International Market Entry Strategy
We help companies design and implement an international market entry strategy, so that they can scale internationally and amplify their impact in the world.
We help companies to scale internationally by supporting them in three key areas of their business:

10x Strategy
for many companies this is a robust international market entry strategy that is ten times better than their current best thinking

10x Momentum
in other words moving 10x faster into international markets than your current pace

10x Cashflow
cash in the bank is increasing by at least 10% year on year

To get those results, there are three big levers you can pull…
The first lever is Critical Thinking which includes:
- Developing an expanded vision - big picture thinking, rather than a “nickel and dime” picture of what you want to achieve.
- Pursuing deep insights - into the opportunities, threats, strengths, weaknesses and barriers to entry in the countries you’re hoping to enter. Understanding the size and dynamics of each market, who your ideal clients and competitors are and how to appeal and deal with them, appreciating the nuances of each culture and what that means for your team as you begin to work there.
- Getting a robust grip on reality - developing certainty that you can deliver on the vision you’ve developed and that your company is set up to do it.

To get those results, there are three big levers you can pull…
The first lever is Critical Thinking which includes:
- Developing an expanded vision - big picture thinking, rather than a “nickel and dime” picture of what you want to achieve.
- Pursuing deep insights - into the opportunities, threats, strengths, weaknesses and barriers to entry in the countries you’re hoping to enter. Understanding the size and dynamics of each market, who your ideal clients and competitors are and how to appeal and deal with them, appreciating the nuances of each culture and what that means for your team as you begin to work there.
- Getting a robust grip on reality - developing certainty that you can deliver on the vision you’ve developed and that your company is set up to do it.
The second lever is the ability to make Definite Decisions - high-quality choices which you make and adhere to. This is enhanced by:
- Having uncompromising objectives - clear, achievable goals that take you beyond your comfort zone. Without these, you won’t take the risks that you need to take to be internationally successful.
- Knowing your numbers - to make high-quality decisions you need to be across and in control of all the numbers in your business. This includes financial numbers and marketing data.
- Creating a powerful plan - a step-by-step plan which sets out who must do what, by when, to make your vision a reality.
And finally, to get things moving, you’ll need Extraordinary Execution - you must consistently carry out your strategy to a very high standard.
Extraordinary Execution becomes much easier when you have:
- Super systems - across all areas of the company, so that the founders can stop working 80 hours a week and start getting maximum leverage from their time.
- A top team - who are 100% on board with your ‘global vision’ for the company. Ideally, they’ll also have at least 90% of the skills needed to make the vision reality, and be willing to put in 120% effort to get results.
- Active accountability - external observers who give objective feedback, encouragement and counsel on your plans and on progress. We believe that to a large extent, environment dictates performance.

Executive Advisory Program
The Executive Advisory Program (EAP) is our flagship offering in the international market entry strategy space.
It is designed for companies turning over $2M+ and enables us to work with your team across a number of areas, to give you the tools to realise your global vision with minimum stress and maximum impact.

We start with a four-month engagement, as in our experience this is the minimum amount of time that you need to get results. Each month we meet twice to work on the areas that you have identified as priorities, including:
- an hands-on, ‘doing’ workshop, to give you the tools that you need to go global and,
- a 1:1 mastermind session to review your financial dashboard, problem solve, track progress and celebrate wins.
In between workshops, you can reach out to us for support,
whenever you need it.
Our Advisors
Meet our team of trusted international strategy experts
Our Clients
What our clients say
Narendra Modi visited Australia from 8 to 10 July 2026 for his third visit as India’s prime minister. His previous visits took place in 2014 and 2023.
The frequency is striking. Before Modi arrived in 2014, no Indian prime minister had made a bilateral visit to Australia for 28 years. During that first trip, he became the first Indian prime minister to address a joint sitting of the Australian Parliament. His two return visits suggest that Australia now occupies a much more important place in India’s economic and strategic planning.
Why does Modi keep coming back, and what does that tell Australian businesses about the direction of the relationship?
The answer lies in the growing practical value that each country offers the other. India needs energy, resources, capital, technology and international partners as it builds its economy and expands its strategic influence. Australia needs access to large growth markets, new investment opportunities and credible regional partners as it seeks to diversify its economic and security relationships.
Modi’s three visits trace the development of that mutual interest.
2014: Rebuilding the relationship
Modi’s first Australian visit reopened political engagement after decades in which the bilateral relationship had received relatively limited attention from both governments.
The visit followed Australian prime minister Tony Abbott’s trip to India in September 2014, during which the two countries signed a civil nuclear cooperation agreement. When Modi arrived in Australia two months later, he held extensive talks with Abbott, addressed Parliament and concluded agreements covering security cooperation, social security, tourism, culture and law enforcement.
The immediate commercial outcomes were modest relative to the scale of the two economies. The political significance was greater. The two governments began constructing a broader relationship around trade, energy, education, security and stronger institutional links.
Australia had resources and technical expertise that India would increasingly need. India had the scale and economic trajectory to become a more consequential market for Australian companies. The 2014 visit gave the relationship the political attention required to begin developing those complementarities.
2023: Consolidating the partnership
By Modi’s second visit in May 2023, the institutional foundations were much stronger.
Australia and India had established a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, introduced annual leaders’ summits and expanded their cooperation through the Quad. The Australia–India Economic Cooperation and Trade Agreement had entered into force in December 2022, reducing tariffs and improving market access across a range of goods and services.
The 2023 visit produced agreements on migration and mobility and established a taskforce on green hydrogen. India announced a new consulate in Brisbane, while Australia was preparing to open a consulate in Bengaluru. Modi also met Australian business leaders and addressed a major community event in Sydney with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.
The relationship was acquiring institutional depth. Ministers, officials, military leaders, universities, investors and businesses were engaging more regularly. Cooperation extended across trade, defence, critical minerals, education, clean energy, research and migration.
Australia’s Indian community also gave the relationship much greater domestic visibility. The diaspora was becoming an important constituency in Australian public life and a practical link between the two economies.
2026: Turning the relationship into practical cooperation
The July 2026 visit was more operational in character.
The most prominent commercial outcome was an administrative arrangement allowing Australian uranium exports to India to begin under the civil nuclear agreement concluded in 2014. The original agreement had remained difficult to implement because India is outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and concerns persisted about the separation of its civilian and military nuclear programs.
The new arrangement is intended to remove the remaining administrative obstacles, with Australian uranium supplied for peaceful purposes under international safeguards. The two governments did not announce expected volumes or a timetable for the first exports. (AP News)
The summit also produced a new declaration on defence and security cooperation, an annual dialogue between defence ministers and a maritime security roadmap. The governments committed to more sophisticated military exercises, greater interoperability, stronger information sharing and closer operational coordination.
They also agreed to expand links between their defence industries and explore an innovation framework connecting government, business, universities and research institutions. Australia has already undertaken its first defence trade mission to India, and the two governments are working on arrangements covering the provision of defence goods and services. (Prime Minister of Australia)
The economic agenda extended beyond uranium and defence. The joint statement covered critical minerals, energy security, investment, education, science, technology and progress towards a more comprehensive trade agreement.
The scope of these commitments reflects the broader role Australia can play in India’s development.
Why Australia matters to India
India is attempting to raise living standards, expand manufacturing, modernise infrastructure and meet rapidly increasing demand for electricity across a population of more than 1.4 billion people.
That development program requires enormous quantities of capital, energy, minerals, technology and professional capability.
Australia is well placed to contribute in several areas. It has large reserves of uranium, lithium and other minerals needed for energy and industrial development. Australian companies have expertise in mining, engineering, infrastructure, financial services, education and project management. Australian institutional investors are also looking for long-term assets capable of generating returns at a scale that is becoming harder to find in the domestic market.
India’s nuclear ambitions illustrate the size of the opportunity. The country plans to develop 100 gigawatts of nuclear generation capacity by 2047. Nuclear power currently provides only about 3 per cent of its electricity, despite installed capacity having doubled over the past decade. Delivering the 2047 target will require sustained investment in reactors, fuel, engineering, construction, safety and associated infrastructure. (AP News)
India is also investing heavily in roads, railways, ports, cities, renewable energy, logistics and digital infrastructure. Modi used the Australian visit to encourage greater participation by Australian investors in those projects.
The opportunity is therefore much broader than exporting commodities. It includes financing, design, professional services, technology transfer, operational expertise and long-term commercial partnerships.
Why India matters to Australia
India gives Australia access to a large and rapidly developing economy at a time when Australian businesses and policymakers are seeking greater diversification.
It was Australia’s fifth-largest trading partner in 2024–25, with two-way goods and services trade valued at A$54.4 billion. That is a significant relationship, although it remains well below its potential given the size of the two economies. (AP News)
India’s demand is growing across energy, resources, education, food, healthcare, financial services, infrastructure and technology. The country also offers investment opportunities for Australian superannuation funds and other institutional investors seeking long-duration exposure to infrastructure and economic growth.
The strategic relationship strengthens the commercial case. Australia and India share an interest in secure sea lanes, regional stability and a balance of power that prevents any single country from dominating the Indo-Pacific.
The 2026 defence declaration creates a stronger framework for collaboration in maritime surveillance, cyber security, aerospace, logistics, autonomous systems, defence research and dual-use technologies. The agreement to increase information sharing, interoperability and the complexity of joint exercises should also create new points of entry for companies that can contribute specialist capabilities. (Prime Minister of Australia)
Commercial participation will still be shaped by export controls, procurement policies and India’s emphasis on domestic manufacturing. Australian defence and technology companies will need to consider joint development, local production and partnerships with Indian firms rather than relying solely on conventional exports.
The diaspora as commercial capability
The Indian-Australian population has helped make the relationship politically visible. Modi’s large community events attract considerable attention, and both governments regularly describe the diaspora as a bridge between the two countries.
Its commercial value deserves equal attention.
Indian-Australian executives, entrepreneurs and advisers bring language skills, professional networks and knowledge of local business practices. Many have direct connections to particular Indian states, cities and industries. They can help Australian companies understand how decisions are made, identify credible partners and navigate differences in regulation, culture and commercial expectations.
This capability is especially useful because India cannot be approached effectively as a single market. Economic conditions, industry strengths, government policy and business practices vary considerably between states. An entry strategy suited to Maharashtra may be inappropriate for Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Gujarat or Uttar Pradesh.
Australian businesses should make more systematic use of Indian-Australian industry groups, founders, senior executives and professional advisers. Diaspora connections cannot replace commercial due diligence, but they can improve market intelligence and help companies build stronger local networks.
What Australian businesses should understand
India offers scale and growth, although neither guarantees an easy path to commercial success.
The country has a federal political system, complex regulation and considerable differences between states and sectors. Price sensitivity remains high in many parts of the market. Procurement processes can be slow, and contractual enforcement may require patience. Relationships and local credibility continue to influence commercial outcomes.
Companies should begin with a clearly defined Indian demand rather than a general ambition to enter the market. They need to determine where that demand is concentrated, which states offer the strongest conditions and what type of local partner is required.
The most promising areas currently include energy and resources, critical-minerals processing, infrastructure investment, defence and dual-use technology, education and vocational skills, food and agribusiness, clean technology and industrial decarbonisation.
Each sector presents a different route to market. A university establishing a campus, a mining-services company seeking contracts and a technology business entering a defence supply chain will face very different regulatory, partnership and investment requirements.
Australia’s desire to diversify away from excessive dependence on China should not lead businesses to treat India as a direct substitute. The structure of demand, regulatory environment, infrastructure, distribution systems and commercial culture are different. India requires a strategy designed around its own market conditions.
From political momentum to commercial results
Modi’s three visits show how far the Australia–India relationship has developed.
The 2014 visit restored high-level political attention. The 2023 visit consolidated a network of trade, diplomatic and institutional arrangements. The 2026 summit applied those foundations to energy security, defence, investment, technology and industrial cooperation.
Governments can establish agreements, reduce barriers and create strategic confidence. Businesses must still convert that progress into transactions, investment and durable commercial relationships.
The strongest opportunities will go to Australian companies that identify a specific Indian need, select the right state and market segment, find credible partners and commit sufficient time and resources to execution.
Modi’s repeated visits indicate that India sees Australia as a useful long-term partner in its development and regional strategy. Australian companies should now give India the same level of serious consideration in their growth, investment and diversification plans.
The headline could also be made more commercially explicit: What Modi’s Third Australian Visit Means for Business.
YOUTUBE Description
Why has Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Australia three times — and what does the growing relationship mean for Australian businesses?
Modi’s latest visit produced significant developments in defence cooperation, uranium exports, critical minerals, clean energy and infrastructure investment. It also highlighted India’s increasing importance as a growth market and strategic partner for Australia.
In this video, I look at how the relationship has developed since Modi’s first visit in 2014, why Australia matters to India’s economic and energy ambitions, and where the opportunities are emerging for Australian companies.
India offers considerable potential across resources, defence technology, infrastructure, education, food, healthcare and logistics. But succeeding there requires a clear market strategy, strong local partnerships and a long-term commitment.
Subscribe for more analysis on what global political and economic developments mean for Australian business.
#India #Australia #NarendraModi #AustralianBusiness #InternationalBusiness #Trade #Geopolitics
Pinned Comment
Australia talks constantly about diversifying away from China. But are Australian businesses genuinely prepared to invest the time, capital and relationships required to succeed in India — or are we still treating it as a market of future potential rather than a commercial priority?
Is India a realistic alternative growth market for Australia, or are expectations running ahead of reality?
When I saw the announcement that the United States was giving the United Arab Emirates more favourable access to certain advanced technologies, I was curious.
The UAE already enjoys a close defence relationship with Washington, as does Australia. So why did the announcement matter, and what would it actually change for companies operating in international defence and advanced technology markets?
As it turns out, the answer lies less in diplomacy than in export controls, industrial policy and commercial opportunity.
A Change in Technology Access, Not a New Alliance
One point is worth clarifying at the outset.
The UAE was designated a US Major Defense Partner in September 2024, with the broader partnership formalised in May 2025. The latest development came in July 2026, when the US Department of Commerce announced that the UAE would receive more favourable treatment under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR).
In practical terms, this eases export controls for certain approved transactions involving US-origin technologies, but does not provide unrestricted access. Export licensing requirements, end-user assessments, end-use restrictions and technology classifications continue to apply.
Nevertheless, the decision is commercially significant because it expands the circumstances in which approved UAE organisations may obtain sensitive American technologies used across defence, aerospace, artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, advanced computing and surveillance.
Why Washington Is Deepening the Relationship
The United States has steadily expanded defence and technology cooperation with the UAE across several strategic priorities.
These include regional military operations, integrated air and missile defence, autonomous systems, cybersecurity, defence innovation and advanced AI infrastructure. The UAE has also invested heavily in becoming a regional technology and industrial hub rather than simply a purchaser of foreign defence equipment.
For Washington, closer technology cooperation also strengthens the alignment of the UAE’s defence and innovation ecosystem with American standards, supply chains and security practices. This is particularly relevant given the UAE’s continuing commercial relationships with China and other major economies. Access to more sensitive US technologies inevitably comes with higher expectations around trusted vendors, cybersecurity, protection of technical data and controls against technology diversion.
Australia’s New Position in the Digital Economy
Australia sits directly inside this shift. The Oman Australia Cable, for example, links Muscat and Perth via the Indian Ocean, creating a route between Australia, the Middle East and Europe that avoids some of the traditional pathways through Southeast Asian chokepoints. Submarine Networks describes it as a 9,800 kilometre cable between Muscat and Perth, with branching units designed for future extensions to Salalah and Djibouti.
Google’s Australia Connect initiative points in the same direction. Its Bosun cable will connect Darwin to Christmas Island, with onward connectivity to Singapore, while an interlink cable will connect Melbourne, Perth and Christmas Island. Google says the initiative is intended to improve reach, reliability and resilience across Australia and the Indo-Pacific.
Google’s South Pacific Connect initiative adds another layer. The Honomoana and Tabua cables are designed to connect Australia and the United States through French Polynesia and Fiji, creating new transpacific pathways and improving resilience in the Pacific.
Taken together, these projects are changing Australia’s position in the digital economy. For a long time, Australia was treated as being on the edge of the global digital map. It was connected, but distant and its geography was often seen as a constraint. These days, Australia is increasingly part of a new digital corridor linking the Middle East, India, Southeast Asia, the Pacific and the United States. Its value is not just as a safe domestic market, but as a secure, stable, energy-rich and strategically aligned node in the global digital system.
The UAE's Expanding Role in Defence Industry
The UAE is increasingly positioning itself as a place where defence capability is developed, manufactured and supported.
Recent cooperation between the US Defense Innovation Unit and the UAE’s Tawazun Council illustrates this direction. The focus extends beyond procurement to include joint innovation, technology development and industrial collaboration.
For international companies, this broadens the UAE’s commercial role. It is becoming a customer, investment destination, manufacturing base, development partner and regional platform serving markets across the Middle East, Africa and South Asia.
That creates opportunities well beyond traditional defence exports.
Where Commercial Opportunities May Emerge
Companies operating in defence and dual-use sectors are likely to find growing demand in areas already identified as priorities by both governments.
These include integrated air and missile defence, counter-drone technologies, autonomous platforms, command and control systems, cybersecurity, sensing and surveillance technologies, AI-enabled defence applications, systems integration, sustainment and specialist training.
The opportunities are not limited to American companies. Australian, British and European firms that incorporate US-origin technologies into their own products may find additional pathways to participate in approved UAE projects. Local industrial participation requirements may also create demand for joint ventures, technology licensing, local manufacturing, engineering services and workforce development. Companies capable of contributing to broader allied technology ecosystems are likely to be better positioned than those pursuing straightforward export sales.
Compliance Becomes More Important
Greater technology access also increases the importance of compliance. Companies pursuing opportunities in the UAE will need a clear understanding of where their intellectual property originates, whether their products contain controlled US technology, who the ultimate end users are, where sensitive data will be stored and how supply chains are structured.
These questions are particularly important for non-US companies. American export controls frequently apply to foreign-made products that incorporate controlled US components, software or technical data. For many businesses, this will mean strengthening capabilities in export classification, licensing, technology control plans, cybersecurity, supply-chain screening, beneficial ownership checks, end-use monitoring and controls governing onward transfer to third countries. For smaller defence businesses, these requirements can materially affect both project cost and commercial viability.
A More Competitive Regional Market
The announcement may also influence the competitive landscape. Companies which are already established in the UAE could gain improved access to American technologies, investment and development partnerships, strengthening their position in regional procurement markets. At the same time, international suppliers are likely to encounter stronger Emirati competitors combining sovereign investment, local manufacturing, government support and access to advanced foreign technologies.
Procurement authorities across the region are increasingly looking beyond imported equipment. They want local capability, technology transfer, skilled employment, industrial participation and long-term economic value. Companies entering the market will need a clear localisation strategy alongside their technical offering.
What It Means for Australian Companies
Australia and the United States are long-time allies and are members of several different defence arrangements, including ANZUS, Major Non-NATO Ally status and AUKUS. In other words, there is no need for Australia to have the same Major Defense Partner designation as the UAE.
The commercial question for Australian companies is also different, i.e. can they use their established position within the broader US defence ecosystem to build partnerships with Emirati organisations? There may be promising opportunities for Australian businesses working in autonomous systems, counter-UAS technologies, maritime capability, cyber, sensing, space technologies and specialist defence services. Success will depend on understanding both US export-control requirements and the UAE’s industrial priorities.
Looking Ahead
Diplomatic announcements rarely create business opportunities on their own. They do, however, reshape the framework within which companies compete, collaborate and invest. For defence and dual-use businesses, this latest US decision is a useful prompt to review three areas.
- First, where could UAE procurement, investment or industrial partnerships fit within the company’s international growth strategy?
- Second, which products, software, components and technical data are subject to US export controls?
- Third, what combination of local, American and allied partners would provide the strongest commercial position while maintaining compliance and protecting valuable intellectual property?
The UAE is becoming more deeply integrated into the American defence technology ecosystem. For internationally active companies, that creates new opportunities for procurement, co-development and regional expansion. It also raises the standard expected in export compliance, supply-chain governance and partner selection. Businesses that understand both dimensions will be better placed to compete in an increasingly interconnected defence market.
The next phase of global business is being shaped by infrastructure most executives never see. Undersea cables form the backbone of the global internet. They carry the vast majority of the world’s international internet traffic and support the systems that modern companies depend on every day: banking, cloud computing, logistics, customer service, e-commerce, remote work, digital trade and, increasingly, artificial intelligence. The International Telecommunication Union describes these cables as critical infrastructure that carries approximately 99 per cent of the world’s internet traffic.
From Connecting Markets to Connecting AI Infrastructure
For decades, the logic of undersea cable routes was largely commercial. Cables were built to connect major population centres, reduce latency, keep costs down and move data efficiently between customers. The routes connecting Asia, Australia and Europe often followed the Asian coastline, moving through places such as the Strait of Malacca, the South China Sea and the Red Sea before continuing on towards Europe. That made sense in an earlier phase of globalisation, when the primary goal was to connect people, cities and markets as efficiently as possible. But Artificial Intelligence (AI)has changed the equation.
AI requires enormous volumes of data to move between data centres, cloud regions and high-performance computing clusters. It needs power, chips, cooling, land, water, fibre and secure international connectivity – requirements which are changing the calculus when it comes to undersea cable routes. If the purpose of a cable is to support AI workloads, it’s no longer enough to ask where the largest customer markets are. Cable providers like Google, Meta, Microsoft and other major technology companies are much more directly involved in financing, building and controlling the infrastructure that carries their data than they were in the past. They care about different things – where the data centres are, where the power is, where the political risk is manageable, and where the route can be made resilient.
A recent example is the I-2SEA cable system, which is being developed by Lightstorm, Microsoft, Singtel and Tata Communications. The system is designed to connect India, Malaysia and Singapore, and has been described as supporting hyperscalers, GPU infrastructure providers and enterprises with AI training and inference workloads across the India-Southeast Asia corridor.
This new map of the internet is being drawn around data centres, cloud regions, AI workloads and political risk, and the route a cable takes is as much a geopolitical decision as it is a technical or commercial decision.
Chokepoints, Leverage and Political Risk
The political risk matters because cables pass through real places. They run across the seabed, land in particular jurisdictions, require permits and depend on access for maintenance and repair. That makes them vulnerable to more than physical damage. They can also be affected by state pressure, regulatory delay, conflict, sabotage and disputes over control.
The Red Sea has already shown how exposed the system can be. The Strait of Hormuz is another emerging concern. Recent reporting has highlighted how dependent Gulf AI ambitions are on a small number of undersea cables running through geopolitically sensitive waters. WIRED has reported that, amid regional tensions, Iranian media claimed lawmakers were considering measures to take control of undersea cables passing through the Strait of Hormuz.
Even if those threats never become policy, they still affect risk calculations. Governments and companies have to plan for the possibility that digital infrastructure can become a source of leverage.
That is particularly important for the Gulf states, which are investing heavily in AI, data centres and digital infrastructure as part of a broader shift away from oil dependence. A country can build data centres, attract cloud providers and secure access to chips, but if its international data routes are concentrated through vulnerable chokepoints, the business model remains exposed.
The same logic applies in the Indo-Pacific. The South China Sea is an obvious example. China claims vast areas through its nine-dash line, and the region is already one of the world’s most contested maritime spaces. Even where a state does not fully control the surface, it can influence approvals, repairs, access and commercial behaviour. A cable fault in calm political conditions is an engineering problem, but in contested waters it may become a diplomatic problem. This is why routes that avoid contested waters and chokepoints are becoming more attractive, even when they are longer or more expensive.
Australia’s New Position in the Digital Economy
Australia sits directly inside this shift. The Oman Australia Cable, for example, links Muscat and Perth via the Indian Ocean, creating a route between Australia, the Middle East and Europe that avoids some of the traditional pathways through Southeast Asian chokepoints. Submarine Networks describes it as a 9,800 kilometre cable between Muscat and Perth, with branching units designed for future extensions to Salalah and Djibouti.
Google’s Australia Connect initiative points in the same direction. Its Bosun cable will connect Darwin to Christmas Island, with onward connectivity to Singapore, while an interlink cable will connect Melbourne, Perth and Christmas Island. Google says the initiative is intended to improve reach, reliability and resilience across Australia and the Indo-Pacific.
Google’s South Pacific Connect initiative adds another layer. The Honomoana and Tabua cables are designed to connect Australia and the United States through French Polynesia and Fiji, creating new transpacific pathways and improving resilience in the Pacific.
Taken together, these projects are changing Australia’s position in the digital economy. For a long time, Australia was treated as being on the edge of the global digital map. It was connected, but distant and its geography was often seen as a constraint. These days, Australia is increasingly part of a new digital corridor linking the Middle East, India, Southeast Asia, the Pacific and the United States. Its value is not just as a safe domestic market, but as a secure, stable, energy-rich and strategically aligned node in the global digital system.
The Opportunity Comes With Obligations
Unsurprisingly, this shift creates opportunities and data centres, cloud infrastructure, AI, cyber security, energy, professional services, digital trade and defence-adjacent technologies could all benefit from Australia’s changing position. But it also creates obligations. If Australia wants to become a serious digital infrastructure hub, it needs to think beyond cables as private assets laid by commercial operators. It needs to think about cable protection, landing approvals, energy supply, Pacific relationships, defence cooperation, cyber security, data regulation, environmental approvals and community acceptance of large-scale data centre development.
The private sector is already making these calculations and governments must now do the same. The United States has already moved in this direction through its submarine cable licensing rules. In 2025, the Federal Communications Commission adopted rules designed to protect submarine cable systems from foreign adversary threats. The rules create a presumption against granting applications involving certain foreign adversary ownership or control, and new cable landings in foreign adversary countries.
This is regulatory fragmentation in action. The internet may still feel global to the user, but the infrastructure behind it is increasingly being filtered through national security rules, alliance structures and sovereign risk assessments. The East Micronesia Cable is another example of this strategic logic. It is a collaborative project involving Kiribati, the Federated States of Micronesia and Nauru, and is funded by Australia, Japan and the United States. The project is intended to provide secure and reliable telecommunications connectivity across those Pacific states. China is notable absent,
Why This Matters for Companies Going Global
For companies operating across borders, this changes the risk equation. A business may never own a submarine cable, negotiate a landing licence or deal directly with a cable repair vessel. But it may still depend on global cloud platforms, offshore teams, AI tools, international payment systems, customer service centres and digital supply chains that rely on this infrastructure every hour of the day.
That makes connectivity a commercial issue, not just a technical one. The resilience of the systems behind a market now matters alongside the size of the opportunity, the quality of the partner and the strength of the margin. Cables, ports, energy grids, cloud regions, payment systems, data centres and semiconductor supply chains are all part of the operating environment – business-critical systems shaped by governments, alliances and geopolitical pressure. If your business depends on global cloud platforms, AI tools, cross-border data, international payments, offshore teams, remote customer service or digital supply chains, then political infrastructure risk is part of your strategy. It may affect where you host data, which cloud provider you use, how resilient your systems are, which markets you enter, how you structure customer service, whether you need redundancy across regions, and how you assess supplier exposure. For companies expanding internationally, this is now part of the due diligence.
The Seabed Is Now Strategic
The ocean floor is becoming the next frontier, the place where commercial strategy, national security and digital infrastructure meet. Where the next phase of globalisation is being quietly built. And where the map of international business is being redrawn. The companies that understand this shift will make better decisions about markets, partners, systems and risk. The companies that ignore it may find that the infrastructure they assumed was invisible becomes very visible when something goes wrong.
China’s test-firing of a nuclear-capable ballistic missile into the South Pacific is a reminder that the region’s strategic environment is changing quickly, and that the consequences will extend well beyond government and defence circles.
On Monday, China launched a long-range ballistic missile from a nuclear-powered submarine, carrying a simulated warhead to a designated area in the Pacific. Beijing described the launch as routine military training, said it was not directed at any country, and stated that relevant governments had been notified in advance.
Australia has taken a very different view. Foreign Minister Penny Wong described the launch as destabilising, and Australian officials have made clear that the warning they received was limited. New Zealand has also raised concerns, including around the implications for the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone. Japan, Taiwan and the United States have expressed concern as well.
The timing makes the launch especially sensitive. It came just hours after Australia and Fiji signed a major new security agreement in Suva, deepening defence cooperation between the two countries and strengthening Australia’s strategic position in the Pacific.
Whether China intended the timing as a direct message or not, that is how it is being interpreted. The launch demonstrated that China can project nuclear-capable military power deep into the Pacific and that its submarine force is becoming more capable. It also reminded the region that the balance of power is shifting.
That matters for Australia because the Pacific is not a distant theatre, it is our immediate strategic environment. It is where our trade routes run, where our energy security connects, where regional trust is built or lost, and where Australia’s diplomatic credibility is tested. It is also where competition between China, Australia, the United States, New Zealand, Japan and Pacific Island countries is becoming more visible, more practical and more consequential.
For business leaders, the easy response is to see a missile test and file it away as a defence issue. That would be a mistake. Geopolitical events do not need to trigger a war to affect business. They change assumptions. They influence government spending. They affect insurance pricing, shipping behaviour, investment decisions, procurement priorities and the way companies think about risk.
In the short term, markets may not react dramatically to this kind of launch. That does not mean there is no commercial impact. It means investors are treating it as a signal rather than an immediate escalation.
But signals accumulate.
If open-ocean missile testing in the Pacific becomes more normal, companies operating across the region will need to factor that into their planning. Ships will not stop every time there is a military exercise, and every test will not become a crisis. But the cost of operating in a more militarised region gradually rises.
Shipping routes become more sensitive. Airspace and maritime warnings matter more. Insurers ask harder questions. Governments spend more on surveillance, deterrence, fuel security, cyber security, port resilience, defence manufacturing and critical infrastructure.
That creates opportunities for some sectors, particularly defence industry, aerospace, maritime technology, cyber security, drones, satellites, undersea monitoring and critical infrastructure.
It also creates complexity for everyone else.
If you are moving goods through the Indo-Pacific, sourcing from the region, selling into Pacific markets, relying on regional ports, or exposed to energy and freight costs, this is relevant to you.
The practical question is not whether this single launch disrupts your business tomorrow morning. The practical question is whether your business is prepared for a region where security risk is becoming a normal part of commercial planning.
Where do your goods move? Which ports and shipping lanes matter most? Which suppliers are exposed to contested areas? How much buffer do you really have in your inventory? What happens if insurance costs rise? What happens if a shipping lane is disrupted for a week? What happens if government procurement shifts even more decisively toward defence, energy security and critical infrastructure?
These are no longer abstract questions. They are the questions serious companies should be asking now.
The broader political point is that Australia and its partners are trying to build a regional security architecture that gives Pacific countries more confidence and more choice. China is showing that it has both the capability and the willingness to push back.
Pacific leaders have repeatedly said they do not want their region turned into a theatre of great-power competition. But that competition is already here, and it is becoming harder to separate the security story from the economic one.
This missile test is another sign that the operating environment in the Indo-Pacific is changing. The companies that understand that early will be better placed than those that wait until disruption is already on their doorstep. Geopolitics is no longer sitting outside business strategy. It is becoming part of the conditions in which business has to operate.
Iran is back in the headlines this week, as Tehran holds a state funeral for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
But for business leaders, the real story is not the funeral. It is what is happening at sea.
Because several weeks after the ceasefire was signed, the Strait of Hormuz is still not operating normally.
This is one of the most important shipping chokepoints in the world. Oil, gas, fertiliser, agricultural products, industrial inputs and manufactured goods all move through, or are affected by, this narrow stretch of water.
At the moment, around 43 ships are passing through the Strait each day. That is only about half of normal pre-war levels. And there are still an estimated 380 vessels waiting or stalled in clusters on both sides of the chokepoint.
Saudi Arabia has ramped up crude exports and is clearing some of its backlog, and agricultural shipping is starting to improve.
But LNG and fertiliser shipments remain largely at a standstill.
That matters for global business because the disruption is spreading well beyond energy markets. It is pushing up freight and insurance costs, creating food and fertiliser pressure, complicating manufacturing supply chains, and forcing companies to tie up more working capital in stock, delays and contingency planning.
There is also a fight over who controls safe passage.
Iran is pushing ships through its approved channel and warning that vessels which bypass its routes may not be guaranteed safe passage.
At the same time, an alternative route closer to Oman has emerged, with the UK and France working with Oman to help secure those waters.
So shipping companies are now making daily calculations about risk, route, insurance, escort, delay and cost.
Some tankers are reportedly turning off tracking systems, while others are moving under naval escort.
And commercial operators are facing steep war-risk premiums after recent attacks on neutral vessels.
There is also a human cost. Thousands of seafarers remain stranded inside the high-risk zone while evacuation plans wait for stronger security guarantees.
So the message for business is simple.
Do not mistake a ceasefire for stability.
Even if oil prices soften, the business impact does not disappear.
Freight stays expensive.
Insurance stays elevated.
Delivery windows stay unreliable.
Input costs remain exposed.
And customers already under pressure become harder to serve profitably.
For CEOs, exporters, importers and manufacturers, this is the moment to check your exposure in the actual supply chain, not just at board-paper level. Revisit your freight assumptions, supplier lead times, insurance cover, inventory position and margins before making promises based on normal conditions.
Because the war may have paused.
But the commercial risk is still moving through the global economy.
The agriculture component of the EU–Australia trade agreeme
For European consumer goods and manufacturing firms, the EU–Australia trade agreement presents a clear but often misunderstood opportunity.
Much of the attention tends to focus on tariffs and improved market access, but in practice, these are only part of the equation.
Commercial outcomes in Australia are shaped less by access alone and more by how effectively a business aligns its structure – supply chain, pricing, distribution and market positioning – with local conditions.
nt has been among the most contested aspects of the negotiation.
In Australia, many farming groups have been openly critical of the outcome. Concerns have centred on the scale of market access granted to European producers, the treatment of sensitive sectors, and the perceived imbalance between concessions made and benefits received.
That reaction is worth noting.
It reflects the fact that the agreement does, in practical terms, create new competitive pressure within parts of the Australian market.
For European exporters, however, the implications are more nuanced.
The agreement improves access. It does not remove the structural realities of operating in Australia.
Tariffs Matter, But Structure Matters More
The agreement reduces tariffs and clarifies rules governing trade between the EU and Australia. For manufacturers, this can improve cost competitiveness and create new pathways into the market. However, the impact of these changes depends heavily on how products are configured and delivered.
A product that qualifies for preferential treatment under the agreement may still struggle commercially if its pricing, positioning or distribution model is not aligned with the realities of the Australian market.
In that sense, the agreement creates potential. Structure determines whether that potential is realised.
Rules of Origin and Supply Chain Design
As with all modern trade agreements, rules of origin determine whether products benefit from preferential tariff treatment. For European manufacturers, this has practical implications.
Eligibility depends on factors such as:
- Where components are sourced
- How products are assembled
- The level of transformation applied during production
These considerations are not purely administrative. They influence supply chain design.
Firms that assess origin requirements early can structure production in a way that maximises eligibility and cost efficiency. Those that do not may find that existing supply chains limit their ability to benefit from the agreement.
A Simpler Regulatory System - With Different Pressures
Compared to the European Union, Australia offers a more unified regulatory environment.
National standards apply consistently across the country, reducing the need to navigate multiple jurisdictions.
For European firms, this can simplify aspects of compliance.
However, this simplicity is offset by other pressures.
Australia’s geographic scale, combined with its relatively small population, creates a different set of operational challenges:
- Logistics costs are higher due to distance
- Market coverage requires careful prioritisation
- Distribution networks must balance national reach with efficiency
In other words, regulatory complexity is lower, but operational discipline becomes more important.
Distribution: A Concentrated Landscape
One of the defining features of the Australian market is the concentration of distribution channels.
In many sectors, a limited number of large retailers dominate. In others, specialised distributors and importers control access to specific segments.
For European firms, this creates both opportunity and constraint.
Working with major retail groups can provide scale, but typically requires:
- Competitive pricing
- Reliable supply chains
- Alignment with retailer expectations around volume and promotion
Alternative routes, including distributors or direct-to-consumer models, may offer greater flexibility but require more active management and investment.
Choosing the right channel is therefore not simply a logistical decision. It is central to how the business will compete in-market.
Pricing in a High-Cost, High-Expectation Market
Australia combines relatively high operating costs with consumers who are accustomed to quality and reliability.
For European manufacturers, this creates a dual challenge.
Products must absorb:
- Long-distance logistics
- Importation and warehousing costs
- Distribution margins
At the same time, they must meet expectations around quality, brand positioning and availability.
Pricing strategies developed for European markets often require adjustment.
A detailed understanding of total landed cost and in-market pricing dynamics is essential to avoid entering the market with a model that erodes margin or limits competitiveness.
Australia as a Market - and a Platform
For some firms, Australia will function as a standalone market. For others, it may serve a broader strategic role.
Its stable regulatory environment, strong infrastructure and proximity to Asia-Pacific markets mean that it can act as:
- A regional base for operations
- A testing ground for new products
- A platform for expansion into neighbouring markets
The agreement strengthens this positioning by improving the conditions under which goods and services move between the EU and Australia.
However, realising this potential requires clarity on how Australia fits within the overall international strategy.
From Access to Execution
The EU–Australia agreement improves the framework within which European consumer goods and manufacturing firms can operate.
It reduces certain barriers and creates more predictable conditions for trade.
What it does not do is simplify the commercial reality of entering and scaling within the Australian market.
Success depends on:
- Aligning supply chain design with trade rules
- Structuring distribution effectively
- Developing pricing strategies grounded in local cost dynamics
- Prioritising markets and channels with discipline
Firms that approach the market with this level of structure are well positioned to benefit from the agreement.
Those that rely on improved access alone are likely to encounter challenges that sit outside the scope of trade policy.
The Strategic Question
The relevant question is not whether Australia is more accessible, it’s whether your business is configured to operate effectively within it.
For European manufacturers and consumer brands, the opportunity is clear – but it is conditional.
The agreement opens the door. How you design your entry determines whether you are able to build a sustainable presence beyond it.
Latest Insights
Read the latest insights on international market entry from our #GoGlobal blog:

Devoid of Complexity and History: How Going Global Should Be
I was watching Sky News the other night when a journalist described one of Donald Trump’s deals as “devoid of complexity and history. It was meant as an insult, a way of saying he’d oversimplified something that demanded nuance.

Cracking the Code of Taiwan’s Business Culture
Taiwan is one of those markets that often flies under the radar. It’s sometimes overlooked in broader discussions about Asia, yet full of opportunity for brands that take the time to understand it.

5 Costly Mistakes When Expanding into Asia
Expanding into Asia can completely change the game for your brand. It’s exciting, full of potential, and offers access to some of the world’s fastest-growing consumer markets. That’s if you get it right.