Is the Commonwealth Fit for Purpose? Sri Lanka Must Ask What Its Citizens Actually Gain
As Commonwealth leaders gather in Antigua and Barbuda, the time has come for Sri Lanka to demand measurable economic, diplomatic and practical benefits from its membership — or reconsider what that membership is worth.
By ColomboWire – Special Political Commentary
The Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) is taking place in St John's, Antigua and Barbuda, from 1 to 4 November 2026. Leaders and representatives from 56 member countries have gathered under the theme, "Accelerating Partnerships and Investment for a Prosperous Commonwealth." King Charles III, the Head of the Commonwealth, is also attending the summit.
But while leaders exchange diplomatic courtesies, attend official receptions and participate in high-level discussions, an important question deserves to be asked back home in Colombo:
What exactly does an ordinary Sri Lankan citizen receive in return for Sri Lanka's membership of the Commonwealth?
This is not a question about historical relationships, diplomatic friendships or the importance of international cooperation. It is a question about value for money, national interests and the practical benefits of international membership.
Sri Lanka is a developing country facing serious economic challenges. Its taxpayers have a legitimate interest in knowing whether international organisations to which their country belongs are delivering measurable benefits to its people.
The Commonwealth was established on the principles of cooperation, democracy, development and shared prosperity. However, principles written in declarations must ultimately translate into opportunities, economic advantages and tangible improvements in people's lives.
The question is whether that is happening for Sri Lanka.
The Commonwealth passport question: Why are Sri Lankans still visa applicants?
Consider the position of an ordinary Sri Lankan passport holder who wishes to visit the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada or New Zealand.
Does Commonwealth membership automatically provide visa-free access to these countries?
The answer is no.
Sri Lankan nationals remain subject to the ordinary immigration requirements of these countries. Sri Lanka is on the UK's visa-national list, meaning that Sri Lankan visitors generally need advance entry clearance. Canada also lists Sri Lanka among countries whose citizens require visitor visas. New Zealand's visa-waiver list does not include Sri Lanka.
This raises an obvious question: if the Commonwealth represents a family of nations connected by historical, political and institutional relationships, why has that relationship not produced greater mobility for ordinary citizens?
Of course, membership does not automatically guarantee free movement. Immigration policy remains a sovereign decision for each country. Nevertheless, Sri Lanka has every right to ask its Commonwealth partners to negotiate better arrangements.
Why should a Sri Lankan businessperson, student, academic or professional face substantial visa costs and administrative barriers when travelling to other Commonwealth countries, while leaders meet regularly to discuss partnership and prosperity?
The issue is not necessarily unrestricted immigration. It is about establishing practical arrangements for legitimate visitors, students, businesspeople, researchers and skilled professionals.
A Commonwealth mobility agreement, negotiated through reciprocal arrangements, could be one of the most visible benefits that ordinary citizens experience.
Where is the economic dividend?
The Commonwealth has 56 member states representing approximately 2.7 billion people. Its combined economic potential is considerable, and its official agenda includes trade, investment, innovation, climate resilience and sustainable development.
Sri Lanka should therefore ask a more fundamental question: how much of this economic potential is being converted into actual opportunities for Sri Lankan businesses and workers?
Are Sri Lankan exporters receiving preferential access to Commonwealth markets?
Are small and medium-sized enterprises receiving practical assistance to enter the British, Australian, Canadian and African markets?
Are Sri Lankan technology companies being connected with investment partners and research institutions across the Commonwealth?
Are there substantial, accessible development-finance programmes for countries struggling with debt, infrastructure requirements and climate-related economic pressures?
The Commonwealth Secretariat does provide technical assistance, policy advice, training, institutional support and programmes addressing development, trade and climate challenges. Its official membership benefits include assistance with legislation, governance, economic development and capacity-building.
These are real institutional benefits and should not be dismissed.
However, there is a difference between an organisation offering technical assistance and a member country receiving the scale of investment, funding and technology transfer required to transform its economy.
Sri Lanka needs transparent figures. How much technical assistance has been provided? How many Sri Lankan institutions have benefited? How many businesses have secured new opportunities? How much investment has been facilitated?
Without such measurements, the public cannot properly evaluate the return on membership.
Is the Commonwealth still defined by its colonial history?
Another question that deserves serious consideration concerns the Commonwealth's institutional identity.
The organisation has evolved considerably from its historical origins. Its membership consists of independent and sovereign states across Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, Europe and the Pacific.
King Charles III is its Head, but he is not the political head of the governments of its 56 member countries. The Commonwealth is a voluntary association, and its Secretary-General and member governments have their own institutional responsibilities.
Nevertheless, the symbolism of the British monarchy remains part of its public identity.
For countries such as Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan and the Maldives, which have their own sovereign constitutions, political traditions and national priorities, the relevant question is whether this historical association is producing a modern partnership based on equality.
The Commonwealth must be more than a diplomatic gathering. Its legitimacy and continuing relevance depend on whether it can deliver practical cooperation between countries with vastly different economic circumstances.
The question should not be whether Sri Lanka should maintain friendly relations with Britain or other Commonwealth countries. Those relationships are valuable in their own right.
The question is whether the Commonwealth institution itself is delivering sufficient additional value.
What should Sri Lanka demand from the Commonwealth?
The Sri Lankan Government should use the Antigua summit and its subsequent diplomatic engagements to establish a clear list of national demands.
There are at least five areas where Sri Lanka could seek measurable commitments.
1. A Commonwealth mobility and visa agreement
Sri Lanka should propose negotiations for easier travel arrangements for Commonwealth citizens.
The initial objective could be reciprocal visa facilitation for businesspeople, academics, students, researchers and recognised professionals, followed by consideration of broader visitor visa-waiver arrangements.
Sri Lankan citizens should not have to wait indefinitely for meaningful improvements in mobility.
2. A Commonwealth development funding mechanism
Developing Commonwealth countries should have access to dedicated development-finance facilities.
Sri Lanka should seek funding for infrastructure, education, renewable energy, agricultural modernisation, public transport and digital development.
This does not mean demanding unconditional billions of pounds. It means establishing accessible funding, transparent eligibility criteria, concessional financing and measurable commitments.
3. Technology transfer and artificial intelligence
The Commonwealth should establish a practical technology-sharing programme.
Sri Lanka needs access to modern agricultural technology, artificial intelligence, digital public services, medical research, renewable energy and advanced manufacturing expertise.
Why should developing countries remain merely consumers of technology when they could become partners in research, innovation and production?
A Commonwealth technology partnership could connect Sri Lankan universities, research institutions and businesses with established institutions in Britain, Australia, Canada, India and other member countries.
4. Education and employment opportunities
The Commonwealth should expand scholarships, university partnerships, professional exchanges and vocational training.
Sri Lankan young people should have greater opportunities to access internationally recognised qualifications, research programmes and professional development.
A Commonwealth that represents 2.7 billion people should be able to create a meaningful education and skills network.
5. Trade and investment guarantees
Sri Lanka should demand a stronger Commonwealth business programme that connects local exporters, manufacturers and entrepreneurs with international markets.
It should include trade facilitation, investment partnerships, support for small businesses and access to international supply chains.
The Commonwealth Business Forum should produce measurable investment commitments rather than simply becoming another networking occasion.
What about the taxpayers' money?
There is another issue that cannot be ignored.
International diplomatic meetings involve expenditure on travel, accommodation, security, official delegations, protocol and associated administration.
These expenses should not automatically be described as waste. Diplomacy has economic and strategic value, and international meetings can generate opportunities that are not immediately measurable.
However, governments must demonstrate that public expenditure serves national interests.
Sri Lankan taxpayers deserve to know how much public money is allocated to Commonwealth participation, what commitments are secured through official visits, and what economic or institutional benefits follow.
The Government should publish a transparent assessment of its Commonwealth engagement, including membership contributions, delegation expenditure, programme funding received and projects delivered.
The same accountability should apply to the organisation itself.
The question is not how much money was spent entertaining international leaders. It is what was achieved for the people who ultimately pay for their governments.
Should Sri Lanka consider leaving the Commonwealth?
This is a question that should not be dismissed as politically unacceptable.
Membership of the Commonwealth is voluntary. Countries can withdraw, although withdrawal and any subsequent application to rejoin have institutional implications.
However, leaving should not be treated as the immediate answer.
Sri Lanka should first establish what it wants from membership, identify the benefits it currently receives, calculate the costs and negotiate reforms.
India, Pakistan, the Maldives and other developing member countries also have interests in ensuring that the Commonwealth reflects the priorities of countries outside its traditional centres of economic power.
If the organisation cannot provide meaningful development cooperation, technology partnerships, improved trade opportunities and practical benefits for ordinary citizens, then its members are entitled to question its institutional relevance.
The Commonwealth should not become an organisation in which developing countries simply participate in ceremonial diplomacy while the practical advantages remain concentrated elsewhere.
A new Commonwealth for the 21st century
The Antigua summit's theme, Accelerating Partnerships and Investment for a Prosperous Commonwealth, offers an opportunity to move beyond declarations.
The Commonwealth Secretariat itself speaks about development, trade, technical assistance, climate resilience and economic cooperation. These commitments should now be translated into measurable national outcomes.
Sri Lanka should therefore propose a Commonwealth Citizens' Benefits Charter, setting out specific targets for:
Easier travel and reciprocal visa arrangements.
Development financing for lower- and middle-income members.
Technology transfer and research partnerships.
Scholarships and international professional opportunities.
Increased trade, investment and employment.
Transparent reporting of membership expenditure and benefits.
An annual public report could show what each country has contributed, what it has received and what commitments remain outstanding.
Such a system would help transform the Commonwealth from a diplomatic association into a more accountable development partnership.
The final question: What is the Commonwealth worth to a Sri Lankan?
Sri Lanka has been part of the Commonwealth since independence in 1948. Its membership has provided an international diplomatic platform, institutional cooperation and opportunities for engagement with countries across several continents.
But historical connections cannot be the only justification for continuing membership indefinitely.
The Sri Lankan public needs to see tangible outcomes.
Can membership help a Sri Lankan student obtain a scholarship? Can it help an entrepreneur enter a new market? Can it make international travel easier? Can it bring advanced technology into Sri Lanka? Can it help the country secure development finance and investment?
These are the questions that matter.
King Charles III and the leaders attending the Antigua summit may exchange greetings, attend official functions and discuss the future of the Commonwealth. But when they return home, ordinary citizens will still be dealing with visa restrictions, economic pressures, employment challenges and the cost of international education.
Sri Lanka should not be satisfied with simply being a member of the Commonwealth. It should demand to become a beneficiary of the Commonwealth.
If the organisation wants to remain relevant to developing countries, it must demonstrate that membership delivers more than diplomatic recognition and historical association.
The time has come for Sri Lanka to ask a straightforward question:
Is the Commonwealth delivering prosperity to its citizens, or are its citizens simply being asked to celebrate the Commonwealth?
That is the debate the Antigua summit should encourage — and one that should continue in Colombo long after the delegates have departed.