FMT explains why Malaysia adopted two networks, what greater telco control could change and why businesses want certainty over their technology choices.
As telcos prepare to take greater control, attention is turning to whether businesses will continue to have two genuinely different technology options.
FMT explains what is changing, why it matters and the safeguards being sought.
Why dual 5G networks in the first place?
Malaysia’s shift from a single wholesale network to a dual-network model was intended to foster competition, expand choice and reduce dependence on a single provider.
DNB uses Ericsson equipment, while the second network, run by U Mobile, relies on Huawei and ZTE technology. The distinction therefore extends beyond the operators themselves to the equipment, software and support systems underpinning their networks.
Quah Mei Lee, senior director of ICT Research at Frost & Sullivan, recently said the dual-network environment could give Malaysia a geopolitical advantage by accommodating investors with different cybersecurity, procurement and regulatory requirements, without requiring everyone to adopt the same technology model.
Responding to the analysis, The Asia Group’s Asrul Hadi said that advantage would hinge on the country maintaining two distinct networks, rather than having both operate on the same technology.
What is changing — and why it matters
Presently, DNB is jointly owned by the government through the Ministry of Finance Incorporated (MoF Inc), alongside CelcomDigi, Maxis and YTL Power.
Following a RM5.2 billion financing exercise, MoF Inc is set to exit as shareholder, with the three telcos expected to hold equal stakes. The government instead will retain a special share giving it oversight of strategic matters.
The move is set to give the telcos greater influence over operations, cost and investment decisions. However, the transition does not automatically mean a supplier change: DNB’s 10-year Ericsson partnership began in 2021.
The concern is whether future procurement decisions could narrow technology choices, even with two network operators in place.
Analyst Jamil Ghani, a PhD researcher at Singapore’s S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, has warned that dependence on the same supplier ecosystem could expose both networks to common software vulnerabilities, supply disruptions or export restrictions.
Keeping critical technologies distinct need not mean duplicating every asset, he said, as towers and some fibre optics could still be shared.
For businesses, these choices affect how they upgrade and respond to disruptions.
Lorela Chia, founding president of the Malaysia Association of Sustainable Supply Chain and Innovation, previously told FMT that different network environments give manufacturers more options when connecting systems or changing suppliers.
She said this was especially useful for smaller suppliers, as factories often rely on a mix of older machinery, newer automation and different cloud platforms.
“For them, switching technology should not mean writing off what already works or starting again from scratch,” she said of smaller suppliers.
Policy changes could also affect investment decisions.
International Islamic University Malaysia economist Noorihsan Mohamad said uncertainty over future support could prompt businesses to postpone spending, particularly on customised systems, integration and training, where investments are difficult to recoup.
Can the two networks stay distinct?
When debating the 2027 budget in the Dewan Rakyat on Oct 22, Machang MP Wan Ahmad Fayhsal Wan Ahmad Kamal urged Putrajaya to retain both Western and Chinese technology paths, arguing that meaningful alternatives would protect digital sovereignty and investor confidence.
This raises the question of whether preserving that technological distinction should be an explicit policy commitment, rather than something that depends solely on the operators’ current supplier arrangements.
Asrul’s proposals include clear governance and transparent procurement rules to keep both networks technologically distinct, commercially viable and accessible through ownership or supplier changes.
“Public assurances certainly help, but they are not sufficient,” he said.
Analyst Samirul Ariff Othman cautioned that the current supplier arrangements should not be seen as a permanent guarantee of two distinct technology blocks.
He said clearer safeguards may be needed if Malaysia wants to preserve that separation over the long term, including rules on supplier changes, independent assessments, customer notification and transition arrangements.
Such measures, he said, would formalise the distinction, rather than leave it dependent on the operators’ existing commercial agreements.
The immediate change concerns who will steer DNB. The longer-term question is whether businesses can commit to a technology with confidence that their choices will remain available throughout their investments. - FMT
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.