East Africa’s cable system not so EASSy after all

The East African Submarine Cable System (EASSy) – an ambitious but controversial multi-million dollar project to wire a huge swathe of Africa – has been renamed the ‘NEPAD Broadband Infrastructure Network’. It seems the name-change was prompted by Kenya – a key partner in EASSy – dropping out of the scheme.

So what does this mean for the project’s future? According to South Africa’s communications minister, Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri, the Network will be African-led with limited involvement of ‘foreigners’. It will now be financed by three subsidiary companies (so-called Special Purpose Vehicles), each one managed by different stakeholders:

•         government for fixed lines
•         government and private sector for private telecommunication networks
•         foreign-owned telcommunications operators for under-sea cable systems

This ‘club’ model (which allows players to invest exclusively in certain areas) is a significant step away from the ‘open access’ approach (whereby telecom companies, internet providers, government etc could invest openly in EASSy) that had been advocated by international institutions like the World Bank and some civil society organisations.

The response to this shake-up has not been entirely positive. CIPESA’s Anthony Mugeere raises concerns about NEPAD’s “bureaucratic protocol issues” and the likelihood that it will slow down the whole process.

Matsepe-Casaburri is quoted as saying: "We wanted to avoid the club-type situation we have had with the (Telkom) SAT-3 undersea cable, but this did not sit well with a number of other countries and institutions." It appears that she chose not to elaborate on her comment when she realised that the media were present.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t have a great deal of faith when a communications minister clams up in front of journalists!

Comments

[Wairagala Wakabi]

A very interesting and timely posting this one. The benefits EASSy promises to deliver for eastern and southern Africa are immense: more affordable, more reliable bandwidth. But the project is not getting off the ground, nearly seven years after it was concretely proposed. Perhaps the South African minister Matsepe-Casaburri should have talked about what is being done to fast-track it, and when we should expect the cable to go live. Plus, many people are eager to hear from her government whether EASSy will remain competitive and viable if the unilateral marine fibre optic systems the SA government and that of Kenya are planning get on stream before EASSy. That is a debate many of us are engrossed in at www.fibreforafrica.net . Sad thing is, we just aren't enough of us involved in this debate and there are some critical voices that are glaringly missing out in these discussions.