Five of the world's 25 major cable landing zone regions now carry extreme risk ratings. Here's what's driving each one — and what cable operators should be watching.
Starboard Maritime Intelligence assessed 25 cable landing zone regions worldwide across six risk factors: geopolitical tension, fishing intensity, historical cable faults, vessel traffic density, regulatory enforcement gaps, and AIS non-compliance. Each zone receives a composite score from 1.0 (low) to 5.0 (extreme).
The results reveal concentrated, compounding risk in the regions where new cable investment is accelerating fastest. Over $13 billion in new submarine cable projects are planned for service between 2025 and 2027 — nearly double the prior three-year window — and a significant share lands in Asia-Pacific, where four of the five extreme-risk zones sit.
Click any zone to view its full risk scorecard
The Persian/Arabian Gulf tops the index at 4.6 out of 5, the only zone to score 5 across four of six risk factors. Since US-Israeli airstrikes on Iranian military installations commenced in late February 2026, the Strait of Hormuz has been effectively closed to commercial traffic. Twelve of 17 Gulf cable systems have at least one segment passing through waters where Iran has confirmed military operations. Specialised repair vessels cannot safely access the strait, and only a single repair vessel remains available inside the Gulf.
The region already carried extreme risk before the conflict, with the world's densest vessel traffic, minimal cable protection enforcement, and near-total AIS non-compliance among smaller vessels. The war has made a dangerous zone functionally inaccessible. A two-week ceasefire was agreed on April 7–8, 2026, with conditional reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
The East China Sea and Taiwan Strait (4.5) is the second-highest rated zone globally, driven by maximum geopolitical tension (5/5), intensive fishing (4/5) with overcapacity estimated at 20–30% above sustainable levels, and extreme vessel traffic (4/5). Eleven or more cable incidents have been recorded since 2023, with the rate accelerating — deliberate cutting is suspected. Unseenlabs satellite data shows 60–80% of vessels in the East China Sea are not broadcasting AIS. With cross-strait tensions showing no sign of easing, cables landing in this region face a threat environment that is both acute and structural. Among planned cables, Apricot and Candle both transit this zone, giving them the highest single-zone risk exposure of any new build.
The West Africa/Gulf of Guinea (4.1), South China Sea (4.35), and Strait of Malacca (4.15) complete the extreme tier. Each has a different risk profile — West Africa is defined by IUU fishing (up to 40% of catch), minimal enforcement, and high AIS non-compliance — though piracy has declined significantly from its 2020 peak, with 2024 IMB data showing West Africa now accounts for 15.5% of global incidents; the South China Sea by geopolitical competition and traffic density; the Strait of Malacca by the sheer concentration of fishing and shipping in a narrow waterway.
New cables are being planned and built. But the risk environment they're entering is changing.
Two zones score 3.85 but aren't yet in the extreme tier: the Red Sea/Gulf of Aden and the Black Sea. Both could be more volatile right now than some extreme-rated zones.
In September 2025, several cables were severed in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, disrupting an estimated 25% of cable capacity between Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. Repairs took months. The Red Sea scores 5/5 for both geopolitical risk and regulatory enforcement gaps. Houthi-controlled waters remain effectively ungovernable for cable protection. The Raman cable, planned to transit this zone, has already been delayed due to Red Sea security concerns, a concrete example of how geopolitical risk is now shaping investment decisions.
The Black Sea scores 5/5 for geopolitical risk, regulatory gaps, and AIS non-compliance. While mine risk is confirmed (100+ mines detected, 500+ deployed), no cable faults have been directly documented from the war. Russia's continued presence and the conflict in Ukraine make this region functionally inaccessible for routine cable maintenance.
Select a risk factor to see how zones compare
We cross-referenced 17 planned or recently announced submarine cable projects against our 25-zone risk framework. The results are stark: across 60 total zone crossings, 55% land in High or Extreme-tier zones. Only 18% of crossings are in Low-risk waters.
Crosses nine zones, including the Extreme-rated West Africa (Gulf of Guinea) plus five High zones (Red Sea, Persian Gulf, East Mediterranean, East Africa, Indian Ocean East). This is the most risk-exposed cable on the list.
Each cross six zones, almost entirely High-rated: Red Sea, Persian Gulf, East Mediterranean, Indian Ocean, and Southeast Asia.
Both cross the Extreme-rated East China Sea / Taiwan Strait (Z-011, score 4.5) plus High-rated Southeast Asia. These carry the highest single-zone risk exposure of any new build.
Crosses four zones, all High (Red Sea, East Mediterranean, East Africa, Indian Ocean East), and is already delayed due to Red Sea security concerns.
The lowest-risk new cables are Echo (US West Coast and Pacific Islands, both Low), Firmina (South America East, Medium), and Nuvem (Mid-Atlantic and US East Coast, both Low to Medium).
By zone, the densest overlap between new cable activity and elevated risk is in the Eastern Mediterranean (Z-003, High) and Western Mediterranean (Z-002, Medium), each with seven cables passing through. Southeast Asia (Z-009, High) has six. The Indian Ocean East (Z-008, High) has five. These four zones represent the most significant convergence of new investment and existing threat.
This is not an argument against building in these regions. The demand is real and the routes are necessary. But it does mean that cable operators in these corridors need a fundamentally different approach to risk management than those running cables between, say, the US West Coast and Oceania.
86% of cable faults come from fishing gear and anchor dragging. These are not random events. They involve vessels that transmit AIS, follow patterns, and operate in predictable areas. The risk is trackable. But tracking it requires continuous, intelligent monitoring of vessel behaviour near cable routes, not just knowing where the cables are. Cable operators investing billions in new infrastructure need a corresponding investment in the intelligence systems that protect it: real-time awareness of what's happening around their assets, the ability to detect behavioural anomalies before they become incidents, and a risk picture that updates as conditions change.
The shift underway in cable protection is from reactive to predictive. Knowing that a cable was damaged is expensive. Knowing that a vessel is behaving anomalously near a cable route, and being able to act on that information in hours rather than days, is what separates a repair bill from a prevented incident. The operators who will manage risk most effectively in these high-threat environments are the ones building intelligence-led protection into their operations now, before the next cable goes into the water.
The EU announced a €347 million investment in submarine cable security and published a cable security toolbox in early 2026. NATO launched Baltic Sentry to patrol cables in Northern Europe. These are the first signals that governments are beginning to treat cable protection as critical infrastructure defence, not just telecoms regulation.
For cable operators, this matters practically. If mandatory near-miss reporting, expanded cable protection zones, and vessel monitoring requirements follow, operators will need the data infrastructure to comply: continuous AIS monitoring, anomaly detection, and auditable records of vessel activity near their assets. The operators who build these capabilities now will be ahead of the regulation. Those who wait will be retrofitting under pressure.
Contact us for a complimentary cable risk assessment.
Request an assessment