Türkiye and the Digital Silk Road: from corridor vision to service design

Begin with the western gateway

For the ADNET initiative, European options are considered from hubs such as Frankfurt through regional interconnections towards Sofia and Türkiye. İstanbul and İzmit are reference locations for the western part of the design. İzmit is an internal Turkish location, not an international border crossing.

Public industry evidence helps frame this geography. In its announcement of 13 August 2024, RETN described its İstanbul point of presence as connected to Sofia and Tbilisi. This is evidence about RETN's network, not a statement of ADNET ownership, partnership or service availability.

Keep Türkiye at the centre of the design

A proposal should explain how the route enters Türkiye, where the service is handed off and how it continues towards the selected destination. Northern, central and southern options should be compared against the actual application, access requirements and available infrastructure.

A planning sequence, not a confirmed physical route.

The shortest-looking line is only one input. Site availability, optical design, maintainability and shared infrastructure can change the practical choice. Measured performance and an agreed delivery plan are needed before making a service commitment.

Evaluate onward directions independently

The initiative considers onward options towards the Caucasus, Iran, Iraq and Central Asia, with longer-term destinations including China, India and Russia. Each direction has its own physical handoffs, operating arrangements and segment availability.

For example, AzerTelecom’s announcement of 6 August 2026 reported that cable laying on the Sumgayit–Aktau Trans-Caspian project was complete, while shore integration and terrestrial works remained. Commissioning was targeted for the end of 2026. Cable laying is therefore not evidence that an end-to-end service is ready to order. Our atlas source register retains the project’s commissioning status.

A direct border connection, a submarine segment and a chain of terrestrial services require different evidence. They should not be treated as interchangeable simply because they connect the same regions on a map.

Turn the map into a project brief

A useful brief identifies the two delivery locations and the service model first. Then record the preferred geography and any route exclusions. Ask the engineering and commercial teams to resolve the remaining questions in a single proposal.

1. Confirm the endpoint addresses and access arrangements.
2. Identify every segment and the party responsible for it.
3. Verify border handoffs, interconnection and applicable operating requirements.
4. Review optical feasibility, protection and shared dependencies.
5. Agree acceptance criteria, delivery milestones and support ownership.

ADNET's map is deliberately presented as a corridor vision. Every route requires our technical and commercial review. Its value is to make the first conversation precise: where the service starts, where it ends and what the customer needs it to do.