Lack of clarity about access rights to AAE-1

Posted on January 22, 2017  /  1 Comments

Mytel, the fourth telecom licensee in Myanmar, states that it intends to capacity of AAE-1 through MPT. But MPT says it’s not part of the AAE-1 consortium and does not intend to use AAE-1 capacity itself. What does that mean for Mytel? Should it ask for capacity on SEA-ME-WE 5 from its competitor instead?

Mytel, which received Myanmar’s fourth telecoms licence on January 12, will also use the AAE 1 (Asia-Africa-Europe) submarine cable “so we will not have to worry about internet bandwidth”, said U Zaw Min Oo.

AAE 1 is owned by a consortium of international carriers, with MPT acting as a “co-landing party” for the cable’s connection to Myanmar, according to a senior technical manager at MPT, who asked to remain anonymous.

MPT is not participating directly in AAE 1, however, and does not plan to make use of the cable for additional bandwidth, the technical manager said. But MPT is part of the consortium that built the 20,000 kilometer Southeast Asia–Middle East–Western Europe 5 cable, which was finished late last year.


1 Comment

  1. MPT is keen to monetize SMW5 while China Unicom is the non-landing member of AAE-1 consortium. Unicom has built a terrestrial fibre cable from Muse on the border between PRC and Myanmar via the Myanmar capital Nay Pyi Taw, to a cable landing station at Pathein in southwestern Myanmar. From there, they have paid for the construction of AAE-1 cable with the Myanmar incumbent, MPT, acting as landing party. Unicom does not have a licence in Myanmar so this terrestrial / submarine link is simply to provide a new route for traffic between PRC and the rest of the world per the Silk Route Initiative. Mytel should be aware of this dynamics and act accordingly. Protection is business as usual across developing Asia.