By Girish Linganna
It is possible that one day, a large number of people may find themselves without access to their social networks and emails for an extended period of time, or possibly even permanently. This is because the global Internet relies heavily on undersea cables for transoceanic communication, making the threat of a catastrophic scenario for the internet increasingly plausible.
Nevertheless, the potential consequences of losing access to social networks are overshadowed by the more severe impact on the global financial system. The undersea cables serve as the essential but largely unnoticed framework upon which the entirety of the Internet is built. This infrastructure plays a crucial role in linking all the continents across the globe, facilitating the exchange of data among billions of individuals.
The recent incidents involving damage to four undersea cables in the Red Sea have brought to light concerns about the security of these essential yet irreplaceable components. A critical issue that arises is whether a terrorist organization or state could potentially have the capability to disable the entire global Internet.
Infrastructure of Submarine or Underwater Internet Connections
Tele Geography, a consulting firm specializing in telecommunications market research, reported that as of the start of 2024, there were a total of 574 undersea cables worldwide. The count of these cables is subject to fluctuations as new ones are periodically being activated, often replacing older cables. This information was provided by the epravda media house.
France, the USA, and Japan are the leading providers in the installation and supply of 1.4 million kilometers of optical fibre cables encased in metal. These cables serve as the foundation for a consistent and dependable Internet connection between continents. Over the course of its more than 35-year history, this infrastructure has established a worldwide network that enables high-speed Internet access across the globe.
The key players in this sector include the American company SubCom, the Japanese NEC Corporation, the French Alcatel Submarine Networks, and the Chinese HMN Tech. Moreover, in recent times, tech firms like Google, Meta, and Microsoft have been expanding their investments in developing new fibre optic infrastructure, as their services rely heavily on the consistent functioning of the Internet. These technology giants collectively contribute around 35% of the investments in this field.
It is noteworthy that data transmission paths align with global technological advancements. Continuously, there is substantial data exchange between Asia, Europe, and South America with North America. This interchange encompasses regular emails, financial transactions, and intercontinental communications.
Typically, underwater cables are relatively thin, often comparable in diameter to a garden hose without an extra protective coating, and can reach up to 5 cm in the most secure locations. These cables vary in length, with some being short extensions spanning a few kilometers, while others are extensive in size. For instance, the 2Africa cable stretches an impressive 45,000 kilometers in length.
The speed of data transmission through submarine cables can vary based on when the cable was installed, with newer cables able to transmit more data than older ones. For example, the MAREA cable, which was installed in 2018, can transmit 224 terabits per second.
Submarine cables are responsible for carrying 99% of the intercontinental data that goes to around 1,400 landing points globally. This network facilitates over $10 trillion worth of financial transactions daily.
Despite the extensive technical infrastructure in place, there is a lack of sufficient submarine cables connecting continents, with some regions, such as between Australia and South America, having no cables at all. This unequal distribution is due to variations in data traffic between different regions.
Warning Issued About the Dangers
A recent event where fibre optic cables in the Red Sea were damaged is an illustration of concerns that senior NATO military officials have raised for years, particularly in relation to the Russian Federation.
Back in 2017, the former Chief of Defence Staff of the UK, Sir Stuart Peach, warned that Russia had the capability to target Internet cables, leading to potentially disastrous outcomes.
During that period, officials from the UK Ministry of Defence observed a growing presence of Russian submarines in the North Atlantic, specifically in the GIUK Gap, a maritime region between Greenland, Iceland, and the UK. They indicated that this area could potentially serve as a strategic location for Russia to launch unconventional information attacks on member states of the NATO alliance.
The Member of Parliament from the Conservative Party, who is now the current Prime Minister of Britain, Rishi Sunak, authored a report addressing the possible risks associated with cable systems. In his report, Sunak emphasized the significance of submarine cables as crucial infrastructure in today’s society, fundamental for our modern lifestyles and digital economy. However, he underscored that these cables lack sufficient protection and are at a high risk of being targeted by hostile states and terrorists, both at sea and on land.
Claims regarding the increased presence of Russian submarines near Internet cables in the North Atlantic were also made by officials from the US Navy. As a result, NATO decided to enhance surveillance efforts by increasing the number of military aircraft missions tasked with monitoring Russian submarine activity.
Following February 24, 2022, Moscow escalated its threats, hinting at the possibility of utilizing nuclear weapons. Occasionally leveraging this as a deterrent to halt the rise of assistance for Ukraine, the Russian Federation could potentially revert to engaging in sabotage activities around the worldwide information transmission infrastructure.
In February 2024, Republican Mike Turner, who chaired the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee, disclosed Russia’s intentions to station nuclear weapons in outer space, potentially targeting satellites, as reported by the American media. This information heightened concerns that the risk to global communication does not lie in space but rather at the depths of the ocean.
Ramifications
In contrast to the military perspective, experts are more optimistic in their evaluations concerning the possibility of the global Internet being disrupted by sabotage on underwater cables. New York University professor Nicole Staroselski believes that the worries about potential damage to one or multiple cables are exaggerated.
Experts point out that incidents of underwater fibre optic cable damage are common, with the majority resulting from underwater earthquakes, rockslides, or collisions with ship anchors. Ultimately, the deliberate destruction of the global network, which would have severe implications, necessitates a comprehensive understanding of the functioning of these systems.
In essence, disrupting a few cables in the Atlantic Ocean will not lead to the complete shutdown of the global Internet, as numerous regions such as Europe, the USA, and East Asia have multiple cables running along similar routes.
Even if Russia were successful in severing all the cables linking the United States from both its eastern and western coasts, the global Internet would not cease to exist. The outcome would simply entail a temporary inability for Americans to communicate with loved ones in different regions worldwide and a disruption for users of platforms like Facebook or Instagram, impeding their ability to post content on their profiles.
Kier Giles, a specialist in Russian information warfare, highlights that the repercussions of such sabotage would extend to impact Russia itself economically. While the inability to access Facebook represents just a minor aspect of the potential disruptions, a significant portion of international trade and financial activities rely on underwater cables for communication. Giles underlines that the economic ramifications of such an event would be substantial.
Similar to the situation in the Ukrainian energy sector, it is improbable that Russia will attain significant success with regard to the global Internet. Nevertheless, a terrorist nation could potentially opt to focus its efforts on the most pivotal locations for maximum impact.
Certain regions in the world pose higher risks to the Internet infrastructure, with a primary focus on narrow passages such as the Malacca and Red Sea. These areas serve as key hubs for numerous cables connecting different continents, meaning that any potential attacks targeting these locations would result in significant and widespread damage.
During October 2022, there was an occurrence of multiple cable damages in southern France close to Marseille. This event led to decreased Internet connectivity in regions spanning Europe, Asia, and the United States. In a report detailing the incident, cloud security firm Zscaler highlighted the breakdown of three primary lines connecting the major hub between Marseille and Lyon, Marseille and Milan, and Marseille and Barcelona.
The disruption of submarine cables in the Red Sea caused disruptions in telecommunications networks, necessitating internet service providers to redirect approximately 25% of the traffic between Asia, Europe, and the Middle East
China’s Approach
Apart from Russia and Iran, who are linked to the Yemeni Houthis, suspected of sabotaging the Red Sea submarine cables, China is also involved in the area. Unlike its allies in the “axis of evil,” China is taking a strategic approach by gradually enhancing its fibre optic cable infrastructure.
In 2015, the Chinese government unveiled intentions to establish its internet cable networks in line with its Digital Silk Road initiative. Huawei, with financial assistance from authorities, expanded the production of submarine cables through its collaboration with the British Global Marine under the entity Huawei Marine.
Huawei Marine successfully secured around 15% of the global market share in the industry by 2019. This rapid expansion by the Chinese company drew attention from the White House. In response, the Trump administration-imposed sanctions on Huawei and its telecommunications division. Consequently, another Chinese cable manufacturer, Hengtong Group, acquired Huawei Marine and rebranded it as HMN Tech.
Following this development, the US government prohibited the installation of cables directly linking the US with China. This restriction effectively ended the Meta and Google project that aimed to establish connections between the USA and Hong Kong.
Under the influence of US pressure and escalating geopolitical tensions between China and Western nations, Beijing has shifted its attention towards the Indian Ocean region. State-owned telecommunication firms from China are strategically operating in areas where they wield both commercial and political influence, primarily among Asian, African, and Latin American nations.
One of the key strengths of Chinese companies lies in their competitive pricing. HMN Tech consistently bids for participation in international projects at rates that are 20-30% below those offered by competing firms.
Asia has a substantial demand for Internet connectivity, and China is pivotal in satisfying this demand. Three prominent telecommunications companies – China Telecom, China Mobile, and China Unicom – are actively engaged in multiple extensive projects aimed at linking China with various Asian nations, as well as with Africa and Europe.
Furthermore, China is making investments in cable initiatives that establish connections between Africa and Europe. China Unicom held a significant investment position in the SAIL cable project linking Brazil to Cameroon, while China Mobile played a crucial role in the 2Africa consortium, which is involved in laying a cable between Africa and Europe.
The author of this article is a Defence, Aerospace & Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. Can be reached at: girishlinganna@gmail.com
Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect the official position or policy of Financial Express Online. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.