Beneath the sea, a large part of the digital power of the 21st century is decided. Over 99% of international data flows travel through submarine cables, not satellites. This infrastructure — silent yet critical — determines which routes are fast, resilient, and, above all, who depends on whom during a crisis.
In this context, Chile has just taken a significant step with the Humboldt Project, a trans-Pacific cable connecting South America with Oceania and the Asia-Pacific via an unprecedented route in the South Pacific. An agreement between Google and Desarrollo País aims to deploy approximately 14,800 kilometers of cable, with commercial operation planned for 2027. Valparaíso will serve as the landing point, with intermediate stops such as French Polynesia in some announced designs. The goal is clear: to position Chile as a digital gateway to the Asia-Pacific, reducing the longstanding dependence on routes that traditionally ‘head up’ toward the United States before crossing the ocean.
While the Humboldt Project symbolizes a strategic leap, it also raises an important question: is opening a new corridor enough, or is there a need to redesign the entire connectivity architecture of the global south?
The “ring” of the Southern Hemisphere — beyond latency
Talking about “closing the digital ring of the Southern Hemisphere” is not just a metaphor. The concentration of high-traffic routes in the northern hemisphere — especially in certain chokepoints and high-risk zones — has implications beyond milliseconds of latency. The physical security of cables, geopolitical bottlenecks, and the ability to reroute traffic during outages or diplomatic tensions are becoming increasingly significant. Recent incidents in strategic areas like the Red Sea have reminded us that an accident — accidental or not — can degrade connectivity across multiple countries, forcing traffic to take longer, more expensive routes.
Within this context, diversifying routes is systemic resilience. Digital infrastructure resilience hinges on decision-making power: the ability to maintain services, economic activity, and communications even when a main corridor becomes fragile.
Existing infrastructure… and what’s missing
The Southern Hemisphere is not starting from scratch. In the South Atlantic, for example, the South Atlantic Cable System (SACS) links Brazil (Fortaleza) with Angola (Luanda), with an announced capacity of 40 Tbps. It enables direct connectivity between South America and Africa without necessarily passing through Europe or North America. Additionally, systems like Equiano reinforce the Atlantic coast by connecting Portugal with South Africa and other intermediate points.
The problem is that these pieces, alone, do not “close” a robust south-south circuit connecting the South Pacific (Chile) with Southern Africa (South Africa) without relying on northern corridors or exposed terrestrial segments at risk. Today, much of the traffic between South America, Africa, and Asia ends up “heading north” — by design of interconnections and transit economics — through nodes and agreements dominated by the northern hemisphere.
This is where the missing piece appears: a dedicated submarine cable between southern Chile and South Africa.
Why a Chile–South Africa link changes the game
An axis connecting Chile and South Africa is not just a technical novelty; it represents a geopolitical architectural decision with multiple implications:
- Direct south-south route: It would enable a more natural corridor between Latin America, Southern Africa, and, by extension, Asia via existing links from South Africa to the Indian Ocean.
- Reduced risk concentration: It would decrease exposure to hotspots in the northern hemisphere and routes where much of the global transit currently concentrates.
- Real redundancy for contingencies: A “ring” functions best when traffic rerouting maintains capacity and SLAs comparable. If the alternative consists of a patchwork of segments with varying risk profiles, the network can stay “alive” but may not remain resilient under stress.
- Chile as a structural hub: Humboldt aims to position Chile as a hub toward Asia-Pacific; adding a link to Southern Africa would also make it a pivot for intercontinental southern routes.
“And isn’t crossing the Andes by land fiber enough?”
It’s the usual counterargument: connecting Chile to the Atlantic via terrestrial links and then hooking into cables like SACS. In theory, this works, but it’s a different solution from a dedicated submarine backbone. Terrestrial trans-Andean infrastructure has operational and geographic limitations and was not designed as a homogeneous, high-resilience intercontinental corridor with large capacity. To speak of a “ring” with guarantees, submarine continuity — in capacity, redundancy, and operational agreements — makes all the difference.
Quick table: how routing would change practically
| Intercontinental connection | Current typical route (simplified) | Common risks/limitations | With a Chile–South Africa cable |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chile ↔ Oceania/Asia-Pacific | Via routes through the U.S. + North Pacific | Dependence on northern nodes | Direct route via Humboldt |
| South America ↔ Africa | Often via Europe/North America (peering dependent) | Longer, more expensive paths | Direct route via SACS (existing) |
| Chile ↔ Southern Africa | Mixed terrestrial + Atlantic / or via Europe/USA | Heterogeneous segments and dependencies | Direct south-south submarine route |
| Latin America ↔ Africa ↔ Asia (global south) | Very reliant on northern corridors | High risk concentration | More diversified circuit in the south |
Digital sovereignty without isolation
Digital sovereignty does not mean closing data borders; it means gaining maneuvering room: deciding how to route, where to host, and how to protect critical connectivity. A cable between Chile and South Africa would primarily be a strategic redundancy: less dependence on traditional routes and more options when the map becomes complex.
Chile has geography. With Humboldt, it is beginning to have infrastructure leverage. The next leap — if the goal is to seriously advance south-south integration — demands regional vision, financing, and agreements that look beyond immediate returns. Because, by 2026, structural influence is also measured by position in global data routes.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Humboldt Cable, and why is it relevant for Chile?
It’s a trans-Pacific submarine cable project led by Google and Desarrollo País to connect Chile with Oceania/Asia-Pacific via a direct route in the South Pacific, with commercial operation expected in 2027. Its importance lies in diversifying routes and positioning Chile as a regional digital hub.
Is there already a direct submarine cable between South America and Africa?
Yes. SACS connects Brazil (Fortaleza) with Angola (Luanda) and was designed to enable direct connectivity between both continents, reducing reliance on routes via Europe or North America.
Why would a Chile–South Africa cable behave differently than terrestrial fiber to the Atlantic?
Because a dedicated submarine link can offer more homogeneous capacity and operational continuity for intercontinental traffic, whereas terrestrial options typically involve segments with different risks and operational constraints, making large-scale redundancy more complex.
What advantages would a “hemispheric” digital ring provide to companies and governments?
Enhanced resilience against outages or geopolitical tensions, more routing alternatives, potential latency reductions for south-south flows, and better options for digital sovereignty and business continuity strategies.
via: LinkedIn