CLEMENT DILLIES, DEC 3 2025
A strand of the literature on de facto states emphasizes that de facto states’ foreign policy aims to ensure both physical security and recognition (Berg & Vits, 2018). Berg and Vits argue that de facto states look for protection from external patrons to maintain themselves and show the international community their capacity to do so. This paper states that instead of being solely driven by physical security concerns, bilateral relationships between de facto states are motivated by their quest for ontological security as they increase it through narratives.
While existing literature emphasizes physical security as a key driver of de facto states’ foreign policy, this paper offers an alternative explanation. Bilateral ties among de facto states can be driven more by identity needs than strategic or physical security benefits. It departs from traditional accounts prioritizing physical security in de facto states’ foreign policy by demonstrating how identity-affirming relationships with similarly unrecognized entities, like Somaliland, serve Taiwan’s ontological security needs. Drawing upon Mitzen’s (2006) accounts of ontological security, which distinguishes between physical and ontological
security, this paper aims to explain what pushes de facto states to enter into relations with one another despite limited capacity to guarantee security. Here, we do not mean to assert that de facto states are acting «as a unified front against the restricting international legal order» but to look at the reasons for de facto states to enter into relations with their kin that seem less able to guarantee physical security than recognized states can. We will be looking at the relationship between Taiwan and Somaliland from the former’s point of view. This raises the following
question: Why do de facto states, despite their limited capacity to provide physical security, pursue bilateral relations? We expect to find that relations between de facto states can be explained by an ontological security seeking behavior, which aims at confirming their national identity and gaining recognition (Grzybowski, 2021) through narratives. For that matter, we will be analyzing Taiwanese narratives focused on their relationship with Somaliland. It is worth mentioning that here, Somaliland is understood as a context, as the other party in the bilateral relationship with Taiwan, rather than a case in itself. In fact, we will not be looking at Somaliland’s narratives on its bilateral relationship with Taiwan.
Defining de facto states in the absence of academic consensus
States benefiting from widespread recognition are often used as the main reference unit in international relations and security studies. This paper utilizes the concept of de facto states as its object of study, and we must specify what this term means before starting our research. The field of research on de facto states remains divided on the question of defining de facto states, and no consensus has been reached yet (Kosienkowski, 2022). These definitions usually differ in the criteria they use, which either reduce or increase the number of studied cases. As the aim of this study is not to take part in this definitional debate, we are obliged to specify our chosen definition, as it shapes the case selection process. Scott Pegg et al. (1998) consider de facto states as secessionist entities that combine the following characteristics:
«organized political leadership which has risen to power through some degree of indigenous capability; receives popular support; and has achieved sufficient capacity to provide governmental services to a given population in a defined territorial area, over which effective control is maintained for an extended period of time.» (Ibid., p. 1).
Read full report below…
De-Facto-Diplomacy-Taiwans-Quest-for-Ontological-Security-in-Somaliland