Israel seeks development partner status in the Pacific Islands Forum just as one of the world’s most seemingly tranquil regions is becoming increasingly contested: Beijing launched a nuclear-capable, submarine-launched ballistic-missile test into the South Pacific on July 6, reportedly without prior permission from the Pacific Islands in the region where the test took place, while the competition between China and Taiwan is intensifying among island states.
The region is more important to Israel than its geographic distance might suggest. A core group of Pacific Island countries has consistently provided Israel with valuable diplomatic support in international institutions. In a U.N. General Assembly vote in December 2025 on Israeli settlements, Fiji, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Naoero (formerly Nauru), Palau, Papua New Guinea and Tonga all voted with Israel and the United States; the Marshall Islands has also historically been among Israel’s most reliable supporters at the United Nations.
The 55th Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting, which is taking place in Palau from Aug. 31 to Sept. 4, therefore comes at an unusually consequential moment for Israel’s expanding engagement with the Pacific.
The Pacific Islands Forum, or PIF, is the principal political organization bringing together 16 countries, along with Australia and New Zealand. It grapples with issues ranging from climate resilience and economic development to fisheries, regional security and the increasingly intense strategic competition playing out across the Pacific.
For Israel, gaining a place within this architecture would represent something larger than another diplomatic relationship. It would give Jerusalem a structured connection to a group of countries that have often mattered disproportionately to Israel in international institutions and that are becoming increasingly important in the broader Indo-Pacific competition.
The diplomatic relationship has recently become more tangible.
Papua New Guinea opened its embassy in Jerusalem in 2023. Fiji subsequently established its first resident embassy in Israel in Jerusalem, and the Republic of Naoero has announced its intention to follow.
Fiji’s decision was reciprocated in June, when Israel opened a resident embassy in Suva. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar described it explicitly as a regional embassy serving the wider Pacific and said Israel wanted to become a strategic partner to the Pacific Islands Forum.
Israel’s new ambassador in Suva, Maya Yaron, serves 10 island countries; the embassy is intended to become a base for Israeli engagement across the Pacific. Yaron is an interesting choice for the job. Before Fiji, she served as Israel’s representative in Taiwan and, years prior, was based at the embassy in Beijing. Having a diplomat with direct experience of both sides of the China-Taiwan divide could well serve Israel’s goals in a region where that divide is becoming increasingly difficult to navigate.
That challenge has been vividly displayed at this week’s Pacific Islands Forum meeting in Palau.
Palau maintains diplomatic relations with Taiwan and has resisted Chinese pressure to marginalize Taipei. Taiwan’s foreign minister attended events around this year’s Forum, prompting China to warn of unspecified “consequences.” Australia and New Zealand responded that decisions about participation belong to the forum itself, not to outside powers.
Only three Pacific countries—Palau, Tuvalu and the Marshall Islands—still formally recognize Taiwan.
Area governments want development partners and investment while maintaining strategic independence.
The dispute follows a very different approach at last year’s forum in the Solomon Islands. The archipelagic country switched diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China in 2019 and has since developed a much closer relationship with Beijing, including a controversial security agreement.
The contrast between the states’ approach illustrates the difficulty confronting the forum: Pacific governments want development partners and investment while maintaining strategic independence.
This matters directly to Israel’s PIF development partner status application.
Israel is seeking this new role as arguments over external partners are becoming more politically sensitive. Taiwan itself participates as a development partner, while China is already one of the forum’s formal dialogue partners. The forum’s own criteria emphasize long-term commitment, sustainable and resilient development, knowledge transfer, technical cooperation and alignment with Pacific priorities, all relevant to a role for Israel.
Perhaps this explains Israel’s silence regarding the China-Taiwan controversy at this year’s PIF. Israel’s contribution to the region will be less political than technological, bringing expertise directly relevant to problems Pacific societies themselves identify as urgent.
Water security is an obvious example. So are agriculture, food security, climate adaptation, disaster resilience, cybersecurity, health technologies and management of scarce natural resources.
That is already the language Israel is using.
In her Aug. 31 meeting with Fiji’s Permanent Secretary for Foreign Affairs and External Trade, Yaron discussed these issues, along with diplomatic training and peacekeeping. She also thanked Fiji for its support as Israel’s application for PIF development partner status is considered. Fiji, in turn, welcomed Israel’s growing interest in the Pacific where rising seas, extreme weather, freshwater scarcity and food security can be existential questions.
The forum is attempting to build its own Pacific Resilience Facility, designed as a Pacific-led mechanism to finance climate and disaster resilience. It is actively seeking additional development partner support.
The objective for Jerusalem is to demonstrate that Israeli engagement adds value regardless of where a Pacific government stands regarding the political competition. If Israel succeeds in gaining development partner status, the achievement will matter beyond the Pacific Islands Forum. It would be another step toward more deliberate engagement with the Indo-Pacific—one based on identifying where Israeli capabilities can contribute to the priorities of other countries.
In the Pacific, that may be the most effective diplomacy Israel has to offer.
