This paper is a preliminary comparative analysis of three polity‐seeking nationalisms that emerged in the contiguous peripheral areas – the overlapping ‘spheres of influence’ of three contending imperial centres: Taiwan, Okinawa and Hong Kong. Specifically, it examines and compares the pattern of nation‐formation and the form, ideology and politics of nationalism in each case, and in doing so it tries to suggest a possible explanatory framework for the rise of these nationalisms. Its tentative conclusion is that the rise of nationalism in Taiwan, Okinawa and Hong Kong should be understood as a macro‐historical sociological phenomenon caused by both the short‐term penetration from centralizing colonial and geopolitical centre(s) that triggered nationalist mobilization in the periphery and the long‐term process of peripheral nation‐formation that created the social basis for mobilization. The three cases also demonstrate some other traits of anti‐centre peripheral nationalism: they all adopted a similar ideological strategy of indigeneity, and all developed a differentiation between radical and pragmatic lines characteristic of minority or peripheral nationalisms. A final observation is that while the geopolitics of states in the region is powerfully shaping the development of the three nationalisms, interactions on the societal level may over time create a counterforce from below.