Sovereignty, AI, and the Struggle for Control in Modern Enterprise Networks

Jan. 29, 2026 /Mpelembe Media/ — This research by Arelion highlights that a vast majority of enterprise leaders experience significant anxiety over protecting sensitive information across complex third-party networks. Organizations face mounting hurdles involving encryption management, artificial intelligence risks, and the intricacies of data sovereignty. Ultimately, these sources emphasize that while security investments are increasing, many businesses still struggle to maintain regulatory compliance and total visibility over their digital infrastructure.

The rise of artificial intelligence is a significant factor in the increasing complexity and anxiety surrounding global network security. According to the sources, accelerating AI adoption is one of several factors—alongside geopolitical tensions and multi-cloud complexity—creating unprecedented challenges for network resilience and security.

Key ways AI affects global network security include:

Heightened Perceived Risk: A majority of enterprise decision-makers (56 percent) now classify AI-related risks to their critical data as moderate to extreme. This contributes to a broader “crisis of confidence,” where 70 percent of leaders report losing sleep over data security concerns.

Regional Divergence in Sentiment: There is a notable lack of global consensus on the level of threat AI poses. While overall anxiety is high, 64 percent of leaders in the UK view AI as posing little or no threat to networks.

Integration into Global Infrastructure: Beyond being a threat, AI is becoming a core component of network services. For example, companies are launching AI services globally for the telecom and technology industries to enhance their offerings.

Complication of Data Protection: AI adoption occurs within an environment where leaders are already struggling with data sovereignty and the visibility of data across third-party providers. The complexity introduced by AI can exacerbate these existing “weak points” in third-party infrastructures.

While the report focuses primarily on the enterprise perspective of these risks, it is clear that AI is viewed as a top-tier concern for those managing the backbones of global connectivity.

The research indicates that the role of AI in securing global telecom infrastructures is characterized by a paradox: while it is viewed as a significant threat, it is also being integrated into global services to enhance network resilience.

AI services help secure global telecom infrastructures in the following ways:

Global Service Integration: Companies such as IQSTEL are actively launching AI services on a global scale specifically for the telecom and technology industries. These services are designed to be part of the core infrastructure presented at major industry events like MWC Barcelona.

Enhancing Backbone Visibility: Currently, enterprise leaders rely on controls like Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) integration for visibility of backbone traffic and real-time alerts. The introduction of AI services typically aims to enhance these existing tools, providing better monitoring as data moves across diverse providers and jurisdictions.

Strengthening Resilience Against Hostile Threats: AI-driven services can assist in regular resilience testing against high-level threats, such as nation-state attacks and supply-chain disruptions. This is critical given that only 52 percent of leaders feel “very confident” about security on their own networks, a figure that drops to 40 percent when data passes through third-party providers.

Managing Global Data Complexity: The sources highlight that enterprise networks are struggling with multi-cloud complexity and sovereignty-aware routing. AI services are being positioned to help partners provide the “scale, visibility and expertise” required to protect data as it crosses international borders and different legal jurisdictions.

The report does not detail the specific technical algorithms (such as machine learning for pattern recognition or automated threat response) used by these services. You may want to independently verify the specific technical capabilities of IQSTEL’s AI offerings.

Despite these helpful applications, there remains a significant crisis of confidence among network leaders. While AI is being deployed to secure networks, 56 percent of decision-makers still classify AI-related risks to their data as moderate to extreme, suggesting that the security community is still learning how to balance AI as both a defensive tool and a potential vulnerability.

Managing sensitive data today is defined by a “crisis of confidence” among enterprise leaders, with 70 percent reporting they lose sleep over critical data security concerns. According to the sources, the primary challenges are not just technical, but also operational and regulatory.

The most significant obstacles identified by senior decision-makers include:

Encryption and Policy Management: Leaders rank managing encryption as their top challenge. This is compounded by the difficulty of ensuring consistent enforcement of security policies across vast and varied infrastructures.

Third-Party and Multi-Cloud Complexity: Organizations struggle with the visibility of data as it moves through third-party provider networks, where confidence in security drops to only 40 percent (compared to 52 percent on internal networks). Additionally, the complexity of multi-cloud environments makes it harder to maintain a clear security perimeter.

Lack of Geographic Visibility: A striking 32 percent of leaders do not know the physical locations of all their data centers. This figure increases to 49 percent when third-party providers are included, creating significant “weak points” in the infrastructure.

Data Sovereignty and Regulatory Pressures: Global data flows are increasingly restricted by data sovereignty requirements, which heavily influence the choice of network backbone providers for 77 percent of enterprises. Furthermore, 48 percent of leaders are not fully confident they can demonstrate compliance with emerging regulations like the EU Cyber Resilience Act and new rules in China.

The “AI Threat” and Geopolitics: The accelerating adoption of AI is viewed as a moderate to extreme risk by 56 percent of decision-makers. These technological shifts occur against a backdrop of rising geopolitical tensions and threats from nation-state attacks, which necessitate constant and rigorous resilience testing.

Ultimately, the report suggests that the primary challenge is the loss of direct control. As data moves across borders, different providers, and various jurisdictions, enterprises are finding it nearly impossible to manage security without specialized partners who can provide “sovereignty-aware routing” and greater transparency.

Geopolitical tensions are a primary driver of the current “crisis of confidence” in global data security, forcing enterprises to fundamentally rethink how they handle data sovereignty and network routing. As the world becomes more volatile, the need to protect sensitive information from nation-state attacks and supply-chain disruptions has moved to the top of the corporate risk agenda.

Geopolitical tensions influence these areas in several specific ways:

Driving “Sovereignty-Aware Routing”: Because confidence in security drops significantly when data leaves an organization’s direct control, there is an urgent demand for sovereignty-aware routing. This practice ensures that data is not only protected by encryption but is also routed through jurisdictions and providers that align with the organization’s legal and security requirements.

Dictating Backbone Provider Selection: Geopolitical and regulatory pressures are so significant that 77 percent of enterprise leaders now say that data sovereignty requirements heavily influence their choice of network backbone provider. Organizations are increasingly looking for partners that offer scale and visibility across international borders to help them navigate shifting jurisdictions.

Mandating Resilience Against Nation-State Threats: Rising tensions have made regular resilience testing against hostile threats, such as nation-state attacks, a standard control for 68-70 percent of enterprises. This reflects a shift from viewing security as a purely technical issue to seeing it as a defense against geopolitical actors.

Complicating Regulatory Compliance: Geopolitical shifts often result in localized data laws, such as the EU Cyber Resilience Act and new rules in China. Nearly half of global decision-makers (48 percent) lack confidence in their ability to demonstrate compliance with these diverging international regulations, with confidence being particularly low in France (28 percent).

Reducing Third-Party Exposure: To mitigate the risks associated with global data flows, 83 percent of leaders agree that reducing third-party network hops increases security. By minimizing the number of providers and jurisdictions data must pass through, organizations hope to reduce their exposure to geopolitical instability and “weak points” in third-party infrastructures.

In summary, geopolitical tensions have transformed routing from a matter of performance and speed into a strategic security and legal necessity, where the physical and jurisdictional path of data is just as important as its destination.

SOURCE Arelion