By Sir Ronald Sanders
Small and medium-sized states, from the most vulnerable island nations to more diversified middle‑income economies, have always faced a difficult reality. They have to navigate a world in which power is unevenly distributed and in which the decisions of larger countries can have profound consequences for their security, prosperity, and independence.
For decades, however, there was a degree of predictability in international affairs. While powerful countries exercised greater influence, there remained broad acceptance of certain principles: that sovereignty should be respected, territorial integrity protected, disputes settled peacefully, and international agreements honoured. International institutions and rules did not eliminate inequalities of power, but they helped to moderate them.
Today, that environment is less certain.
Geopolitical rivalry is intensifying. Economic pressure is increasingly used as an instrument of policy. Longstanding assumptions about alliances, international obligations, and sovereignty itself are being questioned more openly than at any time in recent memory.
For small and medium-sized states alike, these developments are especially significant—for the smallest because they magnify existing vulnerabilities, and for the medium-sized because they narrow the room for their, hitherto, independent initiative. They do not possess the military, economic, or political weight to shape international events on their own. Their prosperity depends upon stable international arrangements. Their security depends upon predictability. Their ability to pursue national objectives often rests on cooperation rather than coercion.
In a world where power is becoming more assertive and international rules less certain, the ability to build partnerships, form coalitions, and advance common interests through association may become one of the most important strategic assets for both small states and medium-sized nations, such as Australia and Canada.
This is where the Commonwealth assumes renewed importance.
The Commonwealth – a voluntary association of 56 states from across the world – remains one of the few international organisations that brings together major developed economies, emerging powers, and small vulnerable states within a single framework. It includes countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and India alongside nations from Africa, the Caribbean, the Pacific, and Asia.
At a time when states need wider partnerships and greater influence, the Commonwealth offers something increasingly rare: a forum where countries of vastly different size and power engage one another regularly and directly.
Yet the Commonwealth should not be romanticised. The Commonwealth has never been free of power imbalances within its own association. Larger and wealthier members have often exercised considerable influence over its priorities and decisions. The United Kingdom has historically played a central role in shaping the institution. Australia and New Zealand have long exercised significant influence in the Pacific. Canada, India, South Africa, and Nigeria each carry weight that smaller members cannot match.
The question, therefore, is not whether larger countries possess greater influence. They plainly do. The more important question is whether the Commonwealth provides opportunities for smaller states to be heard, build coalitions, and affect outcomes in ways that would be far more difficult outside the association; and, also, provides support for medium-sized nations that they now need.
The international system remains largely hierarchical. The Commonwealth, by contrast, functions primarily through relationships, consultation, and consensus. That distinction matters.
Within the association all states possess something they would otherwise lack: regular access, established networks, coalition‑building opportunities, and channels through which ideas and concerns can be advanced directly to decision‑makers.
While that does not create equality of influence, it provides opportunities for smaller states to amplify their voice and advance their interests. Small states have frequently exercised influence disproportionate to their size through collective action, whether on climate change, debt vulnerability, ocean governance, or broader questions of international development.
But there is another reason the Commonwealth matters today. For many years, concerns about sovereignty, territorial integrity, and vulnerability to external pressure were viewed primarily as a small states’ problem. Smaller nations understood instinctively the importance of international law because they lacked the power to rely on anything else. Now, medium-sized states need to embrace it too.
The international environment is less predictable. Assumptions that once appeared secure are being questioned more openly. Longstanding understandings about borders, alliances, and international obligations can no longer be taken for granted.
The Commonwealth’s commitment to sovereign equality, peaceful dispute settlement, and respect for international law therefore serves the interests of large and small members alike.
Historically, support within the Commonwealth was often viewed as flowing primarily from larger countries to smaller ones. Increasingly, however, larger members may also see value in the collective support that smaller states can provide in defence of sovereign equality, territorial integrity, and international law.
The Commonwealth is becoming more than a forum in which stronger states assist weaker ones. It is increasingly a community in which countries of all sizes have a shared interest in preserving an international order based on rules, cooperation, and mutual respect.
Therefore, the Commonwealth’s significance extends beyond development programmes, technical cooperation, or historical ties. It remains one of the few associations through which states of very different size and influence can strengthen their voice, reinforce their resilience, and work together in support of an international order in which sovereignty remains meaningful.
The Commonwealth has historically achieved its greatest successes when it has combined principle with pragmatism. The same approach is needed today.
As the international environment becomes less predictable, countries of all sizes have a renewed interest in strengthening sovereignty, peaceful dispute settlement, and international cooperation. The Commonwealth remains one of the few forums in which those interests can be pursued collectively despite disparities of power.
The Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Antigua and Barbuda this November offers an opportunity to demonstrate that relevance in practical ways and to help make the Commonwealth matter again.