Russian submarines reportedly practiced deploying technology aimed at disrupting critical undersea communication cables in the Arctic this past spring, which raises concerns about the resilience of modern infrastructure if a global conflict were to emerge. British, Norwegian, and American forces monitored the Russian submarines near Norway’s Svalbard archipelago and intervened to stop them from completing their exercises, according to a report by Reuters, which cited two unnamed Western officials. This operation allegedly involved Russia’s Main Directorate for Deep Sea Research, or GUGI, a covert military entity specializing in deep-sea missions.
This operation only adds to worries regarding the vulnerability of essential underwater infrastructure in the event of a larger conflict, especially after the Nord Stream pipeline explosions in the Baltic Sea back in 2022. Those explosions highlighted how easily underwater infrastructure could be compromised by sabotage, despite the fact that the incident hasn’t been directly attributed to Russia, with investigations increasingly honing in on individuals with ties to Ukraine, as reported by Reuters citing German prosecutors.
Geoff Huston, a specialist in internet infrastructure, explained to the Daily Caller News Foundation that the Domain Name System (DNS)—which converts website names into numerical IP addresses vital for computers to find each other—is fundamentally what connects the global information framework.
“The DNS relies on the network, and although caching plays a significant role, an interruption in connectivity would lead to expired data not being refreshed. The DNS would gradually become less functional,” Huston noted. “If the DNS fails, we face huge problems for all the systems that depend on it—be it mobile networks, traffic management, or even electricity and water supply. Disruptions to flight control systems could halt aviation, and maybe the most pressing issue would be the inability to coordinate any responses to such crises.”
A global conflict that involved targeted assaults on these crucial cables could result in consequences far graver than typical internet outages, according to Terry Kelly, a former U.S. Army officer and military communications specialist. “Not only are there risks to undersea cables, but satellite communications could also face significant degradation,” he added. “In the event of something like World War III, society would be disrupted massively, regardless of whether communication lines were severed.”
The operations did not damage any cables, although Russian deep-sea submersibles were practicing the deployment of technology meant to disable subsea infrastructure, as reported by Reuters with references to Western sources.
The Russian Ministry of Defense has not reacted to requests for comments. Prior to the revelation by Reuters, Norway had publicly accused the Russian military of gaining capabilities to threaten Western infrastructure. According to Norwegian Defense Minister Tore Sandvik, GUGI’s activities indicated ongoing development in their ability to map and potentially sabotage vital Western infrastructure.
Norwegian military assets, including a P-8 maritime patrol aircraft and a frigate, were deployed during these operations. Sandvik has stated that Russian attempts to target Norway’s undersea infrastructure would be detected and would have repercussions.
The implications of undersea internet cables extend well beyond simply loading websites or sending emails. “Everyone would feel the impact equally—it wouldn’t just affect specific nations,” said Paul Barford, who leads the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s computer science department. “It’s hard to predict how military or government operations would be affected, but the disruption to commercial services would be significant. We can’t reroute all traffic through other infrastructures.”
Over 99% of international data traffic makes its way through submarine telecommunications cables, which sustain vital services including financial transactions and governmental communications, according to the International Telecommunication Union. Disruptions could have wide-ranging effects on government operations as well as access to essential services like banking, healthcare, and education.
Any major global conflict that involves targeting information structures could also likely result in the destruction of satellites crucial for relaying information via anti-satellite missiles launched from high-altitude fighter jets. Russia showcased this capability when it destroyed one of its satellites in November 2021, generating a significant amount of orbital debris.
Huston warned that even systems like Starlink are not immune to disruptions. “Starlink relies on a network on the ground for command and control. It’s not protected from failures in terrestrial systems,” he explained. “We could create redundancies to mitigate risks, but consumer resistance to higher costs makes it difficult to implement those solutions.”
Past examples, like the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, have shown that the tactics and technologies for such operations could easily be aimed at undersea internet cables. The explosions that harmed three of the four Nord Stream pipelines occurred in September 2022, causing significant damage to a system that had once delivered Russian gas to Germany. Since then, a Ukrainian special forces officer has been indicted by German prosecutors, although Ukraine denies any involvement.
There’s also speculation that the United States could have been behind the Nord Stream explosions, a claim that remains unproven, with U.S. officials consistently denying involvement. Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh alleged in a report that U.S. Navy divers, with help from Norway, planted explosives on the pipelines, citing a single anonymous source.
How nations would cope with such disruptions would depend on the structure of their economic, technological, social, and military systems. Countries with stronger domestic communication infrastructures might fare better than those heavily reliant on international connections, according to Kelly.
“While I don’t have a definitive list of what would be affected most, the reality is that nearly all international data flow relies on these cables, so anything dependent on them would face disruptions,” he explained. “Countries that can’t switch to internal communication systems will struggle more.”
International finance could be particularly susceptible to these disruptions, and the impact wouldn’t necessarily be uniform across nations. States that rely on the U.S. financial system might face greater challenges if communication lines with American institutions were cut, given the significant scale of this dependence.
NATO reported in January that approximately 1.3 million kilometers of undersea cables facilitate about $10 trillion in daily financial transactions. Military communications would similarly suffer from the destruction of these cables, though the U.S. military has alternative low-bandwidth communication methods at its disposal.
“Redundant cable routes might provide some help, but they are limited in number and thus identifiable and targetable,” Kelly noted. “Cutting cables isn’t particularly sophisticated; recent incidents show that vessels can drag anchors to damage them.”
However, widespread cable destruction would be just one facet of the broader economic disaster that a global conflict would entail. The loss of merchant ships, trade breakdowns, and interruptions in military and intelligence communications could end up being more significant than losing individual internet connections.
According to Barford, much of the submarine infrastructure is run by private companies, not nation-states. “If we experience significant disruptions here, it would have a dramatic negative impact on nearly all services, as a large portion of internet traffic flows through these cables,” he stated.
“In our quest for a cheaper and faster internet, we’ve built a fragile system that, beneath its facade of resilience, is an intricate web of interdependence with a notable collection of single points of failure,” Huston expressed. “What would it take to tip the scales? A sea floor plow in shallow waters could create chaos. Our only consolation is that no nation is fully self-reliant, meaning any disruption would amount to self-inflicted damage as much as it would be a strike against others.”
