, while security concerns are taking center stage in global conversations. Emerging technologies like SMART cables hold promise but require a well-structured legal framework for full-scale deployment. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, it’s imperative that governments, industry stakeholders, and international organizations work collaboratively to navigate these complex challenges and opportunities, ensuring a resilient and secure global communications infrastructure for the future. STF

ANALYTICS

INDIA’S RECENT RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO SUBMARINE CABLES

In 2017, my paper, “India’s Critical Position in the Global Submarine Cable Network: An Analysis of Indian Law and Practice on Cable Repairs,” (Sugadev, 2017) highlighted the state of the submarine cable repair permitting situation in India. The paper included suggestions that could potentially elevate India’s status as a significant cable hub in the region. Geography is key, and it favors India if leveraged efficiently! Fast-forward seven years, and the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has issued substantive recommendations to address current challenges and enhance the submarine cable industry, and consequently, the digital network in India. In this article, I analyze TRAI’s 2023 recommendations as a continuation of the conversation on facilitating cable repairs through a supportive permitting system.

India has come a long way from its conservative stance on seaborne activities, primarily due to national security concerns stemming from the 2008 terrorist attack in Mumbai. That incident reshaped the country’s defense posture, leading to increased scrutiny of all ocean activities. As a result, the permitting system for laying and

repairing submarine cables in India’s jurisdictional waters remains cumbersome, requiring the involvement of multiple government agencies and officials.

Recently, the government has acknowledged that a restrictive approach hampers the country’s growth. SubTel Forum’s tenth report emphasizes that “the world continues to consume ever-increasing amounts of data, with international bandwidth demand projected to nearly double every two years for the foreseeable future.” (Submarine Telecoms Forum, 2021) In line with the global internet boom, India’s internet consumption has skyrocketed following the introduction of 5G technology and the expansion of data centers. (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, 2023) In this context, the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) sought TRAI’s advice to improve the “Licensing Framework and Regulatory Mechanism for Submarine Cable Landing in India” (Licensing Recommendations). After assessing the current framework, analyzing feedback from industry stakeholders, and examining licensing frameworks in other countries, TRAI published its recommendations in June 2023, which are discussed in this article.

Additionally, TRAI released another set of recommendations in May 2023, titled “Recommendations on Ease

of Doing Business in Telecom and Broadcasting Sector” (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, 2023) (Ease of Doing Business Recommendations). These support and strengthen several of the points made in the Licensing Recommendations, as discussed below.

DECODING 2023 TRAI’S RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF CABLE REPAIRS

My 2017 paper focused on the challenges faced in repair activities due to the lack of an Indian-flagged cable ship. Cable repair holds significant economic importance in our digitally advanced world, and quick remedies for damages enable digital functions to run smoothly. The recent TRAI recommendations and report advocate for establishing a committee of relevant government departments to discuss viable financial options for a long-term Indian vessel solution. In the interim, the report urges cable vessels operating in the region to reflag or relocate their vessels to suitable Indian ports.

In addition to advocating for an Indian cable vessel, TRAI’s Licensing Recommendations identify the need for cable depots on India’s East and West coasts. These depots would store cables and essential equipment for repairs. A strategic approach for rapid response is advised, with locations near existing or upcoming cable landing stations (CLS) given preference. Financial incentives, such as “special economic zones” treatment and GST/ customs duty exemptions, are also proposed.

TRAI further elaborates its stance in another set of recommendations, “Regulatory Framework for Promoting Data Economy Through Establishment of Data Centres, Content Delivery Networks, and Interconnect Exchanges in India.” It suggests that coastal states like Gujarat, which already offer fiscal support for new cable landing stations, may consider additional incentives. (Government of Gujarat Department of Science and Technology, 2022) Gujarat’s government aims to provide one-time CAPEX support and a power tariff subsidy, further encouraging investment in this sector.

The Licensing Recommendations also call for sim-

plified clearance procedures for repair crews. An auto-renewal option for existing clearances is encouraged. Likewise, the Ease of Doing Business recommendation seconds this proposal. For environmental and coastal zone clearances, an online single-window system via the Saral Sanchar portal is suggested, covering the entire spectrum of government approvals.

Data collection for cable route surveys could be streamlined by allowing officials other than those from the DoT to be on board the cable vessel. To meet the country’s growing digital needs, TRAI proposes an additional optical fiber cushion, similar to practices in countries like Singapore. A new framework for the introduction of stub cables has also been envisioned.

Finally, TRAI emphasizes the need to designate submarine cables as “Critical Information Infrastructure,” managed by the National Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Centre (NCIIPC). It also proposes that these activities be accorded “Essential Services” status, requiring special provisions for customs duty and GST exemptions. These arguments are echoed in TRAI’s Ease of Doing Business recommendations, which further suggest removing the bond requirement for cable ships during repairs to avail customs duty exemptions.

BOTTOM LINE

The recommendations emphasize that licenses and permits for submarine cable laying and repair in India should be treated as a ‘Top Priority’ to support the ‘Digital India’ initiative. While the TRAI Licensing Recommendations may generate mixed reactions within the industry, their focus on cable repairs aims to position India for competitive advantage. If executed effectively, these recommendations have the potential to transform India into a digital superpower. STF

DISTRIBUTED AT KEY 2024 INDUSTRY CONFERENCES IWCS CABLE & CONNECTIVITY INDUSTRY FORUM, PTC, SUBMARINE NETWORKS EMEA, AND SUBMARINE NETWORKS WORLD

7 QUESTIONS WITH RYAN WOPSCHALL

Talking Submarine Cable Industry With International Cable Protection Committee’s General Manager

1. WHO IS ICPC AND WHAT IS THE ASSOCIATION’S MISSION?

The ICPC is the world’s leading organization promoting submarine cable protection and resilience. The organization has over 200 members from over 70 nations, including cable operators, owners, manufacturers, and industry service providers, as well as governments. We all meet in person during our annual Plenary meeting, typically held in April or May of each year where members and invited guest speakers exchange technical, environmental, and regulatory information such as case studies, best practices, lessons learned, as well as new and emerging solutions to current issues facing cable protection.

As part of our on-going objective to remain at the forefront of the industry, the ICPC has recently updated our mission statement:

Mission: The International Cable Pro tection Committee is the world’s leading organization promoting submarine cable protection and resilience.

The ICPC works with its members, governments, international organizations, other marine industries, and the scientific community to mitigate risks of natural and human damage to cables; develop recommendations and best practices for industry and governments throughout the cable project life cycle; promote scientific research addressing how cables exist in the marine environment; and promote the rule of law for the oceans.

The ICPC has the following vision: The ICPC envisions a global network of reliable and resilient submarine cables that coexist with the marine environment.

2.

HOW DOES ICPC PARTICIPATE IN THE SUBMARINE CABLE INDUSTRY?

The ICPC participates in the submarine cable industry as a trade body whose members represent about 98% of all international submarine fiber optic cable systems globally. We also have companies who operate in the power cable sector as well as the renewable energy sector. The ICPC represents global issues facing cable protection. We support our members directly with issues they may face regarding protection of their own cables, and we promote best practices through our Recommendations and publications. Much of our outreach is with governments and pertains to how they can support and promote resilient submarine cable infrastructure, as well as with other seabed users such as the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO), the International Seabed Authority (ISA), among many others.

cable protection. Of course, not every technology is fit for the same purpose, but these advancements can’t be ignored and are becoming important pieces of developing any new cable system. The ’24 ICPC Plenary will be held in Singapore from April 30 through May 2 and will have presentations and a panel discussion (what we are calling our “Fibre-side Chat”) on cable sensing technologies.

4.

WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF ICPC’S SUCCESS?

The ICPC has observed a dramatic increase in awareness of submarine cables since the time of COVID. As a result, we manage multiple media inquiries each month, acting as a public facing voice for the industry. Also, as a result of COVID was a decrease in annual spending. In a way we are still benefiting from that and have been consistently redirecting funds to sponsor peer-reviewed research projects that tackle emerging environmental and regulatory challenges.

The world and the cable industry are not stagnant and unchanging. The industry continues to be very busy, the ICPC membership continues to increase, but the industry and our members are also faced with emerging issues such as the encroachment of other seabed users, increased jurisdictional creep, geopolitically influenced events, congested landing sites and route alignments, and the ever growing criticality of submarine cable protection worldwide. The ICPC aims to help guide our members through these challenges.

3.

WHAT ADVANCEMENTS IN SUBMARINE CABLE DESIGN OR APPLICATIONS ARE INCLUDED IN ICPC PLENARY ‘24?

The ICPC does not necessarily directly tackle advancements in cable design as it would pertain to fiber, electronics, network management, etc. But we do tackle the physical infrastructure layer from a cable protection perspective. One advancement that bridges the gap between cable protection and advancements in technology is cable sensing. The ICPC’s view on cable sensing is that it includes all types of sensing technology such as distributed acoustic sensing, interferometry, state of polarization, and SMART cable sensing. There is a lot of growing interest and momentum in these technologies both for their data collection for environmental purposes, but also as a tool for

The ICPC was founded in 1958. Part of the success of the ICPC is the longevity and growth of our organization. We have a firm foundation to continue to build upon. But the organization was not as proactive, outward facing, and engaged as it is today, due in part because there were fewer marine users, less environmental regulation, and fewer cables in the water. We have seen growth across all of those factors, including growth in the number of cables in the water. This has fueled the growth of our organization.

Having said that, our success comes from a very engaged Executive Committee, robust membership, diverse global representation, and a deliberate objective to engage with governments, seabed users, and other stakeholders. Our advocacy, Recommendations, published best practices, and sponsored peer reviewed research and literature help support cable protection in general, as well as specific cable protection initiatives.

5. HOW IS ICPC HELPING TO PROMOTE A MORE DIVERSE AND INCLUSIVE CABLE INDUSTRY?

As a trade organization, we have a diverse membership base from over 70 countries to start. But a lot of responsibility lies within our member organizations to promote diversity and inclusion, as they are the one making decisions on who represents their company at the ICPC, etc. Over time we have seen an increase in younger people attend Plenaries, an increase in women representing their companies, and an increase in further diversity of member organizations in terms of geographic location. From that perspective, the growth in awareness of diversity and inclusion is present in our industry and is reflected by the decisions made and supported by our member companies.

6. AS SUSTAINABILITY HAS BECOME A HOT BUTTON ISSUE, WHAT IS ICPC’S DOING TO HELP DRIVE A CIRCULAR ECONOMY?

Sustainability is indeed becoming a hot button issue insofar as it’s important to acknowledge the awareness

FEATURE

and focus that industries and governments are placing on sustainable activities. Part of the effort the ICPC has undertaken is, in a way, reactionary in the sense that we have internally explored the ways in which submarine cables do contribute to a sustainable, circular blue economy. Much of our peer reviewed research continues to support that cables are benign to the environment, and contribute greatly to individual, societal, economic and government benefit. Having said that, no industry is without its footprint. We have been working to understand better the emissions or cable vessels, alternative fuel types, more sustainability conscious methods of construction or installation, etc. Some of this is and will continue to be driven by governments, but as an industry we have a responsibility to work towards sustainability as well despite other outside influences.

7. HOW DOES ICPC SHARE AND PROMOTE DEVELOPMENTS RELATED TO CABLE PROTECTION?

The ICPC engages with our members through our monthly newsletters and environmental bulletins. We engage publicly throughout public environmental publications, media interviews, and representation and other industry conferences. We also share a lot of

WHY ATTEND

Finformation and updates through our website, as well as our annual Plenary meeting.

One example or aspect of such activities is the publicly available publication, Government Best Practices for Protecting and Promoting Resilience of Submarine Telecommunications Cables, which is a widely distributed resource for advocating to governments regarding the best practices for cable protection, which promote cable resilience. These include topics such as fishing and anchoring risks, spatial separation, charting, cable protection laws, marine spatial planning, route and landing diversification, permitting for installation and repair, cabotage and crewing restrictions, port entry requirements, customs duties, maritime boundary claims and disputes, and critical infrastructure designation. STF

RYAN WOPSCHALL is the General Manager of the ICPC and has served in this position since 2020. He is also the founder and Principal of Wopschall Consulting, LLC where he works as an independent consultant supporting clients with the development and implementation of their submarine cable projects. In his role with the ICPC he is responsible for the day-to-day activities of the organization, supported by the Secretariat team. He is also responsible for supporting the Executive Committee with the overall strategic direction and objectives of the ICPC, management of yearly EC meetings, and the flagship annual members Plenary meeting.

ollowing on from the ICPC’s most well attended Plenary in its history, held last year in Madrid, we look forward to putting on our 2024 Plenary in Singapore. Drawing on the success of our last Singapore Plenary (back in 2011), we are happy to be bringing this event back to southeast Asia and to a critical hub for submarine cables. Similar to events held in 2011, the ICPC is also pleased to announce that we are going to be co-hosting a separate Law of the Sea Day with the Center for International Law (CIL). This day, open to ICPC members, will dive into the current and emerging regulatory environment governing submarine cables and will consist of an impressive lineup of speakers and invited guests. To attend the Plenary, and the Law of the Sea Day, is to stay current on everything related to submarine cable protection including technical, environmental and regulatory topics, as well as a robust lineup of case studies from around the world. Key dates for the event include the Plenary to be held from April 30 through May 2 and the Law of the Sea Day on May 3. As is customary for this event, it is open to all ICPC members. If you are not a member of the ICPC and are interested in membership in order to attend the Plenary, please email secretariat@iscpc.org.

2024 ICPC PLENARY | SINGAPORE

‘ENSURING A CONNECTED FUTURE’ 30TH APRIL – 2ND MAY 2024

DRAFT AGENDA

(subject to modification and EC approval)

Day One: Tuesday, 30th April 2024

2:00 pm:

Open Session Commences & Welcome to External Speakers (ICPC Chair Graham Evans)

2:00 pm:

Keynote Speaker

2:30 pm:

‘Latest and Emerging Seabed Congestion Challenges’

3:00 pm:

‘Fishery Liaison and Management in Southeast Asia –present and future issues’

Break

4:00 pm – 5:00: IHO/UKHO: Submarine Cable Charting Panel

5:00 pm:

End of Business Day One

Day Two: Wednesday, 1st May 2024

9:00 am:

Invited Guest Speaker

9:30 am: ‘What Submarine Cable Operators Need?’

10:00 am: ‘The challenges and expectations of zoning for cables’

FEATURE

Break

11:00 pm:

‘Global Report of Cable Repair Commencement Times’

11:30 pm:

Sensing Session

Break

1:30 pm:

Environmental Review

A Series of Case Studies: Part One

2:00 pm:

‘Case Study of an Intriguing AIS Target Loitering Near a Cable’

2:30 pm:

‘Utilizing ICPC Recommendations for Submarine Cable Project in the Oil and Gas Industry—Compliance or Compromise’

3:00 pm:

‘Vessel Damage to Solomon Islands Domestic Network, Impact, Repair and Reparations’

Break

4:00 pm:

‘Legal Review’

4:30 pm:

Navigating the Sea of Sustainability: Carbon Footprint Reduction in Subsea Cable Recovery and Recycling’

5:00 pm:

‘‘Applying algorithms and machine learning to extensive maritime data to support the protection of cables from fishing vessels and malicious activity’

5:30 pm: End of Business Day Two

Day Three: Thursday, 2nd May 2024

9:00 am:

‘UNOR Update’

A Series of Case Studies: Part Two

9:30 am:

‘A Case Study of Cable Fault’

10:00 am:

‘Design Against Anchor Hooking Risks on a Subsea Fiber Optical Cable – A Case Study in Brazil’

Break

11:00 am:

‘Optimizing Submarine Cable Route Landing with Remote Sensing

11:30 am:

‘Regulatory Landscape for Submarine Cables in Africa: Navigating Challenges and Ensuring Compliance’

12:00 pm:

‘GEOCAST-GO: Hindcasting and forecasting geotechnical operational windows of seabed mobility and scour based on GIS, CFD modelling and ML/A’

Break

1:30 pm – 3:00 pm:

‘Liaison with Other Organisations and Seabed Users

• DKCPC

• European Subsea Cable Association (ESCA)

• North American Submarine Cable Association (NASCA)

• OSCA

• SubOptic 2023 & Sustainabilit y Report

• Association of Submarine Cable Operators of Nigeria (ASCON)

Break

3:30 pm:

Break-Out Sessions

5:00 pm: End of Plenary

Dear Industry Colleague,

March marks a significant milestone for us at WFN Strategies, as we celebrate our 23rd anniversary. As I reflect on our journey, I am filled with a profound sense of gratitude and pride for what we have achieved together in this dynamic and world-changing industry.

Our path has been both challenging and rewarding, a testament to the resilience and innovation that define our sector. Despite the obstacles we have faced, our collective determination to drive progress has never waned. We are honored to have been a part of this remarkable journey, contributing to advancements that have fundamentally reshaped our world.

One of my most cherished memories dates back to the mid-1980s, on a cold, rainy beach near Newcastle, England. It was there that I found myself involved in trialing one of the industry’s first subsea ploughs. That experience, marked by the harsh weather and the thrill of innovation, symbolizes the beginning of my unwavering commitment to this field. It’s a commitment that, like the relentless North Sea waves, has never stopped.

WE’RE A FAMILY BUSINESS AND WE TAKE GREAT PRIDE IN OUR PEOPLE, SERVICES AND PUBLICATIONS.

As we celebrate this 23-year milestone, we are more excited than ever for what the future holds. The possibilities are endless, and our passion for pushing boundaries and exploring new horizons burns brighter with each passing day. We look forward to continuing our journey, hand in hand with our esteemed partners and clients, as we tackle the challenges and seize the opportunities that lie ahead.

Thank you for being an integral part of our story. Your support, collaboration, and shared vision have been invaluable to our success. Together, we have not just witnessed history; we have made it.

Here’s to the next chapter of innovation, achievement, and partnership. We are eager to see what the future brings and are grateful for the opportunity to share this journey with you.

Warmest regards,

WAYNE NIELSEN | MANAGING DIRECTOR

FEATURE

IRUS AND FIBER OPTIC CABLES

An Overview and Examination of Associated Risks

BY FERNANDO MARGARIT, URIEL A. MENDIETA, BRITTANY E. BUHLER AND MICHAEL J. SANCHEZ

OVERVIEW OF THE INDEFEASIBLE RIGHT OF USE (IRU) IN THE TELECOM INDUSTRY

Participants in the telecommunications infrastructure industry – particularly those involved with fiber networks and related infrastructure – are likely to have come across indefeasible rights of use, or IRUs. IRUs have been one of the most commonly-used methods of granting rights in telecommunications assets for decades. Their implementation has become mainstream among industry participants, as digital infrastructure development has heated up exponentially to keep up with the ever-increasing demand for bandwidth worldwide. Yet, IRUs are often misunderstood or improperly granted, potentially depriving their recipients of the intended benefits of a true IRU or creating additional risk for the IRU grantor.

An IRU is an exclusive, indefeasible right to use a particular asset, such as fiber or the capacity or spectrum on the fiber of a cable system. The IRU is intended to provide its holder rights as to the asset that are as close as possible to actual ownership without actually transferring legal title to the asset. When precisely contracted, an IRU grant conveys

the “indicia of ownership” in an asset to its grantee (holder), including equitable title (i.e., the beneficial interest) and its accompanying exclusive right to possess, use and control the asset. The IRU grantor, however, retains actual legal title and the non-equitable interest in the asset.

It is critical for prospective IRU grantors and grantees to understand what an IRU grant conveys from a title and rights perspective, so they know precisely what they will be conveying or receiving. As an example, a grantee of an IRU as to particular fiber on a cable system will have an exclusive right to use the fiber for a defined period of time but will not actually own the fiber itself. IRU grantees oftentimes fail to appreciate this important distinction.

The IRU grantor, on the other hand, must understand that while it retains actual ownership of the asset, it can’t do much of anything with the asset since it has conveyed the traditional ownership rights over the asset to the IRU holder. For example, the grantor cannot use or access the fiber during the IRU term (typically, other than for maintenance purposes, as agreed in advance with the IRU holder). In fact, in a typical IRU agreement, the grantor

disclaims and waives the traditional ownership rights over the asset, including, specifically, the right to use the IRU asset or grant any additional rights in the asset. Depending on how it is drafted, the latter could include a prohibition on pledging the asset as collateral for financing purposes. Grantors should take note of this possible prohibition as it could present a significant hurdle to raising money for the development of the underlying cable system or facility (if applicable).

BANKRUPTCY PROOF

A key characteristic of a properly granted IRU is that it will (or, as discussed below, at least is intended to) survive a bankruptcy or equivalent proceeding in the United States and similar common law jurisdictions of the IRU grantor, much like actual title to the IRU asset would survive any such proceeding. This key feature is perhaps the most significant distinguishing feature of a true IRU relative to a standard grant of rights of use (including as associated with traditional leases or licenses) over an asset.

The bankruptcy risk for holders of rights in telecommunication assets – whether as IRU holders or holders of weaker rights of use – could be significant and merits careful consideration. For instance, the United States Bankruptcy Code affords debtors in a bankruptcy proceeding the ability to reject executory contracts. A debtor’s rejection of an executory contract is treated as a breach of the contract by the debtor occurring immediately prior to the commencement of the bankruptcy proceeding. Although the rejection doesn’t get rid of the contract entirely, it typically results in the elimination of the principal purpose of the contract, leaving the counterparty (non-debtor) with a mere claim for damages alongside the debtor’s unsecured creditors.

By way of example in the telecommunications industry setting, if the grantor of rights of use over fiber on a network declares bankruptcy and is successful in rejecting the contract pursuant to which the rights are granted, then the grantee is likely left without any rights of use over the fiber despite possibly having paid significant sums of money for such rights. This can be devastating for a grantee that depends on the IRU for its own internal network purposes or to provide service to its customers over the fiber.

An IRU is intended to survive any rejection attempt by a bankrupt grantor. Thus, a proper IRU grant seeks to avoid the indicia of an executory contract. Although what constitutes an executory contract for United States bankruptcy purposes is often factually specific and subject to varying interpretation by courts, an executory contract is generally understood to be a contract that is, in whole or in part,

subject to future performance by any party thereto. As such, a key characteristic of a proper IRU grant is that it will, to the maximum extent possible, require upfront performance from both the grantor and grantee – in particular, upfront payment of the IRU price by the grantee along with an upfront grant of the IRU by the grantor.

Given the rejection risk and desire to avoid any indicia of an IRU contract being executory in nature, IRU holders in assets (such as fiber) that require operation and maintenance services to be provided and paid for throughout the IRU term (all future performance) often receive those O&M services pursuant to separate contractual arrangements. In a bankruptcy setting, the O&M contract could be subject to rejection but the separate IRU contract and grant therein would presumably survive any rejection attempt by the debtor. This scenario would, of course, lead to certain difficulties for the IRU holder with rights over an asset not being maintained properly. These difficulties are addressed through other avenues, including through the attempted procurement of step-in rights for the IRU holder to arrange for its own maintenance of the asset.

The language of the IRU contract itself is also used to bolster the IRU against rejection claims in bankruptcy settings. The IRU contract language frequently states explicitly that the IRU grantee’s obtaining of the IRU and beneficial interest in the asset is not intended to be a revocable license, lease or grant of rights but is instead intended to be non-executory in nature and provide the broadest rights possible over the asset (short of legal title). Other typical contractual language states that the IRU grantee acquired its beneficial interest in the asset in advance of any bankruptcy petition by the grantor and on an indefeasible basis.

HOW STRONG IS THE IRU IN A BANKRUPTCY SETTING?

Despite the great lengths to which grantees often go to protect their IRUs, the treatment of IRUs in the U.S. bankruptcy context remained in doubt for many years, particularly as to whether the IRU contract is merely an executory contract which can be rejected by the debtor.

The doubt and concerns of IRU grantees has been alleviated significantly through various court decisions. The enforceability of IRU interests was most notably analyzed by the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York in WorldCom Inc and MCI WorldCom Network Services, Inc. v. PPLPrism, LLC. In 2002, MCI WorldCom Network Services, Inc. (“WorldCom”) and Cambrian Communications, LLC (“Cambrian”) entered into an agreement whereunder WorldCom purchased a 20-year IRU of six fibers in exchange for a one-time IRU fee and

a separate one-time maintenance fee. Cambrian subsequently filed for bankruptcy and agreed to sell such fiber pairs to PPL Prism, LLC (“PPL”). WorldCom then initiated an action against PPL seeking a declaration from the court that WorldCom had an exclusive beneficial ownership interest in the fibers covered under the original contract.

The court, in ruling in WolrdCom’s favor, determined WorldCom to have equitable title in the fibers in spite of the sale of the fiber pairs to another party in the bankruptcy context. While the court in WorldCom did not specifically rule on whether IRU agreements were executory contracts (and no court has since), the WorldCom court pointed to several factors in concluding that WorldCom’s interest in the fibers was a property interest, rather than a mere contractual interest. These factors, discussed in more detail below, now serve as helpful considerations for parties wishing to align themselves with best practices when entering into IRU Agreements.

IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS IN DRAFTING IRU AGREEMENTS

In light of the WorldCom decision and other recent industry developments, there are certain considerations to contemplate in drafting IRU Agreements to avoid issues in the event of a grantor bankruptcy:

1. The assets subject to the IRU must be identifiable. For example, the IRU fiber can be a fiber specifically identified in the IRU contract perhaps by number or other identifying information.

2. The IRU must be granted over a fixed term.

3. The IRU must be an exclusive interest granted in assets in favor of the grantee. In other words, only a single grantee should have the IRU rights over the asset. In a fiber setting, the grantee should be the only party with rights of access over the fiber (subject to maintenance arrangements agreed-upon in advance).

4. The purchase price of the IRU should be paid in full and upfront

5. The IRU interest must be irrevocable . While this characteristic of IRUs may be implied by its name, it should remain on the forefront of the minds of parties drafting the relevant agreement. The IRU should not contain any termination provisions that could make the grantee’s interest in the fiber or fibers appear as such only exists in a contractual setting. Such irrevocability is also bolstered by the upfront payment discussed above. STF

FERNANDO MARGARIT is Partner at Hunton Andrews Kurth. Fernando has over 25 years of experience representing clients in the telecommunications and technology industries, including in a wide array of infrastructure projects, project financings (debt and equity raises), and emerging technologies. Fernando is frequently recognized as a leader in his field based on his legal and industry experience.

Fernando’s practice has a particular emphasis on subsea and terrestrial network builds, and he has represented clients with respect to many of the world’s most significant and impactful subsea cable system builds. His involvement with these networks is often long term, extending from project inception to service commencement and subsequent commercialization. Fernando counsels his clients on all matters related to such network builds and development, including network supply contract negotiations and development; system construction and implementation issues (permitting, possible force majeure, etc.); consortium agreement negotiations and development; landing party agreements and arrangements; fronthaul and backhaul matters; terrestrial and marine maintenance agreements and arrangements; data center and cable landing station buildouts; colocation agreements; fiber sales (IRU and non-IRU) and exchanges; spectrum sharing arrangements; and related regulatory and network security matters. He also frequently advises his clients regarding network related project financings.

Fernando’s clients include global content providers, multinational telecommunications carriers, technology and media companies, governmental and quasi-governmental entities, equipment vendors, private equity firms, venture capital funds, and financial institutions.

URIEL A. MENDIETA is Partner at Hunton Andrews Kurth.

Uriel’s practice focuses on domestic and cross-border financing and corporate transactions, including mergers and acquisitions, structured finance, and infrastructure projects.

Uriel has represented project sponsors, developers and financial institutions in connection with the development and financing of a wide range of infrastructure projects, including subsea fiber optic cable systems, terrestrial fiber systems and other digital infrastructure and smart city and transportation technology.

BRITTANY E. BUHLER is Counsel at Hunton Andrews Kurth.

Brittany’s practice focuses on corporate and transactional matters, including mergers and acquisitions, financings and infrastructure projects. Brittany advises a broad range of clients, including in the telecommunications and financial services industries, in connection with their financing, capital markets and corporate needs. She also frequently assists clients in connection with their strategic business matters, collaborating with them to reach creative solutions.

MICHAEL J. SANCHEZ is Associate at Hunton Andrews Kurth. Michael is an associate in the Mergers and Acquisitions practice. In addition to providing general corporate counsel, Michael’s practice focuses on domestic and cross-border transactions.

While in law school, Michael was a member of the University of Miami School of Law’s Innocence Clinic where he assisted in the exoneration efforts of wrongfully convicted individuals in Florida. Prior to joining the firm, Michael co-founded a nonprofit organization in the Bahamas that delivered school supplies to local children in need.

In today’s globalized world, the ability to access and utilize the internet has become an essential element of economic development, social mobility, and individual empowerment. Bridging the digital divide and ensuring equitable access to the internet is not just a moral imperative; it is a critical step towards achieving a more inclusive and sustainable future for all.

While various factors contribute to the digital divide, one key obstacle lies in the infrastructure gap, particularly concerning the lack of adequate subsea cable connectivity in underserved regions. These undersea cables, often referred to as the “backbone of the internet,” carry a staggering 95% of global internet traffic.

Submarine cables play a pivotal role in bridging geographical distances, enabling seamless information exchange and fostering global collaboration, fueling digital transformation, and promoting digital inclusion. While the number of submarine cable announcements has been on the rise in recent years, further investments are needed to connect under-connected and under-served countries, particularly those in low- and mid-income markets in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Enhanced submarine cable connectivity improves international connectivity, and through competition, enables price reductions and access to highspeed, robust internet services. Access to multiple cables in

GOOD PRACTICES FOR SUBSEA CABLE POLICY Taking Action To Achieve Digital Inclusion

BY SONIA JORGE, EVELYN NAMARA, AND TAHANI IQBAL

a market enhances resilience and strengthens the connectivity infrastructure needed for a truly digital future.

With large numbers of users coming online in these countries, more must be done to liberalize these markets to achieve meaningful digital inclusion. Unequal access to subsea cable infrastructure creates significant disparities in internet connectivity across the globe. Policymakers should be motivated to address these challenges if they wish to achieve the dual missions of universal and meaningful connectivity.

Investing in subsea cables, therefore, is not just about infrastructure development; it’s an investment in the future of a digitally inclusive world. Recognizing this crucial connection, the Global Digital Inclusion Partnership (GDIP), a multi-stakeholder coalition dedicated to bridging the digital divide, has developed a policy brief titled “Good Practices for Subsea Cables Policy: Investing in Digital Inclusion.” The brief identifies multiple cases of exemplary regulation and highlights the need for regulatory action in the areas of competition and innovation, regulatory certainty and predictability, and infrastructure maintenance.

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE GDIP POLICY BRIEF

The policy brief emphasizes three key areas where policymakers can take action to promote good practices for subsea cable policy:

1. Support competition and innovation: Encouraging open access to subsea cable landing stations and interconnection points fosters competition among service providers, which can lead to lower prices and improved service quality for users.

The promotion of cost-based, open access policies, removal of foreign ownership restrictions, and simplified licensing rules with provisions for private use will enable healthy competition in this space. In Peru, for example, the removal of barriers to foreign investment and ownership, even in subsea cables, led to the widespread deployment of internet connectivity infrastructure across the country. The European Union has also recognized different types of networks that support digital transformation and do not require private networks to comply with the same authorization conditions as public electronic communications network operators.

2. Provide regulatory certainty and streamline permitting processes: Implementing clear, transparent, and efficient permitting procedures for subsea cable deployment eliminates unnecessary delays and bureaucratic hurdles. This creates a more predictable and attractive investment environment for private companies.

It is important to create a predictable and transparent process to support the operations of cable infrastructure. Processes designed to maximize stability and flexibility are key, and a nationally coordinated approach, much like the approaches adopted by the governments of Singapore and France, is helpful to these large-scale, long-drawn-out investments.

3. Ensure adequate protection and timely repair of subsea cables: Establishing clear regulations and frameworks safeguards subsea cables from accidental damage or malicious activities, ensuring network stability and resilience. Additionally, facilitating timely repairs through streamlined processes and exemptions from restrictive cabotage laws, when necessary, minimizes service disruptions and ensures network availability.

Cable breaks take place regularly, with over a hundred cuts annually around the world according to

Telegeography. As such, there is a need for diverse routing and landing points to ensure consistent connectivity is maintained. Recently, Tonga was cut off from the internet for around three months until their sole subsea cable was repaired following cable damage due to an undersea volcanic eruption, reinforcing the need for multiple connections and redundancies. Cable protection zones, such as those found in Colombia and Australia, also offer effective protection by restricting certain fishing, trawling, and other activities that could pose threats to such infrastructure.

India, for instance, is currently consulting on a licensing framework for and regulations for cable landings and has included multiple favorable amendments to its existing regulatory framework. Proposals such as identifying submarine cables within the Indian territory as critical and essential services, simplifying the process for licensing and approvals across government agencies, identifying protection zones or corridors, making provisions for Indian-flagged vessels to address repairs in a timely manner, and providing visa exemptions for foreign crew members on foreign-flagged ships, are indeed a good way to incentivize and encourage further investments in this space. However, at the same time, there are certain proposals that should be reconsidered, such as the need for deploying domestic submarine cables within India, considering the high costs and environmental implications compared to terrestrial alternatives, and avoiding mandatory ownership requirements for subsea cable landing stations, which could discourage new entrants and hinder investment in the market. This exemplifies the importance of careful policy considerations during the

development and implementation of subsea cable infrastructure projects. Striking a balance between promoting investment, ensuring network resilience, and fostering competition is crucial for maximizing the positive impact of subsea cables on digital inclusion.

CALL TO ACTION

The global community faces a collective responsibility to bridge the digital divide and ensure equitable access to the internet for all. By adopting good practices for subsea cable policy and fostering collaboration between policymakers, private companies, civil society organizations, and relevant stakeholders, we can leverage the power of subsea cables to create a more inclusive and interconnected digital future.

For further reading and a deeper dive into the specific recommendations outlined in this article, we encourage you to visit the Global Digital Inclusion Partnership’s website at [https://globaldigitalinclusion.org/] and access the full policy brief: “Good Practices for Subsea Cables Policy: Investing in Digital Inclusion.”

CONCLUSION

Investing in subsea cables goes beyond just expanding internet infrastructure; it represents an investment in empowering individuals and communities, fostering innovation, and driving sustainable development. By implementing good practices for subsea cable policy, as outlined in the GDIP brief and enriched by the insights from Tahani Iqbal, we can create an environment that encourages investment, fosters competition and prioritizes inclusivity. This collaborative effort holds the potential to bridge the digital divide, unlock the transformative power of the internet for all, and pave the way for a more just and equitable global digital future.

Together, let us work towards a world where the benefits of the digital age are accessible to everyone, no matter their location or background. STF

SONIA JORGE is the Founder and Executive Director, Strategy and Partnerships of the Global Digital Inclusion Partnership (GDIP), and an experienced leader and international digital policy expert. Sonia had successfully led global coalitions bringing together private sector, governments, and civil society actors from across the globe to deliver the policies needed to reduce the cost to connect and make universal meaningful connectivity a reality for everyone in global majority countries. As a policy advisor and gender equality advocate with experience in over 45 countries, she has led numerous digital policy and development projects in several regions and with international organizations, such as the World Bank, UNDP, UN Women, ITU, and for private sector companies and associations.

Sonia was recognized by apolitical as one of the World’s 100 Most Influential People in Digital Government in 2019. She serves or has served as a member and expert in a number of Committees, including CGAP’s Data Project, DFID’s Digital Access Panel for Africa, the ITU-UN Women EQUALS Partnership, The World Economic Forum’s Future of the Internet Initiative, the Broadband Commission Working Group on the Gender Digital Divide, the Advisory

Committee on International Communications and Information Policy (ACICIP) Subcommittee of the U.S. State Department on ICT4D, and the EU-AU Digital Economy Task Force. She is an Independent Board Director with KaiOS Technologies, an Advisory Board member of UNESCO’s Cetic.br Regional Center and a frequent speaker at international, regional and national forums.

Sonia was the co-founder and Executive Director of the Alliance for Affordable Internet (A4AI) until September 2022. She has a Masters in Public Policy from Tufts University and degrees in Economics and Business Finance from the University of Massachusetts.

EVELYN NAMARA is the Senior Programs Manager at the Global Digital Inclusion Partnership. In this role, she works closely with partners and stakeholders to strengthen GDIPs membership.

Evelyn is a technology enthusiast whose passion is to create ICT4D solutions that impact societies and communities. She loves working on issues at the intersection of Technology and Public Policy. She’s led multiple tech4dev projects in her native Uganda, including founding a fintech startup that works closely to distribute and disburse life-changing goods and services to beneficiaries.

Her last role was as a Project Manager and Researcher for the Alliance for Affordable Internet, where she managed technical assistance projects and internal programs. Previously, she managed the Special Interest Groups (SIGs) and Community Engagement at the Internet Society. Where she worked closely with different stakeholders and project teams to deliver value to SIGs. In addition to managing SIGs, she was responsible for bringing together the ISOC community by running InterCommunity events for ISOC members to collaborate, share, and learn from each other.

Evelyn is involved in internet governance work and was a two-time Internet Society Ambassador to the IGFs in Brazil and Mexico, a two-time ICANN fellow, and an AfriSIG fellow.

She is very passionate about empowering women in ICT and has mentored and trained numerous women in technology as a trainer for AfNOG and AfCHIX in the past.

Evelyn holds a Bachelor of Science in Computer Science degree from Makerere University and a diploma in Sustainable Business and Responsible Leadership from the Swedish Institute. She is an INSEAD Social Entrepreneurship Programme alumni.

TAHANI is an independent consultant with over 15 years of experience in digital and tech policy across the Asia Pacific (APAC) region. She has been a member of Meta’s Connectivity and Access Policy team in APAC, where she led infrastructure policy initiatives and accessibility efforts in the region, and managed digital regulatory and policy issues for Axiata Group Berhad in South and South East Asia. She has also worked with regional think tanks and research organisations, advocating for digital policy reforms to support digital development. Tahani holds a Masters in Public Policy from the National University of Singapore and a BSc in Economics and Management from the London School of Economics and Political Science, University of London.

GLOBAL NATIONAL SECURITY AND SANCTIONS: Key Hurdles that Submarine Cable Owners and Developers Must Navigate

BY ANDREW D. LIPMAN AND DENISE S. WOOD

INTRODUCTION

Carrying over 99% of all international communications, submarine cables remain vital to meeting global demands for data and the global market for submarine cables is projected to reach $48 billion by 2030. As the demand for connectivity continues to rise, through continued growth of cloud services and artificial intelligence advancements, the current geopolitical climate and national security concerns present challenges to submarine cable transactions. On one side of the spectrum, the United States, the United Kingdom, and other Western countries are experiencing a rise in economic nationalism that threatens international cooperation, while at the other end, countries such as China continue to assert political influence over the global economy. This East-West dichotomy is starting to affect the free flow of communications as we know it, and may lead to the Balkanization of the internet and global communications networks.

Subsea systems across the world have also become increasingly caught up in conflicts outside the context of U.S.-China competition, including large-scale cyberattacks targeting critical infrastructure. In 2022, for example, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security thwarted an international hacking group’s attack on private subsea cable servers located in Hawaii. The same year, following the suspected sabotage of Nord Stream gas pipeline in Europe, a Russian official threatened to retaliate against Western governments by

attacking Western subsea cables. In the Middle East, the Iran-backed Houthi group controlling parts of Yemen has threatened to cut cables in the Red Sea, a critical passage connecting Europe and Asia. More broadly, the U.S. has instituted hundreds of new economic sanctions against Russia since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, and against Iran and militant groups like the Houthis in the Middle East.

Against this backdrop, companies building and investing in subsea cables face complex regulatory hurdles. Given that projects often contemplate long-term relationships (for example, 25-year contract terms + expected useful life of the fiber optic system) among multiple consortium members from countries with divergent foreign policy interests, parties may face unique challenges in executing joint build, supply, landing, and capacity agreements, and in complying with ongoing national security-related obligations across multiple jurisdictions. This article addresses two key factors influencing subsea projects—sanctions and national security reviews of telecommunications license applications—with a focus on the United States. It offers strategies companies can proactively employ to mitigate risk in these areas, even in today’s uncertain times.

NATIONAL SECURITY REVIEW

Submarine cables landing in the United States are subject to regulation by the Federal Communications Com-

mission (“FCC”). Pursuant to the Submarine Cable Act of 1921, as implemented by Executive Order No. 10530 and Section 1.767 of the FCC’s Rules, parties must obtain an FCC license before operating a submarine cable in the United States. The FCC generally refers such applications to the Committee for the Assessment of Foreign Participation in the United States Telecommunications Services Sector (commonly known as “Team Telecom”), which comprises officials from the Departments of Justice, Defense, and Homeland Security, and any Presidential designees, who may also solicit ad-hoc input from other agencies in accordance with Executive Order No. 13913 of April 2020 (“E.O. 13913”), and whose charge to consider threats to Americans’ sensitive personal data in its reviews is further reinforced by Executive Order 14117 issued February 28, 2024 (“E.O. 14117”). After referral from the FCC, applicants are required to submit responses to a series of question sets that allows Team Telecom to assess any national security or law enforcement concerns with a cable project and the cable’s physical and logical security in a process that can last eight to twelve months or more.

When conducting its analysis of national security risks, Team Telecom considers two broad areas:

if it determines changed circumstances warrant more information gathering. In reviewing existing licenses, Team Telecom may ultimately decide to recommend additional mitigation measures, take no additional action with respect to the license, or recommend revocation, to address issues of concern related to national security, law enforcement, and foreign policy. The current geopolitical climate, including strained U.S.-China relations, has disrupted submarine cable partnerships and trans-Pacific system configurations. There are several examples of systems originally planned to land in Hong Kong that had to be reconfigured or temporarily or permanently abandoned due to Team Telecom’s concerns. Moreover, the recent E.O 14117 charges Team Telecom with prioritizing the initiation of reviews of existing submarine cable licenses “that are owned or operated by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of a country of concern, or that terminate in the jurisdiction of a country of concern.”

(a) the nature of the proposed network, including the security of the data running through it, and (b) the identity of the applicant(s), including the degree of foreign government control over such persons. Team Telecom ultimately makes a recommendation to the FCC on whether to grant, deny, or grant the application on the condition that the parties comply with certain mitigation measures. Depending on its risk assessment, Team Telecom may incorporate “standard” mitigation measures or more tailored, bespoke obligations. Common or “standard” provisions include obligations to prevent unauthorized access, maintain the ability to promptly disable traffic, report security breaches, maintain physical and logical security measures consistent with industry best practices, implement personnel screening procedures, and appoint dedicated security personnel available 24/7, among others. The obligations are ongoing, and Team Telecom may also conduct site visits, interview company personnel, or mandate third party audits to ensure compliance.

On the other side of the world, operators have also faced substantial delays due to China imposing onerous requirements or raising objections relating to permitting, causing parties to consider new system routes that avoid the South China Sea— for example, choosing to cross the Java Sea instead and foregoing landings in Hong Kong or China.

While beyond the scope of this article, it bears noting that the European Union (“EU”) may be trending in the same direction as Team Telecom to increase protection of submarine cable infrastructure from perceived security risks and prevent adversaries from controlling networks. In February, 2024, the European Commission released a recommendation on Secure and Resilient Submarine Cable Infrastructure proposing various policy measures to be adopted at both the EU and Member State levels aimed at securing subsea cable networks. Among other proposals, the Recommendation urges creating an “Expert Group” within the Commission that would comprehensively gather information on cables in Europe and assess risks, similar to Team Telecom. The Recommendation encourages Member States to adopt their own review procedures and ensure that operators maintain their cables consistent with best practices.

E.O. 13913, which formalizes the Team Telecom process, also contains a provision allowing the government to review existing licenses based on new risks (colloquially referred to as “Section 6 reviews”). In other words, Team Telecom has the discretion to reopen its investigation at any later point in time

THE IMPACT OF ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ON SUBMARINE CABLE TRANSACTIONS

Sanctions and trade controls can also impact large international submarine cable systems, influencing consor-

tium partner and vendor selection or causing supply chain restrictions or disruptions. Governments typically impose economic sanctions either unilaterally or multilaterally as punitive measures, prohibiting commercial activity or blocking transactions with specific individuals, entities, groups, or with regard to entire countries, for example, in response to human rights violations or terrorism, or to protect national security interests or further foreign policy objectives. Trade controls, on the other hand, manage the flow of goods, services and technologies across borders with the intent of safeguarding national security and economic interests and may include import/export controls, tariffs, licensing requirements, and other trade remedies. In the United States, economic sanctions are primarily administered by Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) within the U.S. Department of the Treasury and trade controls are primarily administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Department of State.

The U.S. has expanded sanctions and trade controls targeting Chinese technology companies, including by adding China-based suppliers to its “Entity List,” restricting export of covered items and services to listed entities. Short of a party or supplier itself directly becoming subject to sanctions or trade controls, submarine cable projects may also face related ancillary risks. For example, the Red Sea is a critical passage for global communications networks through which it is estimated that more than 90% of traffic connecting Europe, Africa and the Middle East flows. Obtaining permits required to lay cables through the Red Sea territorial waters of Yemen has presented significant challenges to suppliers over the course of the Yemeni civil war that began in 2014. In January 2024, the U.S. and U.K. announced the imposition of sanctions on key Houthi officials in response to their alleged support for acts of terrorism targeting commercial shipping in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. Notwithstanding the geopolitical upheaval around the Red Sea, sanctions may stymie the permitting process, complicate cable suppliers’ installations, or cause them to scramble for alternative solutions with purchasers to meet business-critical “ready for service” timelines.

These instances demonstrate why sanctions and trade controls warrant consideration as part of the overall risk analysis for any party involved in an international submarine cable system that involves a significant upfront investment. To be sure, some sanctions contain exceptions for telecommunications-related projects along with other humanitarian and critical infrastructure-related carveouts, and licenses may be available on a case-by-case basis. For example, OFAC allows transactions incident to the provision of telecommunications services involving Russia through a “General License” because such transactions

“support the flow of information” and benefit the Russian people. Similarly, persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction that would ordinarily be embargoed from doing business in the comprehensively sanctioned Cuba are allowed to establish a presence there in order to provide certain authorized telecommunications services. However, to the extent that a party would need to seek a specific license from OFAC to engage in a transaction not otherwise authorized, the process can take months or longer to process and is not guaranteed, which creates uncertainty around the investment.

STRATEGIES TO MITIGATE DEAL AND COMPLIANCE RISKS

The difficulty of aligning multiple parties in the negotiation of already complex joint build agreements, supply contracts, and attendant agreements for large-scale submarine cable systems is exacerbated by the fact that each party may individually be subject to different applicable laws and sanctions frameworks, and needs to protect multi-million dollar upfront investments on assets with expected useful lives of 25+ years.

The imposition of sanctions by the United States prevents U.S. parties from engaging, or continuing to engage, in certain transactions or activities with sanctioned entities and individuals—and failure to abide by these restrictions could subject U.S. parties to risk of enforcement action. Sanctions prohibitions may include the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any sanctioned entity or person, or the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such entity or person. In a worst-case scenario, this could mean that a U.S. party may not continue to derive benefits from an asset in which it has invested significantly, and it may also be left in a position where it cannot recoup its investment or a proportionate share thereof.

Similarly, for systems that land in the United States or its territories, parties may risk sinking funds into the construction of a cable system with other consortium members if Team Telecom declines to approve ownership by any one of the parties on the system and there is no commercial resolution to facilitate that party’s exit from the system to allow the system to otherwise proceed.

STRUCTURING DEALS TO MITIGATE SANCTIONS AND NATIONAL SECURITY REVIEW RISKS

When structuring large international submarine cable projects and consortia, companies can work to mitigate sanctions and national security review risks, for example, by: 1. Conducting comprehensive sanctions and national securityrelated diligence upfront.

Companies investing in subsea cables should conduct comprehensive due diligence on any potential partners, including relating to sanctions. In the case of U.S.-landing cables, diligence should include review of foreign ownership that could raise red flags for Team Telcom based on recent precedent.

2. Agreeing on sanctions frameworks that are applicable to all parties to the agreement and include contractual protections to the extent permissible by applicable laws and regulations.

Sanctions-related negotiations in the context of joint build, supply, landing, and capacity agreements naturally tend to become more fraught as more parties become involved. Parties should endeavor to agree to the same sanctions frameworks applying to all parties equally to avoid contractual ambiguity. Additional contractual protections could include, but are not limited to:

• Representations and warranties that parties and their affiliates are not and will not become subject to sanctions;

• Suspension or termination of the party that is in violation of sanctions from the consortium;

• Termination and disposal rights for parties that are not in violation of sanctions to the extent not prohibited (e.g., by facilitation rules); and

• Consent requirements for change of control or assignment.

In addition, for submarine systems landing in the United States, agreements should contemplate compliance with the FCC landing license and any Team Telecom mitigation instrument and include a mechanism to address the possibility of a negative determination to allow for system continuity.

3. Considering obtaining capacity/fiber from a single consortium member instead of joining a consortium.

Instead of dealing directly with all parties with ownership by joining a consortium, a party could instead obtain an indefeasible right of use or similar lease of capacity or fiber from a single consortium member that provides the grantee exclusive use rights for an extended term, often for the useful life of the cable. While deciding between these arrangements and direct ownership entails commercial considerations (e.g., higher costs, less control), these alternative structures may be appealing to parties seeking to limit risks associated with the multi-party systems.

Because national security reviews, sanctions, and trade controls can create thorny issues to navigate in large international submarine cable project negotiations, it is important that parties proactively conduct diligence and address risks with contractual protections, especially given

the significant upfront investment and expected long useful life of these systems.

STF

ANDREW D. LIPMAN practices in most aspects of communications law and related fields, including regulatory, transactional, litigation, legislative, and land use. Andy’s clients in the private and public sectors include those in the areas of local, long distance, and international telephone common carriage; Internet services and technologies; conventional and emerging wireless services; satellite services; broadcasting; competitive video services; telecommunications equipment manufacturing; and other high-technology applications. Additionally, he manages privatizations of telecommunications carriers in Europe, Asia, and Latin America.

To open the US local telephone market to competition, Andy has been involved in most new legal and regulatory policies at the Federal Communications Commission, at state public service commissions, in Congress, and before courts. He helped shape crucial provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and used similar approaches to promote the opening of foreign markets. He also obtained one of the first competitive local service and interconnection agreements in continental Europe and the first competitive fiber network application in Japan. Andy’s practice includes strategic analysis of companies’ telecom user agreements, renegotiating existing agreements, and negotiating new, more favorable telecom user agreements.

For nearly a decade, Andy served as senior vice president, legal and regulatory affairs, for MFS Communications, the nation’s largest competitive local services provider. One of the founders of MFS, Andy helped guide the company from startup to its eventual sale for $14.4 billion to WorldCom.

Frequently writing and speaking on telecommunications, Andy’s work encompasses more than 170 articles and five books, including two Dow Jones books on telecommunications. He occasionally appears on National Public Radio, C-SPAN, Bloomberg News Network, and ABC News, and he served on the editorial advisory boards of Phillips Publishing Company, Internet Law and Regulation, Telecommunications Alert, Telecommunications Reports, Telecommunications Regulatory Monitor, and The Satellite Compendium.

DENISE WOOD is a seasoned legal expert specializing in the telecommunications, media, and technology sector. Her expertise spans advising both domestic and international companies on a wide array of matters, including but not limited to, technology, wireless and satellite services, networking infrastructure, and regulatory compliance. Her role encompasses dealing with complex contracts like submarine cable agreements and procurement contracts for telecommunications services, as well as navigating the intricate landscape of federal and state licensing. Denise’s experience is not just limited to transactional and regulatory matters; she has also played a pivotal role in litigation, ensuring her clients navigate the challenges of the industry effectively.

Before her current stint at Morgan Lewis in 2022, Denise significantly contributed to Amazon Web Services (AWS) as a senior corporate counsel. There, she led the global telecommunications and networking infrastructure legal team, handling pivotal projects and contracts that underscored her prowess in the field. Her tenure at AWS is marked by her adept handling of intricate legal frameworks and her ability to lead her team through complex international legal landscapes, demonstrating her leadership and depth of knowledge in telecommunications law.

Throughout her career, Denise has been at the forefront of securing necessary approvals and compliance with regulatory bodies such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and state public utility commissions. Her work involves critical processes like mergers and acquisitions, asset sales, and navigating federal rulemaking proceedings, showcasing her comprehensive understanding of the legalities surrounding the telecommunications industry. Her adeptness in managing regulatory issues, including compliance with Universal Service Fund requirements and engaging with proceedings before the FCC, further cements her status as a leading legal authority in the telecommunications, media, and technology sectors.

THE ROLE OF REGULATION IN RECOVERING DECOMMISSIONED SUBSEA CABLES

BY ANJALI SUGADEV, ISABELLE CHERRY, MICHAEL BRAND AND MICHELLE ELSA GEORGE

Acable system is typically installed with a 25-year design life. However, the actual operational lifespan varies in practice (before it is deemed out-of-service and no longer used for transferring data). Although there has been much focus on the regulations that make the process of laying and operating cables difficult, there has been much less focus on the regulations that affect what happens to cables after they are decommissioned. As a result, there are several unanswered questions when it comes to the jurisprudence on cable recovery operations. In this article, we cover some of the international norms that govern out-of-service cables, alongside a few national regulations that affect them.

There are many factors cable owners must consider before deciding whether or not it is viable and worth recovering a cable. Submarine Cables: The Handbook of Law and Policy identifies a recommended checklist that helps cable owners to determine when a cable should be classified as out-ofservice (OOS).1 On this list there are several criteria - the

1 Burnett, D. R., Beckman, R., & Davenport, T. M. (Eds.). (24 Oct. 2013). Submarine Cables. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill | Nijhoff. https://doi. org/10.1163/9789004260337 (the Handbook).

cable must have reached the end of its designed life span (about 20-25 years); the cost of operating and maintaining the cable outweighs profits; the cable increases liability of the original company in terms of sacrificed gear and anchor claims; and, finally, new cable technology may make current cables effectively obsolete.2 Additionally, as Khalid, Mateen, Duckett, and Nunn observe, “cable owners should consider the costs associated with not recovering the cable and keeping it in place”.3 It is important to note that this checklist and expert suggestions are not international regulations but merely recommendations to help the creation of national legislation for decommissioning cables.

INTERNATIONAL REGIME ON OUT-OF-SERVICE CABLES

In the territorial sea, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) grants coastal States sovereignty which may include the right to regulate the removal of out-of-service cables.4

2 D. Burnett, “The Legal Status of Out-of-Service Submarine Cables” (2004) 137 Maritime Studies 22–27.

3 Reja Khalid Mateen, Daniel Duckett, Andrew Nunn, “Proactive Removal of Legacy Subsea Cables: Why an owner should recover?” 2023 SubOptic Conference paper, Bangkok.

4 Article 21(c), UNCLOS.

Unlike the specific requirement to remove abandoned structures or installations in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), UNCLOS is silent on the recovery of decommissioned cables.5 In the EEZ, UNCLOS specifically grants all States the freedom to undertake “other internationally lawful uses of the sea” related to the freedom of laying of submarine cables. Removal of unused cables from the seabed in the EEZ may be considered as a lawful use, unless explicitly prohibited under international law.

UNCLOS guards the freedom of all States to lay and repair cables by ensuring that the coastal State does not impede this freedom unilaterally.6 Therefore, a coastal State requiring complete removal of cables including parts outside of a State’s territorial sea is a jurisdictional overreach, unless it forms a condition of the installation permit itself.7 Additionally, the International Cable Protection Committee (ICPC), in its recommendation for the management of decommissioned and OOS cables, states that “under UNCLOS and customary international law, there is no requirement for the removal of OOS Cables in any maritime zone beyond the territorial sea”.8

In the high seas, beyond the outer limits of the continental shelf of any coastal State, no individual State may impose regulation to recover OOS cables.9 Thus, typically cable owners decide the future of OOS cables in this maritime zone.10

While there may be no clear articles in UNCLOS that explicitly regulate decommissioning efforts, the broader principles established in UNCLOS can serve as guidance both for national regulations and in establishing industry best practices. For example, the ICPC Recommendation calls for considering the possible effects of removal on the marine environment which is consistent with UNCLOS’s aim to ensure that the marine environment is protected.11 Kirkland and Bekker go further by arguing that coastal States might be able to regulate the decommissioning of cables within their EEZ and continental shelf, as a part of jurisdiction to protect and preserve the marine environment.12

It may be concluded that UNCLOS supports the freedom of cable recovery in the marine areas beyond national jurisdic-

5 Article 60(3), UNCLOS.

6 Art 56(2), UNCLOS. The Handbook, pg. 217.

7 The Handbook, pg. 219.

8 ICPC Recommendation #1, Management of Decommissioned and Out-of-Service Cables, Issue 14A, 12 June 2020, para 3.1.1 (ICPC Recommendation).

9 Article 89, UNCLOS.

10 ICPC Recommendation, para 3.1.1.

11 ICPC Recommendation para 3.2.2. and Article 192 of UNCLOS.

12 Kirkland and Bekker,“Jurisdiction Over Submarine Cables and the Good Faith Duty of Coastal States”, 2023 SubOptic Conference paper, Bangkok.

tion, while allowing the coastal State to legislate conditions in the territorial sea. However, in practice, absence of certainty in the international legal framework for addressing cable recovery exposes the cable recoverers to several difficulties. As expressed by Quynh Nguyen13 of Oceanic Environmental Cables GmbH,14 “The lack of clear regulations for OOS cables creates a complex situation, similar to the challenges faced when deploying them. Determining ownership, enforcing retrieval, and ensuring proper environmental practices are difficult without well-defined international rules.”

EXAMPLES OF NATIONAL REGULATIONS

Even though international treaties such as UNCLOS are binding on its Parties, the impact and implementation of those laws are realized through national legal systems. It is worthwhile to analyze how some of the national regulations address cable recovery.

NEW ZEALAND

New Zealand’s District Courts, on the application of the Minister of Transport, can order the removal of abandoned subsea cables within the country’s territorial sea if it is deemed that the cable is unlikely to be reused and poses a hazard to fishing or ship anchoring.15 At the owner’s expense, the cable should be removed within the timeframe and conditions specified. If the owner fails to do so, the Minister may undertake the work and then recover the costs from the owner.16

Cable installation in the EEZ requires marine consent from the New Zealand government. In the application for marine consent, the cable installer is required to provide a general description of how the submarine cable will be dealt with at the end of its life and when it is proposed to reach end of life.17

Also, New Zealand has elaborate rules for recovery of submarine cables that are associated with an offshore installation in the EEZ.18 An example of that is a submarine cable that is connected to offshore oil and gas platforms.

Prior to removing the cables, the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) must be provided with a decommissioning plan.19 Among other details, the plan has to include

13 https://www.linkedin.com/in/quynh-d-nguyen-3316b2199/

14 https://oecops.com/

15 Section 10(1), Submarine Cables and Pipelines Protection Act 1996.

16 Ibid.

17 Section 38, The Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012 as amended in 2017, read with Section 20(2)(c).

18 Section 9, Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects— Decommissioning Plans) Regulations, 2021.

19 Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects—Permitted Activities) Regulations 2013.

the marine management agencies that were consulted and identify stakeholders whose interests may be affected by the decommissioning such as the local iwi (Indigenous) authorities.20

In addition to this, within 60 working days after completing the decommissioning, a detailed report must be provided to the EPA including a description of the activity conducted, the start date and end date, and the coordinate(s) where the activity was conducted. The report must also include measurable estimates of the activity’s environmental impact. Since these submarine cables are associated with economic activities in the EEZ over which UNCLOS entitles coastal States with sovereign rights, the coastal State (New Zealand) is entitled to regulate its recovery operations.

UNITED KINGDOM

The United Kingdom requires a marine license for using a vehicle, vessel, aircraft, marine structure or floating container to remove any substance or object from the seabed within the UK marine licensing area (which includes the territorial sea and the EEZ).21 This law may apply to cable recovery as well. The Marine Management Organization (MMO) is responsible for deciding whether or not the decommissioning of a cable should take place. MMO reviews license applications on a case-by-case basis after consultation with the companies to ensure that environmental factors are considered.22

With regards to the EIA requirements, decommissioning of subsea telecommunication cables is not described as an activity for which EIA is required, however, an environmental report will need to be submitted to support the marine license application for removal.23 British Telecom is believed to be the first recipient of a license for decommissioning two segments of the TAT-14 subsea cable within Great Britain’s territorial waters.24

The new wayleave conditions in the UK have also provided an incentive to recover OOS cables.25 It requires the cable owner to continue to pay the full wayleave costs until the cable has been fully removed from territorial waters or if there is a valid reason approved by the Crown Estate for leaving the cable in-situ.26

20 Ibid.

21 Section 66(1)(8),(9) of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009.

22 Guidance, Make a marine license application, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ make-a-marine-licence-application

23 BT Technology’s Decommissioning of Subsea Telecommunication Cables in UK Waters, Guidance on Environmental Impacts, December 2020, pg.8.

24 Government of UK’s website, Marine Licensing in the MMO, https://marinedevelopments.blog.gov.uk/2022/10/11/mmo-marine-licensing-update/

25 See supra note 3.

26 Ibid.

CONCLUSION

Legislation regarding the recovery of cables requires extensive consultation among the relevant stakeholders –industry, governments, and environmental organizations – in order to effectively balance the needs of all parties. Additionally, communication between all involved parties closes the divide between law and law in practice. Nguyen reiterates “Developing a robust framework for OOS cable management holds the potential to unlock positive environmental, economic, and technological benefits. Not only can responsible decommissioning practices safeguard our oceans, but it can also lead to the recovery of valuable materials for recycling, promoting a more sustainable approach to lifecycle management for this essential infrastructure.” Thus, without an understanding of how law impacts cable recovery efforts in practice and the subsequent implementation of a favorable legal framework, the otherwise well-intentioned environmental benefits from recovery and recycling the recovered materials may not come into fruition. STF

ANJALI SUGADEV is a Regulatory and Permitting Manager at WFN Strategies, with deep expertise in international law, focusing on submarine cables and environmental sustainability. With a career spanning over a decade, Anjali has made significant contributions to the field, including the first legal research paper in 2017 on alleviating the permitting regime for repairing subsea cables in India. Anjali holds an LLM in International and Comparative Law from the National University of Singapore and has been recognized for her scholarly contributions with several awards, such as the prestigious ICPC Rhodes Academy Submarine Cables Writing Award in 2015.

ISABELLE CHERRY is an undergraduate student pursuing a B.S. degree in Environmental Policy and Management at the University of California, Berkeley. She is also a research assistant on the SubOptic Foundation’s Sustainable Subsea Networks research team. Her research explores sustainability metrics relating to the global manufacturing, deployment, and disposal of subsea telecommunications cables with a particular focus on how regulations impact cable recycling efforts.

MICHAEL BRAND is an undergraduate student at UC Berkeley pursuing a B.S. degree in Environment Economics and Policy. He is also a research assistant on the SubOptic Foundation’s Sustainable Subsea Networks research team. His research focuses on the intersection of behavioral economics, environmental policy, and public communication for the development and regulation of digital infrastructure.

MICHELLE ELSA GEORGE, a student at the Pacific Christian High School, is actively involved as a research assistant, focusing on the legal and regulatory issues impacting the subsea cable industry. Her research interests encompass the environmental sustainability of the cable networks and the role of law in addressing evolving uses of subsea technologies.

FEATURE

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCING THE SUBTEL FORUM APP

BY KIERAN CLARK

In the rapidly evolving landscape of submarine telecommunications, staying connected and informed is more critical than ever. The new SubTel Forum app is a pivotal resource for professionals, offering immediate and comprehensive insights into the industry’s pulse.

The SubTel Forum app is designed to serve as the digital confluence for news, analysis, and data, standing as a testament to SubTel Forum’s commitment to delivering cutting-edge information directly to your fingertips. It’s not just an app; it’s a gateway to a world where information is power, and timely access to that information is crucial. In an industry where a single development can have far-reaching implications, the app provides a platform for professionals to stay ahead of the curve. It offers a curated experience, sifting through the deluge of industry news and updates to bring the most relevant and impactful stories to its users.

The app’s design philosophy is built on user-centricity, ensuring that the interface and features are aligned with the needs and preferences of industry professionals. It’s a result of careful planning, extensive research, and a deep understanding of the challenges and information requirements of the submarine telecommunications sector. The app bridg-

es the gap between the fast-paced developments in the industry and the professionals who need to stay informed. By providing a streamlined, intuitive, and comprehensive resource, the SubTel Forum app is not just keeping professionals updated; it’s helping shape the future of global connectivity.

The SubTel Forum app marks a significant milestone in digital resource provision for the submarine telecommunications industry. It embodies a commitment to empowering professionals with a user-centric platform, thoughtfully designed to navigate the complexities of global connectivity. This commitment is mirrored in the app’s features, each crafted to address the specific needs of its users.

Core Features of the SubTel Forum App

The SubTel Forum app is engineered to keep its users at the forefront of the submarine telecommunications sector. It achieves this through a suite of tailored features:

Live Newsfeed: The app’s live newsfeed is not just a stream of updates; it’s a dynamic portal to the heartbeat of the submarine telecommunications world. Here, users can access real-time information about technological breakthroughs, project milestones, and industry trends. The feature is designed to offer a comprehensive view, ensuring that every piece of news is a blend of immediacy and depth.

Access to Publications: The app’s integration of key publications like the SubTel Forum Magazine, the Submarine Cable Almanac, and the Submarine Telecoms Industry Report is an innovative step. It transforms the app into a digital library, where the latest research, analysis, and thought leadership in the industry are just a tap away. This not only saves time but also enriches the professional knowledge base of the users.

Sharing Made Simple: The sharing feature goes beyond just a tool; it’s a bridge connecting users with their networks and communities. Whether it’s a groundbreaking story or a thought-provoking article, the app ensures that sharing this information is seamless and instantaneous. This feature enhances the collaborative spirit of the industry, fostering a culture of knowledge-sharing and community building.

Instant Notifications: The push notification system of the app is tailored to keep users in the loop without overwhelming them. It’s a fine-tuned balance between alerting users to the latest developments and respecting their time and attention. This feature is particularly benefi cial for professionals who need to stay informed but are often caught up in their demanding schedules.

USER EXPERIENCE AND INTERFACE

The design philosophy of the SubTel Forum app is rooted in simplicity and clarity. This is evident in its sleek and modern interface, which prioritizes ease of navigation. We have crafted an environment that is both visually appealing and functionally intuitive. The app’s layout, with its uncluttered design and logical organization, reflects a thoughtful approach to presenting a wealth of information in an accessible manner.

From the home screen to the detailed sections, every element is placed with the user’s journey in mind. The app employs familiar navigational cues and interactive elements, making it easy for users to find what they’re looking for without confusion or frustration. This intuitive interface design is crucial for an app that serves a wide range of content and functionality.

Understanding that its user base comprises individuals with varying degrees of comfort with technology, the SubTel Forum app is designed to be inclusive. Whether a user is a seasoned tech professional or someone less familiar with digital apps, the interface is approachable and easy to comprehend. The developers have ensured that the learning curve is minimal, making the app an accessible tool for all professionals in the submarine telecommunications industry, regardless of their tech proficiency.

ANTICIPATED UPDATES FOR 2024 AND BEYOND

The planned introduction of a comprehensive search function in 2024 is a significant leap forward for the SubTel Forum app. This feature will allow users to query the app’s extensive articles database in real-time, utilizing various adjustable criteria to tailor their search. Whether filtering by category, keyword, or other parameters, this enhanced search capability aims to make information discovery both efficient and user centric. This real-time querying and filtering will enable users to quickly access the most relevant and current content, tailored to their specific interests in the submarine telecommunications field.

The SubTel Forum app shines in its user-friendly interface, ensuring that navigation is a seamless experience.

Personalization is at the core of the app’s 2024 road map. Users will be able to enjoy features like category favorit-

ing, allowing them to tailor their newsfeed to show more of what they prefer. Push notifications can be customized based on category or specific keywords, ensuring users are alerted to content most relevant to them. Additionally, the ability to bookmark articles for easy access later will enhance the reading experience, making it more conve-

nient for users to revisit and engage with content that resonates with them.

A key goal for the SubTel Forum app in the upcoming year is the development of offline access. This feature will empower users to download content and engage with it without requiring an internet connection. This enhancement is particularly crucial for users who may be in areas with limited connectivity or wish to save data.

The SubTel Forum app’s 2024 updates will also introduce additional navigation inputs, enhancing user interaction and accessibility. Swipe gestures are being integrated to offer a more intuitive and natural way to navigate through the app’s content. This feature is particularly appealing for users who prefer quick and effortless browsing. Alongside this, the app is exploring the incorporation of voice command functionality, catering to those who favor hands-free operation or require an alternative form of input. These advancements in navigation are aimed at providing a more dynamic and adaptable user experience, aligning with diverse user preferences and needs.

CONCLUSION

The SubTel Forum app, as it stands today, is a robust tool that has already begun to redefine how professionals in the submarine telecommunications industry access and interact with critical information. It represents a fusion of technological innovation and user-focused design, setting a new standard in digital resources for the industry. The app’s current features, including the live newsfeed, access to key publications, intuitive sharing, and instant notifications, collectively create a comprehensive and engaging user experience.

Looking ahead, the future of the SubTel Forum app is bright and promising. The anticipated updates for 2024, including enhanced search capabilities, personalization options, offline access, and additional navigation inputs, demonstrate an ongoing commitment to improvement and user satisfaction. This evolution is not just a testament to technological advancement but also an invitation to users to be a part of this journey. We encourage our user community to engage with the app, provide valuable feedback, and contribute to shaping its future, ensuring it continues to be an essential tool for professionals worldwide.

EMBRACE THE DIGITAL WAVE WITH THE SUBTEL FORUM APP

The SubTel Forum app is readily accessible on both Android and iOS platforms, serving as a comprehensive hub for submarine telecommunications information. It stands as a testament to our commitment to providing up-to-date

industry insights, news updates, and networking opportunities right at your fingertips.

By downloading the SubTel Forum app, you gain immediate access to a wealth of information tailored to the submarine telecommunications community. It’s designed not just to keep you informed but to offer a platform where the future of digital connectivity in our industry can be discussed and shaped.

We invite you to join a global community of professionals and enthusiasts who rely on the SubTel Forum app to stay informed and connected. Download it today to ensure you’re always ahead in the dynamic and ever-changing world of submarine telecommunications.

We highly value your insights and feedback as we aim to continuously improve the app. Should you have any specific questions or suggestions, please don’t hesitate to email kclark@subtelforum.com. Together, we can make the SubTel Forum app an even more powerful tool for the global submarine telecom munications community. STF

KIERAN CLARK is the Lead Analyst for SubTel Forum. He originally joined SubTel Forum in 2013 as a Broadcast Technician to provide support for live event video streaming. He has 6+ years of live production experience and has worked alongside some of the premier organizations in video web streaming. In 2014, Kieran was promoted to Analyst and is currently responsible for the research and maintenance that supports the Submarine Cable Database. In 2016, he was promoted to Lead Analyst and his analysis is featured in almost the entire array of Subtel Forum Publications.

TFREE TRADE CHALLENGES

he submarine cable industry serves as the backbone of the global digital economy, facilitating the seamless flow of information, data, and communication across borders. However, despite its critical -role in promoting free trade and economic integration, the industry faces various challenges that impact its ability to operate in a truly open and competitive environment. In this article, we delve into the key free trade challenges confronting the submarine cable industry, exploring regulatory barriers, geopolitical tensions, disparities in access to digital infrastructure, market concentration and not competitive sourcing.

1. REGULATORY BARRIERS

One of the primary challenges facing the submarine cable industry is regulatory barriers imposed by national governments and regulatory authorities. These barriers can take various forms, including permit requirements, licensing fees, and data localization mandates, which can significantly hinder the deployment, operation, and expansion of submarine cable networks.

a. Permit Requirements: The process of obtaining permits for submarine cable deployment can be time-consuming

and costly, often involving multiple regulatory agencies and stakeholders. Delays in obtaining permits can result in project delays and increased costs for submarine cable operators, hampering their ability to meet growing demand for connectivity.

b. Licensing Fees: Some countries impose licensing fees or levies on submarine cable operators, which can add to the cost of deploying and operating submarine cable networks. These fees may vary widely from country to country, creating uncertainty and inconsistency in the regulatory environment for the submarine cable industry.

c. Data Localization Mandates: Certain countries require that data generated or transmitted within their borders be stored locally, rather than transmitted via international submarine cables. These data localization mandates can fragment the internet and hinder cross-border data flows, undermining the efficiency and effectiveness of submarine cable networks in facilitating global communication and trade.

d. Electronics spying suspicions: Concerns about potential electronic espionage have prompted several Western countries to ban certain Chinese components from their networks. These measures have reduced competition

CHALLENGES IN THE SUBMARINE CABLE INDUSTRY

BY PATRICIO REY

in the cable-building industry, effectively excluding cost-competitive providers from Western markets.

2. GEOPOLITICAL TENSIONS

Geopolitical tensions and security concerns pose significant challenges to the submarine cable industry, particularly in regions where political instability and conflict are prevalent. Disputes over territorial waters, maritime boundaries, national security, and the ongoing trade war between the United States and China can impact the deployment and operation of submarine cable networks, leading to disruptions and uncertainties for submarine cable operators.

a. Territorial Disputes: Territorial disputes between neighboring countries can complicate the process of laying submarine cables in contested waters, leading to delays and disputes over cable routes and rights-of-way. These disputes can escalate tensions between countries and undermine efforts to promote regional cooperation and connectivity.

b. National Security Concerns: In response to national security concerns, some countries may impose restrictions on submarine cable projects or require submarine cable operators to comply with stringent security require-

ments. These requirements may include encryption standards, cybersecurity protocols, and government oversight of submarine cable operations, which can increase compliance costs and regulatory burdens for submarine cable operators.

c. Commercial War between USA and China: The ongoing trade and technological tensions between the United States and China have introduced additional complexities for the submarine cable industry. The trade war between the two economic giants has led to the imposition of tariffs and trade restrictions on certain electronic components and technologies, including semiconductors and telecommunications equipment. These restrictions have disrupted global supply chains and raised concerns about the availability and cost of critical components used in submarine cable networks. Furthermore, geopolitical tensions between the United States and China have heightened scrutiny of Chinese involvement in submarine cable projects, particularly in sensitive regions such as the South China Sea and the Pacific Ocean. This has led to increased regulatory scrutiny and potential restrictions on Chinese companies’ participation in submarine cable projects, further complicating the geopolitical landscape for the industry.

d. Internet Divide: The growing divide between the Western internet and the Oriental internet presents unique challenges for the submarine cable industry. China has developed its own internet infrastructure, including submarine cable networks, which are subject to strong government regulation. This division complicates efforts to establish seamless connectivity and interoperability between Western and Chinese internet networks, potentially fragmenting the global internet and hindering cross-border communication and trade. This divide could grow as a repercussion of the Russia-Ukraine war, leading to a virtual split in the network of networks.

3. DISPARITIES IN ACCESS TO DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Another challenge facing the submarine cable industry is the digital divide, which refers to disparities in access to high-speed internet and digital infrastructure between urban and rural areas, as well as between developed and developing countries. While submarine cables connect continents and enable global connectivity, access to these networks is often limited to major urban centers and affluent regions, leaving rural and underserved communities with inadequate internet access and connectivity.

a. Urban-Rural Divide: In many countries, submarine cable infrastructure is concentrated in urban centers,

where population density and demand for connectivity are highest. As a result, rural and remote areas often lack access to high-speed internet and digital services, limiting economic opportunities and hindering social development.

b. Developed-Developing Divide: Disparities in access to submarine cable networks also exist between developed and developing countries, with many developing countries lacking the infrastructure and resources to participate fully in the global digital economy. The high cost of deploying and maintaining submarine cable networks can be prohibitive for cash-strapped governments and telecommunications companies in developing countries, further widening the digital divide.

4. MARKET CONCENTRATION

The submarine cable industry is increasingly dominated by a few digital giants which control significant portions of the global submarine cable infrastructure. The concentration of market power in the hands of these companies raises concerns about competition, innovation, and access to submarine cable networks for smaller players and emerging market entrants. Efforts to promote competition and diversify ownership in the submarine cable industry are essential for fostering a more open and inclusive market environment.

4. NON-COMPETITIVE SOURCING

Non-competitive sourcing can be a problem in the submarine cable industry, and it can have implications for free trade. When there’s limited competition in the sourcing of submarine cable components or services, it can lead to several issues:

a. Higher Costs: Limited competition often results in higher prices for submarine cable components and services. This can increase the overall cost of deploying and maintaining submarine cable networks, potentially leading to higher prices for consumers or reduced profitability for operators.

b. Barriers to Entry: Non-competitive sourcing can create barriers to entry for new players in the submarine cable industry. Smaller companies or new entrants may struggle to compete with established suppliers, limiting innovation and stifling competition in the market.

c. Dependency on a Single Source: Relying on a single supplier for submarine cable components or services can create dependency and increase vulnerability to supply chain disruptions. If the supplier encounters issues such as production delays, quality problems, or geopolitical tensions, it can have significant repercussions for sub-

marine cable projects and operations.

d. Reduced Innovation: Lack of competition may result in complacency among suppliers, leading to reduced innovation and slower technological advancements in the submarine cable industry. This can hinder the development of new, more efficient submarine cable technologies and limit the industry’s ability to adapt to evolving market demands.

e. Trade Imbalances: Non-competitive sourcing may contribute to trade imbalances between countries, particularly if one country dominates the market for submarine cable components or services. This can create tensions in international trade relations and may prompt calls for protectionist measures or trade restrictions.

Addressing non-competitive sourcing in the submarine cable industry requires promoting open and transparent procurement practices, fostering competition among suppliers, and diversifying sourcing options to reduce dependency on a single source. By promoting free and fair competition in the sourcing of submarine cable components and services, the industry can lower costs, spur innovation, and ensure the resilience and reliability of submarine cable networks in support of global connectivity and free trade.

CONCLUSION

The submarine cable industry faces numerous challenges, including regulatory barriers, geopolitical tensions, disparities in access to digital infrastructure, and market concentration. Addressing these challenges requires coordinated efforts by governments, industry stakeholders, and international organizations to promote a more open, competitive, and equitable market environment. By overcoming these challenges, the submarine cable industry can continue to serve as a catalyst for economic growth, innovation, and prosperity in the digital age. STF

PATRICIO ALBERTO REY SOMMER is General Manager of Desarrollo País (Fondo de Infraestructura S.A.) and an industrial civil engineer, with a master’s degree in engineering sciences from the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. In his professional career, he has worked in operational and financial areas of various companies such as Procter & Gamble, Budnik and Prize. He has also worked in the public sector, planning for the Regional Ministerial Health Authorities and Mayor of the Libertador Bernardo O’Higgins Region, where he led reconstruction projects after the earthquake of February 22, 2010. Previously, he covered the role of Manager of the National Network, of the Chilean Chamber of Construction (the union that brings together the main Chilean builders, contractors, and concessionaires). He currently holds the position of General Manager of Desarrollo País (Fondo de Infraestructura S.A.) from where he seeks to promote the development of sustainable and resilient infrastructure for Chile.

THE GLOBAL SUBSEA NETWORK 2024: A

BY JOHN TIBBLES

INTRODUCTION

Over the past few years, I have contributed articles for SubTel Forum based around a long experience in the subsea industry. Subsea Cables are now recognised as an absolutely critical part of global infrastructure but are beginning to be impacted by what are proving to be very challenging times.

STF founder and publisher, Wayne Neilsen, agreed with my suggestion that I review some of the comments I had made in past issues considering the circumstances prevailing today. Many such ideas and thoughts have recently become reality and as a result, I have taken another look at

where the industry is going at the start of 2024.

Two issues I’ve covered in past articles have been the politicisation of the industry and the increasing need for resilience as the global economy, not just the digital one, becomes ever more dependent on the subsea network. Cables have moved from being literally out of sight and out of mind to major national and international news stories.

Resilience has, in my view, taken a back seat in recent years to high capacity and low latency as driving forces for many additions to the network. High capacity brings with it economies of scale and thus lower end-user costs.

This is especially important in bringing affordability to the developing world. Low latency brings improved networking and reduced response times, but competition for the right numbers in this area has led to a lack of redundancy and therefore network resilience. Low latency is a legitimate goal but not at the expense of no latency because the physical connection has been interrupted or lost.

1. POLITICS (AND WARS )

Politics too often leads to war or military activity to give it a politically correct name, but military requirements feed back into politics. In the subsea cable world, ‘our world’ we have seen cables go from an invisible global resource to both targets and tools. The last two years have seen concerns about potential damage, disruption and interference with subsea cables escalate to outright attacks resulting in direct and collateral damage. This of course focuses on the Red Sea and the strife surrounding its southern end where there are no international waters and the straits are controlled by states with extreme internal problems, and a mix of poverty and violence. Not where you would like to send your shiny new cable ship to lay new systems or repair damaged ones. Media headlines across the world have carried stories of insurgents deliberately interrupting cables on this important route or them being damaged by sinking shipping. This all too real activity highlights vulnerability far more than speculation about what one state or another may have been doing to interdict cable routes or intercept their content.

With these issues in mind, we are already beginning to discern government involvement in the selection of suppliers:-

The EU has some new programmes to support projects which may land in an EU country or where there is significant EU interest. Slightly hamstrung by the fact that many

of its members are landlocked and perhaps do not see these issues affecting them,

There is evidence of a more ‘America First’ approach in the USA after decades of letting the market decide there is now visible and direct US government interest and financial support for such a policy’

Perhaps an ‘Asia for the Asians’ approach in that region means the third major supplier, NEC, continues to win business there providing an option alongside the two ‘Western’ entities, while HMN continues China’s presence in the supply market

With the increasing political involvement, perhaps we will see systems being deployed not so much for capacity growth but for resilience to ensure the internet that we rely on so much is indeed ‘always on.’ That’s often a hard business case to make and again looks to be an opportunity for involvement of government policies rather than purely financial objectives.

2. ‘GLOBAL’ GOOGLE

What has happened to ‘the OTTs’ ? Just a few years ago it looked as though the market for new major systems was being radically shaken up as the American data behemoths entered the subsea market in force with new systems involving Google, Facebook (as they were), Microsoft and Amazon. These initial stages saw much disruption to the market as they sought the lowest price per bit and desegregation of system components. In turn, this led to ‘open systems and deployment of new technology, much higher fibre counts and adoption of less costly materials ‘

The companies are still in business of course but seemingly all but Google and to a much reduced degree, Facebook/ Meta have vanished from the cable development business.

As a result, Google, who I am sure never intended things to work out like this, are by far the largest party in the subsea market. So, the question must be asked. are they too big? Their influence is seemingly on par with that AT&T had back in the days of bilateral agreements and largely monopoly legacy ‘telcos.’

In addition, recent developments have included direct, not even covert ‘support’ in terms of financial subsidies and political influence by the US Government. They, in turn are bound to have a preference for a US system supplier. By its very nature, this must impact contract awards and, thus, the system supply market. In addition, Google has seemingly entered the wholesale market in a substantial way inevitably impacting choice and pricing in the increasingly important market for fibre pairs.

’ Global Google’ perhaps more by accident or design

appears to have become the US Government’s chosen instrument to deploy what has been described as the ‘Trusted Internet.’ The implication is that other internets exist which cannot be trusted to the same extent and are thus deemed insecure for use by Western customers. What might be the consequences of these actions for suppliers, developers and users of the worldwide subsea cable community?

3. THE NEW WORLD ORDER

Aside from the dominance or ‘excessive influence’ of Google, the rise of the internet has changed the usage of telecom networks. While they are still critical for established global commerce and finance the internet is being democratised by another factor- people or more correctly population. In the past, the cost of oceanic communications meant end users paid a lot for the privilege, However the global reach and scale of the internet and the subsea network that allows it to grow globally mean that people are beginning to matter as much as dollars. Access to the internet and communication with families, friends (real and virtual) and millions and millions of pre-working-age children and youth communicate globally on a scale unimagined 30 years ago. Thus, demand growth is not confined to global financial and trading centres but is springing up everywhere driven by the OTT need to connect data centres to data centres and the increasing connection of more and more people to the internet. Both these factors are increasing demand for capacity even beyond the levels already experienced.

5G mobile and the increase in access to the net it brings, is driving democratisation of the internet, demonstrating how population size has become a major factor in the growth of digital services. It is not just the young in New York, Paris or Tokyo who send TikTok videos, Meta messages, music, pictures of pets, sport and a million other topical issues. Those same messages ‘clicks and bits ‘ can now be generated by the young on the African savannahs, towns and villages across Indonesia’s vast archipelago and the megacities in China and India The difference being that there are many many more of them than in the less populated western/ developed world.

While Google and at least until 2 Africa is finished , Meta is targeting these markets legacy telco network providers in these countries are awakening to the value and importance of subsea cables and how their country can play a major part in the development of the global network. Important as the hubs like London, Singapore, Los Angeles and Tokyo will be increasingly challenged as key network nodes by the likes of Egypt, Indonesia, Kenya

and Saudi Arabia. A good example is Indonesia, which for years focussed on accessing the world via Singapore, Indonesia is embarking on a program to build multiple new cable projects across the Indian and Pacific Oceans commensurate with its size and scale and will inevitably overtake Singapore and Australia as key points on the cable network in that region through its sheer size and population.

In the Indian Ocean Region, a changing Saudi Arabia has clear ambitions to become the hub of the Middle East, with its size, population and wealth dwarfing the smaller but hitherto more entrepreneurial states. India and China between have close to one-third of the world’s people and will surely have more impact on the network of the future than the major nodes of today. These are not new developments, but they have become more evident than a couple of years ago, especially in Indonesia and Saudi; one has the population and the other the money.

CONCLUSIONS (AND HOPES?)

Is the USA able to deploy a ‘trusted internet’ concept or will sheer population size and growth away from the West overwhelm that ambition with rival networks? Whatever the outcome these new factors will exert huge influence on the traditional network nodes and paths as new hubs develop.

Can two internets emerge? One based around the US and its friends another China and its friends. Will this influence the deployment of new systems to avoid the established nodes or areas of influence; like a direct China-South America system as an example a renewal of interest in the BRICS concept?

A very recent and very good CNN article about Subsea cables and their importance ends with the sentence ‘The resilience of the undersea network is crucial to all of us. We can do better.’-to which I would ask Can We??

I have spent my working life in international telecommunications, and in my view, it has always meant bringing people around the world together. That’s what submarine cables have achieved. It would truly be a shame if the politics surrounding them contributed to separation and division. STF

JOHN TIBBLES has spent a working lifetime in global telecoms much of it in the subsea cable arena where he held senior positions responsible for subsea investments and operations at Cable and Wireless and MCI WorldCom and as an internal advisor consultant to Reach and Telstra Reach. John spent many years working for C&W in Bermuda and established the first private subsea cable offshore company and has worked extensively with both consortia and private system models. He has a wide background and expertise in most commercial matters of international telecoms and since ‘retiring’ he has remained active in the industry as a consultant, commentator and at times a court appointed expert and has been a panellist and moderator at international events.

FEATURE

FORECASTING THE VOYAGE:

ABSTRACT

A Statistical Expedition into Submarine Cable System Development Success

BY SYEDA HUMERA AND KRISTIAN NIELSEN

This report introduces a predictive model designed to forecast the success and timelines of submarine cable system development, from concept to commissioning. It leverages the “Cable Dates” dataset for a detailed analysis, providing statistical insights into the likelihood of advancing through key development stages: Announcement, Contract in Force (CIF), Marine Survey, Manufacturing, and Ready for Service (RFS).

The model offers a comprehensive overview of the development process, highlighting the initial momentum at the announcement phase and identifying CIF as a critical indicator of financial commitment and project viability. It notes that the stages following CIF, while technically and logistically more complex, show a higher predictability in terms of project advancement. The report quantifies the average time between milestones, noting a relatively swift transition from CIF to Marine Survey and longer periods from Survey to Manufacturing and Manufacturing to RFS, reflecting the inherent challenges of engineering and implementing submarine communications infrastructure.

decision-making in an industry influenced by financial, technological, and timing factors, underlining the critical role of accurate forecasting in achieving success.

CONCEPTUAL MODEL

The Conceptual Probability Model is based on key observations of submarine cable system development, pinpointing essential milestones that indicate the project’s progress through its lifecycle. These milestones include the initial announcement, Contract in Force (CIF), start of Marine Route Survey, beginning of manufacturing, and the final step of commissioning leading to Ready for Service (RFS). These stages form the core of our model. The CIF milestone is especially significant, acting as the key indicator of financial viability and commitment. After reaching CIF, the likelihood of the project continuing and successfully completing increases significantly.

METHODOLOGY

By providing these statistical analyses, the report serves as a practical tool for industry stakeholders, guiding them through the complexities of submarine cable projects. It emphasizes the importance of data-driven planning and

The methodology involves compiling data from the provided “Cable Dates.csv” file, extracting key dates, and calculating the interval between different stages. This information is then used to assess the likelihood of progression to subsequent stages.

To adapt the methodology, you’ve provided for the anal-

Figure 1: Conceptual Probability Model

ysis of the “CableDates.csv” data and to create a predictive model like the approach used in the Subtel Forum analysis, we would follow these steps:

1. DATA COMPILATION:

We have utilized the provided “Cable Dates .csv” dataset, which includes various stages of the submarine cable system lifecycle. This dataset serves as the foundation for our analysis, mirroring the initial step of compiling data for submarine cable systems, including those that did not reach fruition.

2. DATA IDENTIFICATION

Taking the structure of the dataset in mind, we extracted the following fields for analysis:

• Initial Announcement of the system

• Contract in Force (CIF)

• Start of Marine Route Survey

• Start of Manufacturing

• End of Commissioning / Ready for Service (RFS)

3. CALCULATION OF DAYS

the dataset to summarize its main characteristics, identify patterns, and understand the distribution of important variables, particularly the dates associated with each key milestone in the cable system lifecycle.

2. DATA TREATMENT

During this stage, we address any issues of data quality, such as missing values, outliers, or inconsistencies. Decisions on how to handle these would be documented to ensure the robustness of the model.

We calculated the applicable number of days between the identified milestones. This involved computing the intervals between the initial announcement and CIF, CIF to the start of the Marine Route Survey, and so forth, capturing the temporal dynamics essential for predictive modeling.

4. ADDRESSING MISSING DATA

When some entries didn’t have specific dates, we used logical estimates or notes to keep the model accurate. This method made sure missing data didn’t affect our analysis, leading to a stronger predictive model.

5. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PREDICTIVE MODEL

The predictive model was formulated based on probability analysis, demonstrating the likelihood of a project advancing to subsequent stages based on the data. This probabilistic framework was informed by the descriptive analysis of the dataset, treatment of data inconsistencies, and modeling based on observed patterns.

PREDICTIVE MODEL

1. DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS:

This initial phase involves a thorough examination of

3. DATA MODELING

Here, we develop a statistical model using the cleaned data to predict the probability of a cable reaching each stage. Techniques like logistic regression or survival analysis are suitable for modeling the likelihood of events happening over time, such as reaching CIF or RFS stages.

4. ESTIMATION OF PERFORMANCE

We estimate the model’s performance by validating its predictions with a subset of the data not used in its training, employing methods like cross-validation. We calculate performance metrics such as accuracy, precision, recall, the area under the ROC curve, or the R-squared value.

Using these steps as a framework, we apply specific elements from our “CableDates.csv” data to this approach.

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS:

• Calculate the frequency and percentage of cables that reach each stage.

• Determine the average, median, and range of days between each milestone.

• Decide how to handle cables with missing date information for certain stages. Options include excluding these cables from the model or imputing the missing data if appropriate.

DATA MODELING

• Develop a predictive model to calculate the probability (y) of making it to each phase:

• Concept (x=0): Assumed to be 100% since all cables start at this stage.

• Project Announcement (x=1): Probability based on cables reaching the announcement stage.

• CI F (x=2): Probability based on cables reaching CIF after the announcement.

• S urvey (x=3), Manufacturing (x=4), and Commissioning (x=5): Sequential probabilities based on reaching each stage.

ESTIMATION OF PERFORMANCE:

• Estimate the predictive power (R value) of your model using the probabilities and time intervals between stages derived from the historical data.

The “Average Number of Days to Start of Phase” chart provides a clear look at how long each phase of submarine cable system development typically takes, based on real project data. It starts with the Contract in Force (CIF) phase, highlighting the critical point where financial commitment kicks off the project. From CIF to the Marine Survey, the average is 159 days, indicating a busy period of surveying and groundwork for the next steps. Then, it takes about 381 days on average to move from the Survey to the Manufacturing phase, showing the challenges of turning plans into actual cable systems. The last step, from Manufacturing to becoming Ready for Service (RFS), averages 559 days, reflecting the complexities of engineering, logistics, and environmental considerations in getting the cables operational underwater. Each part of the chart shows the average time for these phases, helping those in the industry predict and plan for the time needed to navigate through the development of submarine cable systems.

5.CONCLUSION:

The predictive model developed from the “CableDates.csv” data is a valuable tool for forecasting how submarine cable system projects progress. Centered around the key Contract in Force (CIF) milestone, it shows the journey from a project’s announcement to its completion, helping stakeholders understand the steps involved in deploying cable systems. The model is grounded in real data, giving us a way to statistically predict and plan for the successful setup of submarine communication networks. Its accuracy is especially useful in an industry that relies heavily on technological progress and global connectivity.

Our analysis shows that it takes an average of 393 days to go from a project’s announcement to the CIF stage, a time filled with intensive negotiation and planning. The next step, moving from CIF to starting the Marine Survey, takes about 159 days, marking a quick shift to preparing the project’s physical aspects. The phase from Survey to Manufacturing lasts an average of 381 days, highlighting the detailed work of designing and making the cable. The final stretch, from Manufacturing to Ready for Service (RFS), is the longest at an average of 559 days, pointing out the challenges in installing submarine infrastructure.

This timeline, backed by our model’s analysis, provides a solid foundation for stakeholders to anticipate how long projects will take and what obstacles they might face. It breaks down the project stages into a clear sequence, offering a practical tool for planning and risk management. As the submarine cable industry evolves, this model will become increasingly important for improving project predictions, optimizing the use of resources, and ensuring the successful implementation of vital undersea communication networks. STF

SYEDA HUMERA, a graduate from JNTUH and Central Michigan University, holds a Bachelor’s degree in Electronics and Communication Science and a Master’s degree in Computer Science. She has practical experience as a Software Developer at ALM Software Solutions, India, where she honed her skills in MLflow, JavaScript, GCP, Docker, DevOps, and more. Her expertise includes Data Visualization, Scikit-Learn, Databases, Ansible, Data Analytics, AI, and Programming. Having completed her Master’s degree, Humera is now poised to apply her comprehensive skills and knowledge in the field of computer science.

KRISTIAN NIELSEN is based in Sterling, Virginia USA. He has more than 15 years’ experience and knowledge in submarine cable systems, including Arctic and offshore Oil & Gas submarine fiber systems. As Chief Revenue Officer and Quality Director, he supports the Projects and Technical Directors, and reviews subcontracts and monitors the prime contractor, supplier, and is astute with Change Order process and management. He is responsible for contract administration, as well as supports financial monitoring. He possesses Client Representative experience in submarine cable load-out, installation and landing stations, extensive project logistics and engineering support, extensive background in administrative and commercial support and is an expert in due diligence.

PM 2.0 by

PROVEN PROCESSES AND METHODOLOGIES

• Defined Processes

• Template Driven

• PMP Based Project Management Approach

• Rigorous Documentation Controls

• Quality Assurance Focused

• Secure Records Storage

• Accessible and User Friendly

INTRODUCING THE VIRTUAL REP

• In-Field Analysis Without In-Field Risk

• Remote real-time analysis and reporting without the added cost of today’s in-field representation liabilities.

REQUEST A QUOTE

BACK REFLECTION

OPERATING THE CABLE IN THE EARLY DAYS

BY PHILIP PILGRIM

This edition’s Back Reflections contains the reminiscing of a cable engineer from Newfoundland. The document was published by the historian and retired telegrapher, H. F. Shortis. In this record, the author details a smattering of interesting though often, unrelated, items. I have taken the liberty to insert commentary [in brackets] to provide further colour.

OPERATING THE CABLE IN THE EARLY DAYS

The death of John Temple in England, at the age of 83 [Atlantic Cable Engineer 1839-1922 who deployed first 3 Atlantic Cables], brought out details of the difficulties which beset cable engineers in their attempts in 1857-58, also in 1865-66 to bind Europe and America with an electrical conductor. Halifax has a lady resident whose husband had charge of the cable end at Bay Bulls Arm, Trinity Bay, Nfld. (now Heart’s Content). As the writer spent several years in that locality in the sixties you may print the narrative of various incidents of that time as a continuation of the romance. Tourists travelling over the Newfoundland Railway would not yawn when passing through the narrow isthmus at Bay Bulls Arm, if they knew of its old-time importance and that the big fellows of finance in London and New York were making the trenched Western Union cables under the rails hot with banking problems and market quotations.

As stated in the editorial, the 1858

Thomson’s Mirror Galvanometer (thanks to Science Museum)

cable carried a feeble current for a time, then “quit”. The method of operation was reverse of 1866 when Thomson’s delicate galvanometer could reflect trans-Atlantic signals from a battery contained in a guncap. DeSauty, the Superintendent, at Bay Bulls Arm, nursed the dying cable, and made periodical reports to the American public and Oliver Wendell Holmes [American Physician & Poet 1809-1894] got after him with his dry humour. When communications ceased the house built for the accommodation of the staff was sold to an old Englishman, a typical John Bull of the London “Punch”. It was taken across the neck of land to Placentia Bay and was our home for two years, 1866-68. In that building we heard of Wellington’s campaign in Spain and Portugal from one who had been in St. Jean de Luiz with the transports. Our recollection of the 1858 cable was supplemented by stories of the old gentleman’s acquaintance with Cyrus Field and other members of the expedition. The Agamemnon was-a two decker muzzle loading warship. The United States ship “Niagara” was a different type, high out of water, and the chaffing of Mr. Field and others as to the superiority of the American over the British warship ruffled the old man, and to their taunts he tartly replied, “Aye, sir, but many’s the man ‘of war I’ve seen that would soften her sides”. We had one of the iron cable buoys rusting on the beach. It was about fourteen feet long and four in diameter. Now they are pear shaped. The fecound Brer Rabbit had not then been imported from Nova Scotia but we had Brer Arctic Hare laying low in the daytime, and at night gamboling about disturbing Sir Caribou in her slumbers Brer Wolf with his great toofies killed

sheep near the office door.

Before being stationed so near the landing place of the 1858 cable two delightful years were spent at a small lead mine, Lamanche, operated by

a New York company [Ripley and Company of New York]. It was about twelve miles from Bay Bulls Arm, and at the time of Cyrus Field’s arrival in the Niagara another brother of that distinguished family [Matthew Field] was living in this obscure village. The Manager of the mine was Major ----[Roswell Sabine Ripley], a West Point officer, and afterwards Commandant at Charleston, S.C., during the Civil War. I think it was Col (Lord) Wolsely, the British representative with the Confederate Army who published a book and mentions the commandant’s pride in the forts under their inspection, his language sparkling with old time profanity. Later he joined the Egyptian Army. [Cyrus Field obtained the Lamanche Galena Mine. It as part of land grants provided in his charter with the Government of Newfoundland].

The years between 1858 and 1866, when the Atlantic Cable was successfully laid, were full of tragic events, beginning with the secession of the South-

1858 Atlantic Cable Station, Bay Bulls Arm, Nfld.

R.S Roswell Lamanche Mine Manager 1857

BACK REFLECTION

ern States. At Cape Race (Nfld.) the Associated Press maintained a boat and crew to intercept passing steamers for the latest news and became a point of considerable importance. The Trent Affair, when Mason and Slidell were taken from a British steamer by a Northern warship nearly brought on a war with Great Britain. The latest movements of the American armies, and other news, came by slow stages via Cape North and Cape Ray to catch eastbound steamers. A tin cylinder thrown from a Westbound steamer contained the European news which was forwarded over the badly insulated wire to New York and paid for according to its importance and date. It was risky business in foggy weather. The Allan liner Anglo Saxon called there in April and went ashore at Clam Cove (1863), and 307 souls were lost-137 rescued. Although the distance from St. John’s was sixty miles it was almost impossible for the ear to catch the appalling news from the instrument. The sealing steamer “Bloodhound” was hurriedly despatched and picked up many in open boats including Hon. John Young and family of Montreal. Two years ago, we saw a monument near the C.P.R. docks in Montreal to perpetuate his name with the industrial growth of that great city.

A drab greyhound of the sea came into St. John’s engaged a medical man from an outport and slipped out of the harbor for an unknown port. The doctor was an Apollo in appearance with Parisian training. The following year in that obscure little settlement, Lamanche, the doctor, broken in health, through dissipation, told his experience, while we supported him in his walk, of the trip to Nassau, thence to Wilmington, N.C.

Stealthily steaming for the entrance to that port with all lights out they were suddenly enveloped in an illumination from the blockading squadron, and the

order “Surrender or we fire”. The blockade runner had to surrender and the doctor, after a term of imprisonment, was released through Cyrus Field’s in-

Associated Press “Foreign Press Office” Cape Race, Newfoundland

Wreck of the Anglo Saxon (by: Anton Melbye and John William Bottomley)

fluence. Of course, in listening to his narrative we did not tell him of the American Consul in St. John’s having an eye open, or of our part, especially, in the surrender.

We rarely saw a dictionary in those days. When the sad news of the assassination of President Lincoln, went through to Cape Race the office boy in St. John’s became excited. Not understanding the gloom of others, he tackled the first caller, a politician of the same height and features of the dead president, and whispered, “Mr. ----- what’s the meaning of the word assassination”? “Shtuck” was the

grave reply. The President was shot in a Washington theatre.

The depressing news of the failure

of the 1865 cable expedition was brought to Heart’s Content by H.M.S. “Vesuvius”. She had lost the other ships in bad weather. About that time the Western Union Telegraph Co., was despatching Kennan with a party from San Francisco to explore a route in Siberia for an overland wire to St. Petersburg; connecting with Alaska by cable across Behring Strait. July 27th., 1866 was a bright day when, with the opening of the St. John’s Telegraph Office, we learned that the cable was O.K. In a short time, an editorial from the London Times extolling Cyrus Field and his associates as the benefactors

Excerpt of Manchester’s Guardian Paper April 27, 1865

1864 Proposed Collins’ Overland Route (Alternative to Atlantic Cable)

BACK REFLECTION

of the human race, was sent out to the newspapers. The “hoy bells” of the Roman Catholic Cathedral were soon heard over the city. The following evening, we received marching orders and the first strike known to telegraphers broke out owing to the treasury being empty. We were expected to walk eighty miles and live on air and water. A grocery store settled the strike, and with a paper collar, gun and ammunition as luggage, we reached our

destination in forty-six hours to relay cablegrams at five dollars per word of four letters. In a short time, the treasury was well supplied with funds. Our work for some months after the ocean cable started business was very fatiguing owing to the wretched condition of the wire. In hot weather every operator in his lonely office on the south coast of Newfoundland would look wistfully for a break in the western sky to dry the old clothes

lines. Mrs. Graham Bell of Baddeck, in a little piece staged in that town makes the Cape North Office the scene for overwork. Every man was loyal to his employers and worked till he dropped from weariness, but at the time Mary Ellen made her appearance in the moonlight at Lamanche...., but that story is for the ear of a Saul of Tarsus.

The Atlantic Cable being a commercial success made Cyrus Field a

celebrity in Europe and America, but gradually he drifted into the vortex of New York business activity and dropped from the public mind. Perhaps he should be remembered more for his efforts to remove the bitterness that existed in the United States against England. The cable was freely used in the early days to convey speeches of his English guests for a better understanding between the two nations. When Dean Stanley, of Westminster Abbey, was his guest in New York, Mr. Field proposed to the American people the erection of a monument to mark the spot at Tarry-town where Major Andre of the British Army was hanged by Washington’s orders. The New York papers were vitriolic in their criticism of the proposal. Many years ago, the writer suggested to a young

New Englander a jollification on the fourth of July-Independence Day. He looked at me and said, “You, a British subject and to suggest such a thing”’. Why not? We were all of the same stock of British liberalism, ready to fight rather than submit to a despotic ship-tax, tea-tax, or any other form of oppression. STF

PHILIP PILGRIM is the Subsea Business Development Leader for Nokia's North American Region. 2021 marks his is 30th year working in the subse a sector. His hobbies include "Subsea Archaeology" and locating the long lost subsea cable and telegraph routes (and infrastructure). Philip is based in Nova Scotia, Canada.

REFERENCES:

https://collections.mun.ca/digital/collection/xmasannuals/ id/1066/rec/37

https://collections.mun.ca/digital/collection/cns_period/ id/27393/rec/1

De Sauty

by Oliver Wendell Holmes

AN ELECTRO-CHEMICAL ECLOGUE

The first messages received through the submarine cable were sent by an electrical expert, a mysterious personage who signed himself De Sauty.

Professor Blue-Nose

PROFESSOR

TELL me, O Provincial! speak, Ceruleo-Nasal! Lives there one De Sauty extant now among you, Whispering Boanerges, son of silent thunder, Holding talk with nations?

Is there a De Sauty ambulant on Tellus, Bifid-cleft like mortals, dormient in nightcap, Having sight, smell, hearing, food-receiving feature Three times daily patent?

Breathes there such a being, O Ceruleo-Nasal? Or is he a mythus, ancient word for ‘humbug’ Such as Livy told about the wolf that wet-nursed Romulus and Remus?

Was he born of woman, this alleged De Sauty? Or a living product of galvanic action, Like the acarus bred in Crosse’s flint-solution? Speak, thou Cyano-Rhinal!

BLUE-NOSE

Many things thou askest, jackknife-bearing stranger, Much-conjecturing mortal, pork-and-treacle-waster! Pretermit thy whittling, wheel thine ear-flap toward me, Thou shall hear them answered.

When the charge galvanic tingled through the cable, At the polar focus of the wire electric Suddenly appeared a white-faced man among us Called himself ‘DE SAUTY.’

As the small opossum held in pouch maternal Grasps the nutrient organ whence the term mammalia, So the unknown stranger held the wire electric, Sucking in the current.

When the current strengthened, bloomed the pale-faced stranger,—

Took no drink nor victual, yet grew fat and rosy,— And from time to time, in sharp articulation, Said, ‘All right! DE SAUTY.’

From the lonely station passed the utterance, spreading Through the pines and hemlocks to the groves of steeples, Till the land was filled with loud reverberations Of ‘_All right_ DE SAUTY.’

When the current slackened, drooped the mystic stranger,— Faded, faded, faded, as the stream grew weaker,— Wasted to a shadow, with a hartshorn odor Of disintegration.

Drops of deliquescence glistened on his forehead, Whitened round his feet the dust of efflorescence, Till one Monday morning, when the flow suspended, There was no De Sauty.

Nothing but a cloud of elements organic, C. O. H. N. Ferrum, Chlor. Flu. Sil. Potassa, Cale. Sod. Phosph. Mag. Sulphur, Mang. (?) Alumin. (?) Cuprum, (?) Such as man is made of.

Born of stream galvanic, with it he had perished! There is no De Sauty now there is no current! Give us a new cable, then again we’ll hear him Cry, ‘All right! DE SAUTY.’

UK-USA Cable Connectivity in 1866 (Thanks to www.atlantic-cable.com)

LEGAL & REGULATORY MATTERS

ANTITRUST ISSUES IN A SUBMARINE CABLE CONSORTIUM

By Andrés Fígoli

Whenever there is a new submarine cable consortium project, the legal and regulatory analysis is initiated by the prospective landing parties to determine what antitrust requirements should be complied with. Each cable owner, whether a landing party or not, should conduct an independent legal analysis to assess the antitrust requirements. This analysis should be conducted in their own country and in those jurisdictions where they intend to operate. Antitrust laws and regulations vary from jurisdiction to another, so it’s important to understand the specific rules that apply.

Such evaluation is important to know in advance the regulatory roadmap for the installation of a new subsea cable and to be able to negotiate any pre-sales IRU agreements with special legal conditions to generate additional revenues. The way forward is not easy, as any infringement of antitrust rules is generally subject to penalties linked to the net profits of the companies involved.

Accordingly, to compete effectively in any given market, each consortium member knows that it must successfully design and market its own capacity services, while maintaining the consortium infrastructure in good working order, and anticipating and responding to various competitive factors affecting all landing country markets and customers. Challenges range from pricing strategies against other new consortium competitors in the area, changes in consumer preferences, emerging technologies, and economic and social

conditions in each landing country over the 25-year life of the cable.

MARKET SHARE

Consortium members should first define the relevant geographic markets in which they already operate and those in which they intend to operate. In the context of a submarine cable project, these markets would typically include the countries where the new subsea system will land.

If a consortium co-owner is found to have significant market power, it may be subject to stricter antitrust scrutiny. Antitrust authorities are more likely to investigate and review the conduct of companies with significant market power to ensure that they do not abuse that power to harm competition.

In order to calculate the market share of a telecommunications company, each national regulation determines how this should be done. In general, it is necessary to know the total revenue or number of subscribers of that company and the total revenue or number of subscribers of the international connectivity market. Once the market share has been calculated, it is often up to the antitrust or regulatory authorities in that jurisdiction to determine whether the cable owner is a dominant operator.

However, market dominance as such is not illegal. What is generally illegal under the relevant legal framework is the abuse of dominance - a practice that occurs when a company uses its dominant position to exercise market power, thereby distorting and/or restricting competition.

Actions to take before laying cables

Addressing potential antitrust issues before laying submarine cables is a proactive approach that can help consortium members avoid legal challenges, penalties, and reputational damage. If a consortium member, whether an OTT or a telecommunication company, has an affiliate in a landing country and plans to sell capacity with an interconnection point in that nation, then it is imperative to assess whether there are any potential antitrust issues that need to be addressed before these two actions take place, rather than after, when it may come under the regulatory spotlight.

The real concern of any antitrust authority is to identify which entity, despite the complex corporate and contractual arrangements in a construction and maintenance agreement (C&MA), can effectively distort competition in its markets, so it is better not to be on the suspect list in the first place.

It is therefore essential that each cable owner considers this with an antitrust counsel in accordance with its own regulatory situation in the landing country. For example, a new telecommunications company with no previous presence in that nation may not have the same regulatory requirements as a consortium member that already has subsidiaries in that country with mobile, satellite or even other submarine infrastructure providing services to local customers.

In addition, if the latter has previously been sanctioned by the antitrust authority for anti-competitive behavior, all the other co-owners should take certain additional precautions to avoid being considered a cartel. Accordingly, the consortium parties should engage anti-

trust counsel to prepare a brief guide on how to conduct consortium discussions to avoid any risk in each jurisdiction.

CONSORTIUM DISCUSSIONS

In the early stages of a submarine cable project, the exchange of information and discussions between the prospective consortium members is an integral part of the formation of such a submarine infrastructure project. Several competition authorities recognize the legitimacy of this need but have expressed concern where discussions and negotiations are not conducted in a prudent manner. Thus, it is essential that discussions are limited to the formation and operation of the purchasing consortium.

Moreover, these authorities expect the consortium partners to act as independent competitors in areas outside the collaboration (e.g. retail, and other markets in which the consortium members compete). Antitrust concerns generally arise from the possibility that the information exchanged, or discussions held by the competing companies could be used to fix, stabilize, or coordinate future competitive behavior, or that the meetings could be used as a pretext to fix prices or engage in other collusive behavior. For example, how the consortium members will bid, price, or perform in the coming years.

It is therefore important to recognize that the disclosure of non-public, competitively sensitive information in discussions or communications between consortium members may raise antitrust concerns. To minimize the risk of antitrust scrutiny, the co-owners must limit the disclosure or exchange of non-public competitively sensitive information.

On the contrary, the consortium parties are generally free to discuss non-confidential, technical, or com-

mercial matters relevant to the industry, such as common problems or challenges related to technology, the characteristics and suitability of particular equipment or technology, and the specific standards or technologies used today in the areas mutually agreed by the consortium. What is not allowed is for any co-owner to disclose or discuss their own plans for the introduction of, or meetings relating to, specific equipment or technology:

• individual company prices, proposed price changes, terms and conditions of sale, price differentials, price mark-ups or price discounts.

• the collective adoption of a particular pricing model or the boycott of another model.

• their proposed conduct towards individual suppliers, customers, or intermediaries. For example, while cable owners may legitimately develop or select a particular technology to promote interoperability, they cannot agree to collectively boycott other competing technologies.

CONTRACTUAL CLAUSES

A particular clause in a C&MA may be legal in one country but illegal per se in another. Some practices are considered to have a negative effect on the market and are therefore almost always prohibited. For example, it is illegal to agree with competitors to fix prices, to fix or agree to limit output, to rig bids, to allocate territories or customers, or to boycott a customer or supplier. In some countries, such agreements are even criminal offences.

Consortium co-owners should therefore tread very carefully and activate the C&MA termination clause in the event of a serious breach of the agreement by one of the cable own-

ers, which could implicate the others in possible unintentional breaches of local antitrust law.

Indeed, one of the most important future competitors for any consortium may be new entrants to the telecommunications industry. These new entrants would typically start with no market share in a country in which they land and may not be burdened by an installed base of obsolete equipment or technology, relying more on equipment/fiber with higher level of transmission performance. The success of a cable consortium therefore depends in part on its ability to anticipate and adapt to technological change.

PRE- SALES CAPACITY IRUS

The prospective consortium cable owners will seek to pre-sale capacity IRUs before the new cable system becomes operational to obtain additional financing and also to reduce the risk exposure. In fact, for a period of 25 to 30 years, the consortium members will face competition from other telecommunications companies, including local and global operators, existing or newly developed consortium cable systems along existing and new alternative routes, as well as from satellite companies offering competing network access and data services.

Consortium owners are aware that IRU capacity customers with alternative cable infrastructure or access to competing subsea networks may have more options and leverage in negotiations. This dynamic can influence the pricing, terms, and conditions of IRU agreements and expose consortium members to customer demands for some provisions that may be illegal, such as:

• Exclusivity of other Capacity IRU sales in its country for the duration

LEGAL & REGULATORY MATTERS

ANTITRUST ISSUES IN A SUBMARINE CABLE CONSORTIUM

By Andrés Fígoli

of the contract (25 years or less).

• ROFR, Right of First Refusal, a contractual right that gives a Capacity IRU customer the option to deal with the consortium owner as a supplier before other suppliers can.

• Best price: the cable owner concedes to give the Capacity IRU customer the best terms or prices it offers to any other customer.

In the same way, local providers of backhaul and local loops in the landing country may be tempted to try to impose similar special terms on the consortium cable owners, or vice versa, as in the previous scenario.

All these arrangements have some challenges in common, such as the difficulty of sharing confidential third-party information with a supplier or customer to enforce these terms. In addition, all parties need to recognize that price alone is not the sole measure of the competitiveness of another party’s offer, but that it must be weighed against the overall package and terms offered. Considerations may include, but are not limited to, price, payment terms, minimum purchase requirements, time commitments and other benefits offered by such suppliers or by one or other of the parties.

In addition, if a customer buys capacity IRUs from most of the submarine cable owners in the same country with similar best price provisions, it can create the network effect by indirectly controlling the prices of international connectivity in that country. Thus, even a single customer with no infrastructure of its own may be able to distort competition in the telecommunications

market, and this is something that a consortium should be defended against by national competition authorities to have a healthy market in the long term.

OTTS AND THE MARKETS

With the successive announcements of new cable systems, concerns are being raised about the dominant position of OTTs (Over-the-Top) or GAFAM in the changing connectivity routes around the world. Certainly, it is currently very difficult to project a new submarine infrastructure without their participation, as a parallel project by an OTT with higher investment in the same region could undermine the future competitive advantages of any telecommunication operator or newcomer to the industry.

While it is true that the primary business of OTTs is focused on other types of business (e.g. online shopping, personalised advertising), it is also true that self-regulation has failed in these same markets. On both sides of the Atlantic, there are numerous lawsuits against hyperscalers for misconduct and abuse of dominance in these non-telecom markets, with the help of whistleblowers and consumer and civil rights organisations.

In the coming years, the wholesale telecoms market could face similar challenges if current developments are not carefully monitored in order to preserve national digital sovereignty under the pressure of economies of scale. A possible mistake could be to rely too much on the short-term vision that there will always be spare capacity offered to them as landing countries. Accordingly, one of these preventive measures should be to demand transparency in the contracts between

countries and OTTs and to secure interconnection rights for any local operator in such systems.

Other voices have also mentioned the possibility of requiring a certain percentage of bandwidth or fibre pairs to be reserved for landing countries, rather than relying on an OTT to open the water gauge at will. While an island may welcome these new investments with their associated data centre projects, if not properly regulated, they may jeopardise future investment in the region, leaving the country with limited room for manoeuvre to attract new ICT players.

National policymakers should find a long-term balance between preserving their sovereignty rights in case they need to correct possible abuses, and ultimately encouraging new submarine routes through different operators, taking advantage of the different multinational options in the market. And there is always the World Trade Organisation (WTO), to help out when international markets are distorted and nations need international coordination to get back on track. STF

ANDRÉS FÍGOLI is the Director of Fígoli Consulting, where he provides legal and regulatory advice on all aspects of subsea cable work. His expertise includes contract drafting and negotiations under both civil and common law systems. Additionally, he has extensive experience as an international commercial dispute resolution lawyer. Mr. Fígoli graduated in 2002 from the Law School of the University of the Republic (Uruguay), holds a Master of Laws (LLM) from Northwestern University, and has worked on submarine cable cases for almost 21 years in a major wholesale telecommunication company. He also served as Director and Member of the Executive Committee of the International Cable Protection Committee (2015-2023).

ON THE MOVE

IN THE DYNAMIC REALM OF CORPORATE ADVANCEMENTS, THIS MONTH SPOTLIGHTS A SERIES OF NOTABLE TRANSITIONS AMONG INDUSTRY LEADERS.

ANDY HUDSON is now the Acting CEO at Aqua Comms, succeeding Jim Fagan. Previously, he was the company’s Chief Network Officer.

BINOD SRIWASTAV has transitioned from Tata Communications, where he served as Global Sales Head & Vice President, to Google as the Head of Strategic Partnerships Development, India/South Asia.

After over 13 years at A-2-Sea Solutions Ltd as an Engineering Manager in Romsey, England, STEVE WALL embarks on a new chapter with Xtera as a Senior Integration Engineer in London as of March 2024.

MERRIE WILLIAMSON, recognized for her tenure at Microsoft, Intel, and her expertise in AI, joins Equinix as the new Chief Customer and Revenue Officer.

JC PATERSON announces his new role as Team Lead for Offshore Fiber Optic Jointer at ASN (Erria), highlighting his availability and expertise in the field.

CHRIS BAYLY has stepped into the role of Managing Director for Saudi Arabia at Ciena, following a nearly six-year tenure as Chief Commercial Officer at Aqua Comms based in the United Kingdom.

EINAR NYHEIM has taken up the mantle as Director of Product and Architecture for Transmission & Fiber at NetNordic Norway, after more than two decades of shaping the technical direction as CTO and co-founder of WestNet.

These transitions underscore the vibrant and ever-evolving nature of the industry, as seasoned professionals continue to explore new challenges and avenues for impactful contributions.

SUBMARINE CABLE NEWS NOW

CABLE FAULTS & MAINTENANCE

Maintenance Work of SEA-ME-WE 4 Suspended

Bangladesh Braces for Internet Disruption

Houthis Hit Underwater Communications Cables

Seacom Confirms Cable Outage in Red Sea

CURRENT SYSTEMS

Sparkle, Algar Boost US-Brazil Connectivity via Monet Cable

Mertech Marine to Decommission Japan-US Subsea Cable

Globe Activates New Submarine Cable Network

Aqua Comms, ESnet Subsea Spectrum Agreement

SPLANG to Link French Guiana, EllaLink

NEC Completes Key India Submarine Cable

Hawaiki Offers 400GbE Services Enabled by Ciena

DATA CENTERS

BW Digital to Build 80MW Batam Data Center

Telxius Data Center Lauded for Connectivity

Digital Realty Opens Chennai Data Center

NTT Launches New Data Center in Noida

FUTURE SYSTEMS

Bulgaria, Azerbaijan Announce Cable Project

EXA Infrastructure Unveils New NY-London Hybrid Route

2Africa Subsea Cable Lands In Akwa Ibom

Peace Subsea Cable Lands in Maldives

e&, Batelco Sign MoU for 1,400 km Al Khaleej Cable System

Bayobab Lands 2Africa Cables in Ghana, Nigeria

Airtel Africa Investment in 2Africa and IHS

CMI’s Submarine Cable Boost to Connectivity

E& Anchors UAE’s Cable Future

ALPHA Cable to Boost APAC with Signed MOU

STATE OF THE INDUSTRY

Malaysia Reverses Cabotage Rule for Cable Repairs

ICPC Addresses Red Sea Cable Damage

Aqua Comms Appoints Andy Hudson as Acting CEO

Britain’s Undersea Cables Vulnerable

EU Plans to Secure Submarine Cables

Airtel Africa Unveils New Fibre Wholesaler Telesonic

Summit Expands Bandwidth to Northeast India via Bangladesh

Telecom Italia Bid Standoff with Italy

ETNO: EU’s Submarine Cable Risk

India’s COAI Hails Submarine Cables Vessels Duty Cut

SUBTEL FORUM

Submarine Cable Almanac – Issue 49 Out Now!

Introducing the SubTel Forum Mobile App

Submarine Telecoms Forum, AMG Partner for Ad Sales

TECHNOLOGY & UPGRADES

Cisco and Microsoft Showcase 800G on Amitié Cable

Southern Cross Upgrades with 800G Ciena Tech

Orange Powers AMITIE Cable with Infinera

ADVERTISER CORNER

By Nicola Tate

This month, I have the pleasure of introducing myself, Nicola Tate, as your new go-to expert for advertising here at SubTel Forum Magazine. My role is centered around supporting submarine fiber cable technology, service, and product providers in making valuable connections with the professionals and decision-makers who rely on Submarine Telecom Forum’s diverse media properties.

With over 8 years of experience in the advertising realm, spanning both digital and print across a myriad of industries such as marketing, dental, education, real estate, legal, automotive, government, and healthcare, I’ve honed my skills in crafting media packages that not only meet but exceed our sponsors’ goals. This breadth of experience has endowed me with a keen understanding of what marketing professionals, product managers, and business owners are seeking to accomplish within their allocated marketing budgets.

SubTel Forum stands as the premier platform within the submarine cable industry, serving an extensive network of over 150,000 users across 125 countries. With more than 64% of our users holding significant influence or being the final decision-makers in purchases, and an additional 35% playing a part in the decision-making process, the reach and impact you can achieve by advertising with us are unparalleled.

My commitment to excellence is reflected in the customer service I provide; offering swift responses to inquiries and positioning companies in the most advantageous spots for success is my forte. I place a high value on developing long-term relationships, ensuring that our collaboration will not only meet your current needs but also support your future endeavors.

SubTel Forum stands as the premier platform within the submarine cable industry, serving an extensive network of over 150,000 users across 125 countries. With more than 64% of our users holding significant influence or being the final decision-makers in purchases, and an additional 35% playing a part in the decision-making process, the

reach and impact you can achieve by advertising with us are unparalleled. Moreover, our audience boasts of more than 85% of users with over ten years of industry experience, offering an engaged and knowledgeable base for your marketing efforts.

If your goal is to expand your reach, enhance your brand presence, positively influence your sales, and drive increased revenue, SubTel Forum is your unmatched ally. I invite you to contact me to explore the various advertising options we offer and to discuss how we can forge meaningful connections with SubTel Forum users, propelling your business to new heights. STF

Originally hailing from the UK, NICOLA TATE moved to the US when she was just four years old. Aside from helping companies create effective advertising campaigns Nicola enjoys running (completed the Chicago marathon in 2023 and will be running in the Berlin marathon in 2024), hiking with her husband, watching her boys play soccer, cooking, and spending time with family.

Your Gateway to Influential

Submarine Telecoms Advertising

CONNECT INNOVATIVELY. ENGAGE GLOBALLY.

GROW EXPONENTIALLY.

Welcome to a new era of advertising with SubTel Forum in 2024. We’re combining revolutionary and diverse advertising options with a focus on impact and customization. Our offerings this year are designed to cater to a spectrum of marketing strategies within the dynamic submarine telecoms industry, offering a unique blend of opportunities for every advertiser’s need.

AT A GLANCE

Submarine Telecoms Forum is the leading digital platform for the submarine cable industry, offering a dedicated e-magazine, daily news, and streaming video content. We serve over 150,000 users across 125 countries, providing free, comprehensive insights into submarine telecom cable and network operations. As a trusted source for information, we ensure you stay informed and connected in the fast-paced world of submarine telecommunications.

OUR SPONSORS INCLUDE:

In 2024, we’re expanding our reach to more industry professionals and decision-makers. We are your link to a vast network in the telecom world.

OUR AUDIENCE BY THE NUMBERS

65% 85% More than

are final decision-makers or high influencers of purchasing decisions.

of readers have been in the industry for greater than 10 years.

265,579

4,376

START YOUR 2024 ADVERTISING JOURNEY WITH US

Ready to elevate your brand in 2024? Reach out to our dedicated team at sales@subtelforum.com for personalized advertising solutions. We’re here to collaborate with you in achieving your marketing aspirations. Let’s make your campaign a success together.

Editorial Calendar

SubTel Forum Bi-Monthly MAGAZINE

SubTel Forum, the premier publication in the submarine telecoms industry, offers focused issues that delve into specific market aspects. Each issue stands out with:

• Over 100,000 Downloads: Your message reaches a vast audience with each publication.

• Two Months Exposure & Endless Archiving: Extended visibility and perpetual access for your ads.

We also provide a tiered advertising structure, accommodating various marketing needs and budgets. Choose from half-page, full-page, and two-page spread options, with discounts for multiple-issue commitments.

SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS WITH SUBTEL FORUM:

• Web Banner: Feature on our News Now feed.

• Press & Mailer Recognition: Announcement of your sponsorship.

• Video Embedding: Optional 30-second slot for Full and Two-Page ads.

• Social Media Shoutouts: For Full and Two-Page spreads on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter.

• Dedicated Email Campaign: Exclusive for Two-Page sponsors.

AD OPTIONS (SEE EXAMPLES TO THE RIGHT):

• Half Page: Great visibility, no additional perks.

• Full Page: Includes a social media campaign/mention.

• Two-Page Spread: Maximum exposure with social media and a dedicated sponsor email.

ART & VIDEO REQUIREMENTS:

• Print Ads: 300 dpi in PDF or JPG with crop marks.

• Video Ads: 30-second clips in 1280 × 720 or 1920 × 1080 resolution, mp4 format.

• Optional Video - 30 seconds

• 1280 × 720 or 1920 × 1080 resolution – mp4 Video File

SubTel Forum Quarterly ALMANAC

The SubTel Forum Almanac, released quarterly, is a key reference for the submarine cable industry. Each issue showcases major international systems with detailed pages featuring system maps, landing points, capacity, length, and RFS year, among other data.

QUARTERLY DOWNLOADS & EXPOSURE:

• Over 525,000 downloads per issue.

• Three months of exposure plus permanent archiving.

2024 TOPICS INCLUDE:

• Q1 - Age

• Q2 - Region

• Q3 - Supplier

• Q4 - Owner

SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS:

• Prominent Two-Page Spread Ad near the front.

• Logo/Link on cover and webpage acknowledgment.

• Web Banner on News Now feed.

• Social media acknowledgment.

• Press release and mailer mention.

ART & VIDEO REQUIREMENTS:

• Size: 17” W x 11” H for Two-Page Spread.

• Resolution: 300 dpi, in PDF or JPG.

• Optional 30-second video in 1280 × 720 or 1920 × 1080, mp4 format.

SubTel Forum Industry REPORT

The SubTel Forum Annual Report offers the latest, comprehensive data on the submarine fiber market, analyzing system capacity, productivity, and industry outlook. Key features include:

• Annual Downloads & Exposure: Over 560,000 downloads, with one-year exposure and permanent archiving.

• Tiered advertising structure, accommodating various marketing needs and budgets. Choose from half-page, full-page, and two-page spread options.

SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS:

• Web Banner on News Now feed.

• Social media acknowledgment.

• Press release and mailer acknowledgment.

AD OPTIONS (SEE EXAMPLES TO THE RIGHT):

• Half Page: Great visibility, no additional perks.

• Full Page: Includes a social media campaign/mention.

• Two-Page Spread: Maximum exposure with social media and a dedicated sponsor email.

• Optional video: Include a blank box for overlay; no size restrictions.

ART & VIDEO REQUIREMENTS:

• Print Ads: 300 dpi in PDF or JPG with crop marks.

• Optional Video - 30 seconds

1280 × 720 or 1920 × 1080 resolution – mp4 Video File

LOCK IN NOW FOR 2024!

Sponsors can secure a spot in one of the various categories below. First come-first served!

• Global Overview

• Capacity

• Ownership Financing Analysis

• Supplier Analysis

• System Maintenance

• Cable Ships

• Hyperscalers and The Evolution of Submarine Cable Ownership

• Special Markets

• Regulatory Outlook

• Regional Analysis and Capacity Outlook

SubTel Forum PRINT CABLE MAP

Feature your logo on our beautiful, large format print map, which proudly showcases every major international submarine cable system. This map is a fixture in many offices across the industry.

• Limited Availability: Only 22 spaces for logos.

• Wide Distribution: Over 4,500 copies shared at key industry events like PTC and Submarine Networks EMEA and World, ensuring a year-long exposure.

ANNUAL PRICE: $4,000

SPONSORSHIP PERKS:

• Complimentary Web Banner on News Now feed.

• Social media shoutouts.

• Acknowledgment in press releases and mailers.

• 25 free copies for sponsors.Resolution: 300 dpi, in PDF or JPG.

SubTel Forum ONLINE CABLE MAP

The SubTel Forum Online Cable Map is built with the industry-standard Esri ArcGIS platform, linked to the SubTel Forum Submarine Cable Database. It offers comprehensive tracking of:

• Over 550 current and planned cable systems.

• More than 1,500 landing points.

• In excess of 1,700 data centers.

• 53 cable ships.

• Integration with SubTel Forum’s News Now feed for current and historical news.

QUARTERLY PRICE: $3,000

This map is a valuable tool for anyone interested in the submarine cable industry, allowing detailed exploration of global cable infrastructure.

SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS FOR THE SUBTEL FORUM ONLINE CABLE MAP:

• Duration: 3-month exposure.

• Visibility: Your logo and link featured on every page.

• Company Profile: 75-word description in the company announcement.

• Additional Promotion: Complimentary web banner on SubTel Forum’s News Now feed.

• Social Media Recognition: Acknowledgment on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter.

• Official Acknowledgment: Mention in press release and mailer.

These benefits offer sponsors significant exposure and opportunities to highlight their company within e-submarine telecoms community.