Flying Between the Cracks of Giants
Singapore’s defense relationship with Taiwan is one of the Indo-Pacific’s most discreet yet enduring military partnerships. Since 1975, under Project Starlight, Singapore has conducted large-scale troop training in Taiwan, compensating for its lack of domestic training space. In return, Taiwan benefits from a highly capable partner that boosts its defense readiness without provoking open conflict.
This commentary examines the rationale and evolution of this partnership and offers strategic lessons for small states navigating U.S.–China tensions. Singapore’s balance—military cooperation with Taiwan, economic ties with China, and diplomatic neutrality—demonstrates a flexible model for small states to maintain autonomy amid intensifying rivalry.
Evolution of Cooperation
Project Starlight was conceived during a time when Singapore faced urgent national security concerns and lacked adequate space for military exercises. Taiwan offered an ideal solution, with its geography and political willingness to accommodate Singapore’s training needs. The program began with infantry and artillery training and eventually expanded to include more complex operations, such as joint air force training for F-16 fighter pilots and naval coordination exercises. Training is conducted with discretion, at bases located in southern and central Taiwan, and continues to be a foundational element of bilateral defense ties.
While the number of Singaporean troops participating annually has declined in recent years, from roughly 10,000 at its height to approximately 3,000, this reduction reflects a strategic recalibration rather than a weakening of the relationship. The evolution of training modalities, coupled with Singapore’s increasing use of overseas facilities in countries like Australia and France, has diversified its military preparedness while retaining Taiwan as a key component of its defense strategy.
Beyond field exercises, the partnership has expanded into the technological domain. Joint research and development in aerospace systems, unmanned aerial vehicles, and radar capabilities has enhanced both nations’ defense sophistication. A 2022 bilateral cyber-defense simulation focused on countering potential electronic warfare tactics by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) further demonstrated a shared commitment to digital resilience. Singapore’s strengths in systems integration and command infrastructure have proven complementary to Taiwan’s indigenous innovation in areas such as fighter jet development and cyber warfare preparedness.
Strategic Logic and Diplomatic Balancing
For Singapore, the partnership with Taiwan provides not only practical military benefits but also strategic diversification. Relying solely on traditional defense partners such as the United States or Australia would expose Singapore to political risks, especially if those partners were to be constrained by broader geopolitical developments. Taiwan offers an additional axis of capability development, ensuring that Singapore’s defense ecosystem remains robust and resilient.
This cooperation is carefully calibrated to avoid provoking China. Singapore formally recognizes the People’s Republic of China and affirms its commitment to the “One China” policy. However, it has preserved its unofficial but operationally significant relationship with Taiwan by avoiding public endorsements, limiting ministerial visits, and ensuring that bilateral activities are kept largely out of the media spotlight. When a shipment of Singaporean military vehicles returning from Taiwan was temporarily seized in Hong Kong in 2016, Singapore responded with restraint and reaffirmed its diplomatic position, illustrating its adept handling of sensitive incidents.
From Taiwan’s perspective, the partnership with Singapore serves as a crucial form of international engagement. Lacking formal alliances and facing increasing isolation in multilateral forums, Taiwan sees in Singapore a partner that brings advanced capabilities and strategic discretion. The relationship strengthens Taiwan’s defense posture without heightening tensions with Beijing or forcing Singapore into a public defense commitment.
Regional and Global Implications
Within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Singapore’s partnership with Taiwan is tolerated, if not publicly endorsed. Other member states have adopted varied postures toward China and Taiwan based on their respective strategic calculations. For instance, countries like Thailand and Brunei maintain a low-profile neutrality, while the Philippines and Vietnam, which have more contentious relationships with China, are more receptive to Taiwan’s defense-related outreach. Singapore’s quiet pragmatism is broadly viewed as a legitimate form of strategic hedging under pressure.
Globally, this discreet cooperation contributes to broader regional security balances. The United States, while not officially involved, views Singapore’s military engagement with Taiwan as supportive of Indo-Pacific stability and deterrence. U.S. defense officials have quietly praised Singapore’s constructive role, particularly its ability to enhance Taiwan’s preparedness without triggering diplomatic crises. Conversely, China continues to express formal disapproval of such interactions. However, Beijing has thus far opted for measured responses, likely due to Singapore’s considerable economic value and its nuanced approach to managing cross-strait sensitivities.
Lessons for Small States: Navigating Between Giants
Singapore’s strategy offers key lessons for small states seeking to maintain autonomy in an era of heightened great power competition.
First, its ability to engage in layered partnerships with multiple powers without becoming overly dependent on any single actor provides strategic flexibility. Singapore simultaneously maintains defense links with the U.S., training programs with Taiwan, and extensive trade ties with China. This enables independent action without provoking disproportionate retaliation.
Second, discretion serves as a vital tool of statecraft. Singapore’s ability to conduct high-impact military cooperation with Taiwan while avoiding diplomatic fallout demonstrates how quiet resilience can be more effective than overt confrontation. By limiting publicity and relying on backchannel coordination, Singapore has minimized the risk of coercive retaliation while preserving partnerships.
Third, when compared with other small states, Singapore’s strategy occupies a distinctive middle ground. Vietnam’s approach is more confrontational, shaped by historical conflicts with China and maritime territorial disputes. New Zealand, by contrast, adopts a values-based foreign policy, focusing on human rights and regional institutions while avoiding direct entanglement. Singapore’s focus on capability-building, balanced engagement, and strategic ambiguity represents a unique blend of realism and restraint.
Importantly, Taiwan itself emerges as an asset in the security strategies of small states. Its technological capabilities, geography, and political will make it an ideal partner for training, defense innovation, and strategic diversification. Such cooperation can proceed without formal alliances, providing a flexible framework for countries that wish to support regional stability without overtly challenging China’s sensitivities.
Managed and Strategic Calculations
The continuation of Singapore–Taiwan defense ties is not without risks. In the event of a Chinese blockade or military escalation in the Taiwan Strait, Singapore’s training programs could be interrupted, and its strategic position compromised. Moreover, calls from the United States to expand joint training or intelligence sharing with Taiwan could place Singapore in a difficult position as they balance alliance expectations with economic realities.
To mitigate these risks, Singapore has developed a range of contingency measures. It continues to expand its training infrastructure abroad, including in Australia’s Shoalwater Bay and France. It also invests in domestic facilities such as the Murai Urban Training Facility to reduce reliance on any single location. At the multilateral level, Singapore actively supports the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting (ADMM) as a venue for de-escalation and strategic dialogue, while quietly participating in the Global Cooperation and Training Framework (GCTF) to maintain technical collaboration with Taiwan.
Domestic politics also influence strategic options. Public sentiment in Singapore remains largely supportive of strong ties with China, particularly among the ethnic Chinese majority. Yet, there is growing awareness of the dangers of overdependence. The government must carefully manage public expectations and economic exposure while preserving its capacity for strategic maneuvering.
Moving Forward
For Singapore, maintaining and refining strategic ambiguity is critical. Backchannel communications with both Beijing and Taipei should be institutionalized to prevent miscalculation. Public reaffirmation of the “One China” policy, coupled with quiet cooperation on training and technology, allows Singapore to preserve balance. Regionally, Singapore should further invest in ASEAN-led initiatives that include both China and, where possible, Taiwan in non-political technical forums, reinforcing its position as a convener of pragmatic multilateralism.
For Taiwan, the path forward lies in expanding Track II diplomacy and building resilience through diversified partnerships. By engaging Europe, Japan, and ASEAN member states in areas such as cybersecurity and disaster relief, Taiwan can strengthen its international position without relying solely on the United States. Cooperation with Singapore should deepen in areas that offer mutual benefits and minimal political risk.
Conclusion: A Blueprint for Strategic Balance
The Singapore–Taiwan military relationship illustrates how small states can quietly exercise agency within a constrained strategic environment. By combining discretion, technological cooperation, and strategic diversification, Singapore has built a resilient defense posture while preserving diplomatic flexibility. This balance of steel and silk: hard capabilities and soft diplomacy, offers a pragmatic blueprint for other small states seeking to navigate the complexities of today’s Indo-Pacific.
As great power competition intensifies, such adaptive strategies will become increasingly valuable. Singapore’s example shows that in the shadow of giants, sovereignty can be maintained not through defiance, but through quiet strength and calibrated engagement.
