Indonesia In The Geopolitics And Global Digital Economy Of Submarine Cables
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38142/jtep.v6i4.2131Keywords:
submarine cables, geopolitics, weaponized interdependence, digital sovereignty, critical infrastructureAbstract
Indonesia’s geographic position linking two oceans has once again placed it at the center of great-power competition. But this time through the submarine fiber-optic cables that carry more than 97% of international internet traffic. Yet the geopolitical dimension of this infrastructure remains understudied, and Indonesia is almost absent from the existing literature. This article argues that a strategic geographic position does not by itself generate bargaining power; without adequate regulatory and oversight capacity, that position may instead become a source of vulnerability. Using a qualitative approach based on document analysis and a literature study and drawing on the framework of weaponized interdependence complemented by the concept of digital sovereignty, the article examines how submarine cables have become an arena of geopolitical competition, Indonesia’s position within that network, the gaps in its national regulatory framework, and the implications of this infrastructure for the global digital economy. The analysis shows that competition unfolds across three domains — ownership, supply chain, and landing routes — yet state influence remains partial and fragmented. Indonesia acts as an active owner at the periphery of the network and a passenger at its core, with cable landing points as the only chokepoint under its full jurisdiction. The control it holds is administrative and spatial-planning oriented, not yet reaching physical security, geopolitical screening, or data sovereignty. This asymmetry between formal involvement and substantive control capacity is what places Indonesia’s strategic position closer to vulnerability than to strength.
References
Abels, J., & Babić, M. (2026). Cable wars? Mapping the political economy of submarine cables in an era of geoeconomic competition. Globalizations. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2025.2599691
Al Jazeera. (2025, March 10). As undersea cables break off Europe and Taiwan, proving sabotage is tough.
Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia. (2022). Profil internet Indonesia 2022 [Indonesian internet profile 2022].
https://survei.apjii.or.id/survei/2022
Beritasatu. (2021). Kepmen KP 14/2021 optimalkan ruang laut Indonesia [Ministerial Decree MMAF 14/2021 optimizes Indonesia’s marine space]. https://www.beritasatu.com/ekonomi/812911/kepmen-kp-142021-optimalkan-ruang-laut-indonesia
Bueger, C., & Liebetrau, T. (2021). Protecting hidden infrastructure: The security politics of the global submarine data cable network. Contemporary Security Policy, 42(3), 391–413.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2021.1907129
Cariolle, J. (2026). Digital disasters: The macroeconomic costs of submarine cable breaks (FERDI Working Paper No. P370). Fondation pour les Études et Recherches sur le Développement International.
https://ferdi.fr/en/publications/b46e9e8e-70bc-4e01-8a8a-dd5749be749d
Couture, S., & Toupin, S. (2019). What does the notion of “sovereignty” mean when referring to the digital? New Media & Society, 21(10), 2305–2322.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819865984
Detik. (2022). SKKL Echo jalan tol internet ke AS sampai ke RI, apa kabar Bifrost? [The Echo submarine cable, an internet highway to the US, reaches Indonesia: What about Bifrost?]. detikINET. https://inet.detik.com/telecommunication/d-6145349/skkl-echo-jalan-tol-internet-ke-as-sampai-ke-ri-apa-kabar-bifrost
Detik. (2025). Terungkap! Ini proyek kabel laut yang dibangun Google-Meta di perairan Indonesia [Revealed: The submarine cable projects Google and Meta are building in Indonesian waters]. detikINET.
Farrell, H., & Newman, A. L. (2019). Weaponized interdependence: How global economic networks shape state coercion. International Security, 44(1), 42–79. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00351
Insikt Group. (2025). Submarine cables face increasing threats amid geopolitical tensions and limited repair capacity. Recorded Future.
Juned, M., Bainus, A., Saripudin, M. H., & Pratama, N. (2022). The dynamics of the USA and China relations in the cyberspace: Struggle for power in a global virtual world in building a global cyber regime. International Journal of Business and Globalisation, 30(3–4), 396–414.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBG.2022.123617
Katadata. (2025). Komdigi ungkap Meta dan Google akan tambah pembangunan kabel laut di Indonesia [Komdigi reveals that Meta and Google will expand submarine cable construction in Indonesia].
Kementerian Kelautan dan Perikanan. (2021a). Melalui KKP, pemerintah terbitkan aturan penataan kabel dan pipa bawah laut [Through the MMAF, the government issues rules on the arrangement of submarine cables and pipelines].
Kementerian Kelautan dan Perikanan. (2021b). Terbitkan aturan penataan alur pipa dan/atau kabel bawah laut, KKP akan gelar sosialisasi [Having issued rules on submarine pipeline and/or cable corridors, the MMAF will hold outreach sessions].
Kementerian Koordinator Bidang Kemaritiman dan Investasi. (2023). Kabel bawah laut: Sinyal perekat Nusantara [Submarine cables: The signal that binds the archipelago]. Kementerian Koordinator Bidang Kemaritiman dan Investasi Republik Indonesia.
Kompas. (2021). Kabel terus bertambah, pemerintah tata pipa dan kabel bawah laut [As cables keep multiplying, the government organizes submarine pipelines and cables]. Kompas.id. https://www.kompas.id/artikel/kabel-terus-bertambah-pemerintah-tata-pipa-dan-kabel-bawah-laut
Kompas. (2025). Mengapa Google dan Meta ingin bangun kabel bawah laut sampai Indonesia [Why Google and Meta want to build submarine cables reaching Indonesia]. Kompas.id. https://www.kompas.id/artikel/en-mengapa-google-dan-meta-ingin-bangun-kabel-bawah-laut-sampai-indonesia
Merdekawati, A., Ajari, S., Hasibuan, I. A. T., & Agung, I. G. P. (2021). Compatibility of Indonesia’s regulations on submarine cable with UNCLOS 1982. Arena Hukum, 14(2), 293–313. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.arenahukum.2021.01402.5
Noor, E. (2024). Entangled: Southeast Asia and the geopolitics of undersea cables. Indo-Pacific Outlook, 1(5). Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa.
https://hdl.handle.net/10125/107713
Sherman, J. (2024). Improving Indo-Pacific cable security and resilience: Investment, licensing, and repair. Indo-Pacific Outlook, 1(4). Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa.
https://hdl.handle.net/10125/107696
Telkom. (2016). Telkom resmikan sistem komunikasi kabel laut, South East Asia–Middle East–West Europe 5 [Telkom inaugurates the SEA-ME-WE 5 submarine cable communication system]. https://www.telkom.co.id/sites/berita/id_ID/news/telkom-resmikan-sistem-komunikasi-kabel-laut,-south-east-asia-midle-east-west-europe-5-290
TeleGeography. (2026). Submarine cable map 2026. PriMetrica.
https://submarine-cable-map-2026.telegeography.com/
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, December 10, 1982. https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf
Vatanparast, R. (2020). The infrastructures of the global data economy: Undersea cables and international law. Harvard International Law Journal Frontiers, 61.
Watson, A. H. A. (2025). Undersea cables: The official perspectives expressed in the Pacific region. Marine Policy, 178, 106735.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Bela Agustin, Mansur Juned

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.




