The well-known late political scientist, Joseph Nye, defined soft power as “the ability to affect others to obtain the outcomes one wants through attraction rather than coercion or payment.”1 Translating the latent soft power of the Umma into something more kinetic requires strategic coordination through mechanisms that are structured yet flexible. In “Ummatic Soft Power as a Catalyst for Change,” Ashraf Motiwala outlines eight domains through which this power can be mobilized: religion; culture, arts, and sports; law; education and intellectual activity; trade and business; healthcare and humanitarian work; media and narrative; and technology and AI.2 Together, these domains form the key arenas where influence can be cultivated and directed, shaping perceptions, guiding decisions, and winning hearts and minds among both Muslim masses and elites. To harness these capacities effectively requires the development of collaboratives of ummatic soft power that can align and activate these domains—to empower Muslims toward the realization of a unified Islamic civilization for the benefit of the Umma and humanity at large. Ummatic collaboratives can be understood as a type of transnational advocacy network (TAN). The concept of TANs was popularized in the 1990s in political science and international relations, especially in the work of scholars like Margaret Keck, Kathryn Sikkink, and Sideny Tarrow, who were an integral part of a broader shift toward taking the power of non-state actors in global politics more seriously.3 Keck and Sikkink defined TANs as “a set of relevant organizations working internationally with shared values, a common discourse, and dense exchanges of information.”4 TANs can comprise a wide coalition of actors including individuals, NGOs, professional groups, religious organizations, and social movements that collaborate across borders often in pursuit of justice or social change. These networks are distinguished by the centrality of principled ideas or values in motivating their formation, rather than by material concerns or professional norms. As a specific type of TAN, ummatic collaboratives can be understood as “transnational, decentralized networks which serve as the operational nodes designed to harness the diverse capabilities of the global Umma and channel them toward shaping global narratives, policies, and norms.”5 For those engaged in ummatic efforts, the TAN model offers valuable tools: it shows how transnational collaboration, shared vision, and strategic advocacy can influence powerful structures even without control of state apparatus. In this way, ummatic collaboratives carry an inherently vertical integrative function. On the one hand, they speak to the public, building solidarity, identity, and a moral narrative that sustains collective consciousness across the Umma. On the other hand, they target those who hold the levers of power, pushing them to act in ways that align with Islamic principles and the interests of the Umma. This dual orientation ensures that collaboratives are not confined to cultural symbolism but are strategically positioned to translate moral authority into tangible outcomes. The theory of TANs offers several conceptual tools for this dual task. “Framing” enables collaboratives to connect local struggles, whether in Palestine, Kashmir, or East Turkestan, to a shared ummatic narrative, transforming them into global causes. Pressure is applied through coordinated campaigns, boycotts, or mobilizations of shame, which leverage the moral weight of the Umma against unjust actors. The “boomerang pattern,” whereby local actors bypass hostile governments and appeal directly to international allies, further demonstrates how decentralized networks can bring pressure to bear on recalcitrant authorities.6 These mechanisms show that the path from soft power to policy change is not linear but mediated through layered strategies of persuasion that shift the cost-benefit calculations of various actors.