Australia should position itself as the trusted technology partner for core infrastructure across the Pacific. More than branding, this means being the default choice for governments weighing offers from multiple suitors with competing strategic and commercial aims.

When Australia moved to exclude Huawei from its 5G rollout in 2018, it signalled something larger than a vendor decision. Core digital infrastructure is a strategic, not just commercial, choice. That call was heard across the Pacific, where similar questions about trusted next-generation networks were already emerging.

Seven years on, as cloud data centres, telecommunications networks, satellite gateways and submarine cable landings roll out across the Pacific, choices are still being made about who builds and runs the region’s digital backbone. These technologies and the decisions around them may lack the drama of 5G but carry the same stakes, defining connectivity and sovereignty for decades.

Australia’s trusted-partner pitch works because it answers two practical concerns for Pacific governments. They need resilient and interoperable infrastructure that doesn’t lock them into single vendors or expose them to coercive leverage. They also need confidence that systems carrying national data are governed by democratic values and the rule of law. Australia can meet both needs, but only if it treats them as strategic objectives rather than incidental outcomes.

There is a base to build on. Australia blends finance and capability through the Australian Infrastructure Financing Facility for the Pacific, which backs connectivity alongside other essential infrastructure. It now funds cyber capacity through the Southeast Asia and Pacific Cyber Program and supports the Pacific Cyber Security Operational Network, linking operational teams across the region. These efforts matter but are often fragmented and slow. Offers need to be simpler, faster and easier for Pacific governments to use.

Australia’s 5G decision offers a blueprint. It was not enough to bar one vendor; the government also enabled a credible pathway for secure networks through financing options, technical assistance and alignment with trusted suppliers. In the Pacific today, the same ingredients are needed in more areas, from undersea cables to national cloud strategies.

Other players have moved to fill the space. Chinese vendors offer low-cost turnkey packages that bundle hardware, software and finance. For cash-strapped governments, these deals are hard to ignore. Without a coherent Australian-led alternative, the trusted option risks being outpaced by offers that deploy faster and finance easier.

Australia should lead the Partners in the Blue Pacific to offer a complete package. It should blend grant funding, concessional loans and public-private partnerships so trusted infrastructure is competitive on price and delivery speed; coordinate allied finance through development banks and multilateral lenders to spread cost and risk; and above all, bring dedicated focus, practical delivery support and the local relationships Australia can provide at scale.

Trust also comes from sustained presence. Too often, infrastructure projects have been treated as one-off interventions. The advantage lies in lifecycle engagement: training local engineers, building maintenance capacity and keeping governance and security standards current as technology evolves. A network is only as secure as the capability of those who operate it.

Resurfacing the 5G conversation is not about re-litigating Huawei. It is a reminder that technology choices are never neutral. The standards, suppliers and governance frameworks embedded in core infrastructure today will shape the digital environment for decades.

That calls for a whole-of-government approach. The diplomatic reach of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Defence’s regional engagement and Austrade’s industry networks all position Australian technology as the safe, reliable choice. The private sector must be in lockstep with solutions that meet commercial and security needs.

Pacific partners want infrastructure that works, is affordable and will not become a liability in crises. Australia’s role is to make sure the trusted option is best in practice and competitive on speed, cost and long-term value.

If a Pacific partner were to ask tomorrow for independent advice on a national network upgrade, could Australia mobilise a team within weeks, provide reference designs, help structure the tender, run assurance testing and line up financing support, then support commissioning? If not, we should fix that before the next request arrives.

Our window is closing. Once the region’s digital backbone is built, replacing its systems will be costly and disruptive. If Australia wants to be the trusted partner for Pacific core infrastructure, it cannot wait for the next high-profile scare. Our 5G decisions showed what is possible when strategic clarity meets coordinated action.

As I saw at Pacific Cyber Week, partners want practical support, not slogans: quick mobilisation, clear reference designs, robust assurance and help bridging finance. The task now is to apply that lesson across the full spectrum of digital infrastructure before decisions are made without us.