The region, long expected to fuel the next era of global digital growth, now finds itself contending with geopolitical tension, constrained landing capacity, a surge of hyperscaler ambitions, and deep uncertainty over the true impact of AI on bandwidth demand.

Yet this is not a crisis moment. Instead, it represents a strategic turning point, an inflexion where resilience, route diversity and long-term planning now sit as high on the agenda as sheer capacity growth. The days when a handful of core Asian east–west corridors could reliably serve as the arteries of global data are fading fast. Today, network designers are being forced to draw new lines on the map. 

To explore this shift, Capacity spoke with Julian Rawle, associate partner, subsea at Cambridge Management Consulting and a veteran consultant in the submarine cable sector. His assessment is clear: Asia is not just adding cables. It is reinventing its connectivity logic. 

The Singapore–Japan rethink

The Singapore–Japan route has historically been the region’s cornerstone system, serving as a major relay between Southeast Asia and North America. But the once-straightforward corridor is now at the heart of a strategic and political recalibration. 

“The obvious answer to this question is Singapore–Japan,” Rawle notes when asked which routes remain most critical. Yet, he explains, the picture has grown more complex. Increased Chinese activity in the South China Sea has contributed to delays on major systems such as SJC-2 and introduced new permitting challenges for projects seeking to transit the region without Chinese involvement. 

Where the industry once prioritised the shortest path, geopolitics now influences the engineering drawing board. Developers are turning to alternative design strategies, from systems running south via the Java Sea before heading north, to routes skirting the edge of China’s self-declared “9-Dash Line” close to the Philippines and Borneo.  

Crucially, new transpacific links originating directly in Singapore raise the question: why maintain Singapore–Japan at all? The answer lies in resilience, according to Rawle. The market’s response was to start building transpacific cables directly from Singapore, he explains.  

“Yet redundancy requirements now drive continued Japan connectivity, particularly given concerns about long-term South China Sea maintenance access.” 

A new generation of regional hubs

Singapore remains Asia’s digital capital, but constraints are real. Landing slots, terrestrial fibre duct space and data-centre development capacity are all limited. As a result, alternative hubs are rising. 

Batam, Indonesia, sits first among them. Long seen as an industrial island, it is now “becoming regarded as a feasible alternative to landing in Singapore,” helped by physical proximity and growing infrastructure maturity.  

Malaysia’s Johor Bahru, just across the causeway, is also positioning itself as a cable and data centre hub, offering terrestrial and unrepeatered subsea connections back into Singapore. 

Even regional connectivity patterns are shifting. While the Malacca Strait has long been the dominant pathway into Singapore, its congestion and exposure are increasingly scrutinised. Recent Australian systems, Indigo and ASC, have demonstrated that routing via the Sunda Strait is both feasible and resilient, avoiding some of the risks associated with the busier Malacca corridor. Their success is now informing thinking for cables arriving from the Middle East and Africa, suggesting that a broader range of access routes may emerge as the region moves beyond reliance on a single dominant landing pathway. 

Rethinking East–West connectivity amid Red Sea risk

The global subsea system is built around predictable choke points. But today, one of the most critical: the Red Sea is under strain. Rawle points to unrest in the Middle East, particularly around the southern Red Sea, which is delaying new Asia–Europe systems and constraining maintenance of existing ones  

Rawle says hyperscalers and carriers are exploring bypass strategies that would once have seemed unlikely, including: hybrid subsea–terrestrial routes across the Arabian Peninsula; terrestrial paths from the Gulf through Iraq, Syria and Turkey; and evaluation of new Africa–Asia corridor dynamics. 

Eyes are turning to the SAFE system, which links South Africa, India and Malaysia and is believed to be nearing retirement around 2027. While historically a thinner route, a successor could help diversify global east–west options. 

AI demand: Uncertainty over hype

While cloud traffic growth during the Covid-19 era proved the underlying resilience and capacity headroom of the global subsea network, AI introduces a more ambiguous picture. 

“There is no freely available data yet on what the impact is,” Rawle cautions.  

Although individual AI training centres process vast volumes of data, often petabytes at a time, it remains uncertain how much of that dataset will ultimately need to be moved to edge inference sites, and at what sustained data-stream rates.  

The distinction matters: petabytes of training data does not automatically translate into terabits-per-second transport requirements for inference, given that a byte equals eight bits and only a subset of data may travel beyond the training cluster. 

Rather than assume a dramatic explosion, Rawle’s firm is adopting a disciplined stance: a 10% uplift above underlying demand forecasts, pending real-world evidence.  

That caution comes with historical scars. The dot-com boom led to a capacity overbuild, followed by what Rawle calls a “nuclear winter” for the subsea sector when demand failed to arrive on schedule.  

Today, the industry knows the risks of speculative overbuilding too well to repeat them lightly. 

Technology pushes towards physical limits

Subsea technology innovation has delivered extraordinary gains in spectral efficiency and system capacity. But Rawle argues the industry is nearing a key threshold.  

The next frontier is fibre count. From eight fibre pairs historically, modern systems have tripled capacity. With 1.6Tbps wavelengths emerging and vendors now offering 24-fibre-pair systems, the ability to “squeeze larger data streams down a fibre” is approaching the Shannon Limit. 

Dual-core fibre, effectively doubling the number of pairs within the same physical fibre, is now under test, and some see potential for four-core implementations in time.  

Hollow-core fibre also enters the conversation, though Rawle emphasises that it remains some distance from subsea readiness. If capacity demand ultimately exceeds these innovations, the fallback may be simple, if costly: “build more cable systems”  

A strained supply chain

The most immediate operational challenge for cable investors today is not technology, it is availability. Manufacturing lead times have stretched dramatically, from one year to as long as three years. 

The global fleet of cable-laying ships, now averaging over 20 years old, has not expanded or renewed at the pace required to support the current boom in systems.  

This supply crunch is driving up project costs and forcing more conservative investment timing. “Some business cases” are becoming unfeasible due to price inflation and delayed deployment windows, Rawle notes  

The only solution today is foresight: start planning earlier, secure factory slots sooner, and temper investor expectations about timelines and return horizons.  

Limited state support in Asia, for now

Government participation in subsea infrastructure is uneven globally, but Asia trails Europe significantly. Japan is underwriting new landing sites and Singapore has formalised landing-slot processes, while Australia has taken a more proactive funding role, driven largely by geopolitical dynamics in the Pacific.  

India acknowledges subsea’s strategic importance but has yet to roll out concrete policy support, and ASEAN lacks an equivalent to the EU’s collective funding structures.  

Meanwhile, US involvement largely centres on discouraging partner nations from using Chinese telecom suppliers.  

Hyperscalers shape the next era

Perhaps the most transformational force in the region is the hyperscaler strategy. Google is now leading investment into routes that traditional carriers would never have found commercially viable, including Australia–South Africa corridors offering island branching opportunities.  

Meta’s global “Waterworth” vision signals potential for continent-spanning design, while AWS’s newly announced Fastnet transatlantic system marks a shift toward full-cable ownership. With that move, Microsoft now remains the only hyperscaler still primarily pursuing an anchor-tenant strategy, at least for the moment. 

Rawle points to Asia’s own hyperscalers, including ByteDance, as potential future disruptors. A shift away from leasing capacity from Chinese state carriers could reshape the market dynamics entirely.  

Looking ahead, consolidation in the global data-centre market may give rise to a new class of subsea investors: operators whose data-centre footprints demand direct global fibre control.  

A new map, a new mindset

Asia’s subsea ecosystem is not breaking; it is reshaping. Strategic routing is shifting, new hubs are emerging, hyperscalers are defining investment cycles, and hard lessons from the market’s past boom-and-bust phases are informing cautious, data-driven planning. 

The coming decade will not be defined by capacity for its own sake, but rather by resilience, geopolitical agility and supply-chain foresight. Subsea infrastructure is no longer just the silent foundation of global connectivity; it is a strategic asset in a fragmented digital world. And as Rawle makes clear, the region is only at the beginning of that transition. 

RELATED STORIES

NTT, Telstra, Airtel, Eutelsat execs to keynote at ITW Asia 2025

Is the future of AI being built in Asia?