Why De Facto States Keep Forming Alliances Even Without Hard Power
In a world dominated by recognized sovereigns, entities such as Taiwan, Somaliland, Kosovo or Abkhazia still manage to craft diplomatic ties. The driving force isn’t typically a shield of troops or a blanket of UN resolutions – it’s ontological security, the need to feel “legitimately existent” in the international arena.
From Physical Safety to Identity Assurance
Traditional scholarship (Berg & Vits 2018) argued that de facto states pursue foreign policy mainly for physical security and eventual recognition. Recent case studies show a shift: relationships are used to reinforce a collective narrative, confirming that “we are a state, we are democratic, we belong.”
Case Spotlight: Taiwan‑Somaliland Partnership
Since 2020, both have opened representative offices, signed agreements on health, education, and mineral exploration, and regularly celebrate each other’s elections. Their official statements repeatedly stress shared values – “freedom, democracy, rule of law” – while casting China as a disruptive force and the United States as a supportive ally.
These narratives do three things:
- Routinize the relationship: Frequent joint statements create a predictable diplomatic rhythm.
- Signal identity: Positioning themselves as “democratic peers” strengthens internal legitimacy.
- Leverage soft power: Scholarships, medical missions, and wildlife projects translate symbolic goodwill into tangible impact.
Data Snapshot: Growing “Engagement Without Recognition”
According to the International Crisis Group, the number of formal agreements between de facto states rose from 12 in 2015 to 27 in 2023 – a 125 % increase. Over 60 % of these deals involve “identity‑oriented” sectors (education, culture, democratic assistance), while only 30 % focus on security cooperation.
Emerging Trends to Watch
- Digital Diplomacy Networks: De facto states are creating secure messaging platforms to coordinate narratives in real time, bypassing traditional diplomatic channels.
- Joint Climate Initiatives: With limited access to UN climate forums, entities like Somaliland and Taiwan co‑author research papers and host virtual summits, reinforcing their “global citizen” image.
- Micro‑Recognition Campaigns: Social‑media hashtags (#WeAreStates) and crowdsourced mapping projects are used to “register” themselves in the minds of global audiences.
- Strategic Cultural Exchanges: Music festivals, film co‑productions, and sports tours are becoming the primary stage for state‑building narratives.
Practical Takeaways for Policy Makers
Pro tip: When evaluating the security of a de facto state, assess the consistency of its identity narratives as much as its military capabilities. A stable narrative often predicts a reliable partner in non‑security domains.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is “ontological security”?
- A state’s need to feel continuously existent and recognized, beyond mere physical safety.
- Why do de facto states prefer each other over recognized powers?
- They share similar legitimacy challenges, making joint narratives mutually reinforcing.
- Can these relationships lead to formal recognition?
- Directly, rarely. Indirectly, they raise visibility and can pave the way for limited diplomatic openings.
- Is Taiwan’s approach unique?
- No. Kosovo and Northern Cyprus employ comparable “democratic solidarity” narratives, though each tailors the message to its audience.
What’s Next for De Facto State Diplomacy?
The next decade will likely see a surge in identity‑centric alliances, driven by digital platforms and climate urgency. As more unrecognized entities adopt “soft‑power bundles,” the line between security and storytelling will blur even further.
Stay ahead of the curve – follow our International Relations hub for deeper analyses, and don’t miss our upcoming webinar on “Narratives as Security Instruments.”
