Make the right decision through technical query

The government and the Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC) are apparently in a state of muddle over the reform of the telecommunications sector. In the meantime, mobile operators are trying to ensure the future control of their business by 'seizing the opportunity'. I am using the word 'seizing the opportunity' because despite repeated attempts during the previous two political governments, mobile operators did not get the desired decision in their favor. Now they are trying to cash in on the situation if they can somehow implement their desired decision during the interim government. Such an attempt has clearly been observed since the current government took office. On the other hand, network transmission operators built with domestic investment, interconnection exchanges, international gateways, and international internet gateway operators, want to preserve the existence of their systems.

Because if mobile operators are allowed to build their transmission networks, they will be able to build a specialized 'mobile operator' syndicate in the entire internet system and the companies licensed at other levels will face an existential crisis. Now the biggest challenge is ahead of the BTRC as both sides have their logical point of view. Which side will BTRC take or if it takes any decision, will it create equal opportunities for both sides? However, before making any decision, one should understand the reality of one's own country well.

Rather, during the tenure of the then caretaker government in 2008, in the light of the Telecommunications Act of 2001, several layers were created in the telecommunications sector through the ILDTS (International Long Distance Telecommunication Services) policy and separate licenses were issued. Although this guideline was formulated to ensure the government's revenue from the international call termination system using VoIP technology; but through this guideline, a specific value chain or outline can be created in the telecommunications sector by making several new layers. In particular, the ILDTS policy broke the dominance of Grameenphone as the country's top mobile phone operator in the entire telecommunications system of the country since 1998. As a result, after the implementation of this policy at that time, not only the licensed companies for the new tiers, but also all broadband internet service providers and other mobile operators welcomed them.

However, the situation is no longer the same as in 2008. The situation has changed radically in the last 16 years. From 2G at that time, people have become accustomed to using 4G technology today. It is doing so. Experimental 5G technology is also being used. In line with the rapid transformation of information technology, optical fiber networks have expanded up to the union level in the country and the use of internet bandwidth has increased from 650 Gbps to 6,000 Gbps. As a result, after this massive transformation, questions may now arise about the rationality of the tiers created through the ILDTS policy. However, different parties are answering that question according to their business interests. A neutral answer is needed in this regard. To get this impartial answer, a technical investigation is needed to properly determine how the value chain has worked in the country's telecommunications sector in the last 16 years, how much benefit the common man has received, what kind of complications there are in this value chain, and how much change needs to be made in this value chain. The responsibility of this investigation lies with BTRC according to the Telecommunications Act of 2001.

Any decision without identifying specific areas of correction or change through technical investigation will benefit only one business party and will put the BTRC in controversy. For example, now there has been a strong debate on the issue of allowing mobile operators to use DWDM cards. Since the current government took office, the mobile operators have been campaigning to get permission to build their transmission network. First, mobile operators quickly pressed for a policy of infrastructure sharing. Then, when controversy arose over that, they took a strategic position to get permission to use 'DWDM' themselves.

In a sense, getting permission to use 'DWDM' and building their transmission network are the same thing. Mobile operators have their optical fiber. To make it an active network, all they need to do is purchase and install a 'DWDM' card. According to the ILDTS policy, only NTTN operators are allowed to purchase and install 'DWDM'. Therefore, if mobile operators get permission to install 'DWDM' by trickery, they can easily bypass the issue of technical investigation, policy changes or creation of new policies and become NTTN operators overnight! Once they can become NTTN operators, it will only be a matter of time before the broadband internet business of nationwide ISPs will also be taken over.

However, the reality is that Bangladeshi entrepreneurs have made big investments in expanding the network up to the union level in Bangladesh through the creation of the common transmission network provided under the ILDTS policy. They have created employment for a large number of Bangladeshi citizens. More than 3,000 ISP companies have been established across the country focusing on the common network. The size of investment in the ISP sector is also quite large in small investments. Millions of people are working here. Can this investment and employment creation be bypassed? If mobile operators are unconditionally allowed to purchase and deploy 'DWDM', both the large employment and investment of domestic entrepreneurs will be under great threat. Who will take the responsibility for this?

Those who know the history of the expansion of the telecommunications sector in the country well must remember how big the difference is between the situation before 2008 and the situation after. We have certainly not forgotten how much the service provided by the fiber leased from Bangladesh Railways was charged at a high price. The service receivers had to pay the operators Tk80,000 per month for 2 Mbps data connectivity. After 2008, that price has gradually come down to Tk300. Before 2008, no one except the railways had a fiber network outside the urban areas. After 2008, the creation of a common network made it possible to take that network to the union level. There may be a lot of criticism about the ILDTS policy; but the reality is that without this policy, it would not have been possible to break the monopoly of the country's top mobile phone operator, it would not have been possible to provide broadband internet services at such a low price in Bangladesh and it would not have been possible to create domestic entrepreneurs in the telecommunications sector either.

Now the question may arise, why should a technology be reserved for only one party? I also think that not only a technology-neutral policy but an open policy in the use of technology should be adopted. A policy that increases the possibility of foreign investment should be adopted, but equal importance should be given to attracting foreign investment to protect the investment and business interests of domestic institutions and companies. To address the challenges of future data security, since the COVID-19 pandemic, many of our neighbouring countries as well as most countries of the world have been giving priority to increasing their capacity in telecommunication networks and data management. In contrast, will we make domestic companies in the telecommunication and information technology sectors non-existent?

In fact, the government's policymakers and regulatory agencies must take the initiative to create equal opportunities for all business interests rather than serving the purpose of any single party. The ILDTS policy at that time broke the monopoly in the business of this sector and created roughly equal opportunities for all concerned. This policy may have to be revised now due to the need of the time; but before that revision, it is important to determine where, how much, and why revision is needed. Therefore, there is no alternative to a technical investigation. Until that investigation is conducted, it would be a good decision to keep the existing framework under the ILDTS policy.

Rased Mehedi: Telecommunications and Information Technology Analyst.