Commentary: Beijing’s Baltic confession exposes undersea vulnerability

Together with local partners, Australia may drive for stronger worldwide frameworks that can distinguish between these scenarios and hold the concerned parties responsible.

For Australia, the recent opening of the Cable Connectivity and Resilience Center, which invested an additional$ 18 million ( US$ 11.9 million ) over four years, is a commendable start, framed as a contribution to efforts by the Quad grouping in this area. But only this determination will be inadequate.

A detailed Indo-Pacific local cable protection framework, created in collaboration with partners in Southeast Asia and the Pacific, is required to protect undersea infrastructure from rising geopolitical threats.

The establishment of wire protection zones throughout the Indo-Pacific and additional steps should be included in this framework to safeguard the security of this crucial infrastructure. The lack of a sturdy wire protection program in Papua New Guinea or Solomon Islands, for example, underscores the intensity.

The Baltic Sea event may serve as a wake-up phone, not just for Europe, but for Australia and its Indo-Pacific lovers. The South China Sea’s proper uncertainty and the country’s heavy rely on underwater cables may spur efforts to address flaws in digital facilities safety frameworks.

It is not only about preventing injury, it’s about ensuring that when injury occurs, it is addressed quickly and accurately, with strenuous accountability enforced.

Cynthia Mehboob is a PhD Scholar at the Australian National University’s Department of International Relations. This remark first appeared on Lowy Institute’s blogging, The Interpreter.