The following is former Jamaica Prime Minister Bruce Golding’s address to the Commonwealth Society of Beijing’s Commonwealth Day celebrations on Monday, March 30, 2026.

Allow me to express my gratitude to the Commonwealth Society of Beijing, the government of the People’s Republic of China and my own Embassy here for the opportunity and privilege to address you today. This is my fourth visit to China and I have looked forward to and enjoyed every one of them. This is a great country that is changing the world in so many remarkable and positive ways.

The global framework

here has hardly been a time in recent memory that we have been more urgently called upon to take stock of what is happening in the world, the direction in which it is going and what this portends for the people of the world.

World War II ended 80 years ago. It claimed the lives of 80 million people, involved the use of nuclear bombs and left lasting devastation.

In a “never again” reaction, world leaders came together and agreed on an architecture built on some core principles that would guide relations among countries to prevent another such conflagration.

Those principles have not always triumphed. There have been numerous armed conflicts between countries since World War II, as we are witnessing at this very time, but they have been regarded as deviations from the rules, not the norm. Indeed, the essential value of that framework of understanding was validated by the fact that the Cold War that lasted for 45 years did not result in any armed confrontation.

Importantly, that architecture led to a number of initiatives that went beyond just the deterrent of war. It gave birth to a rules-based multilateral framework that governed other facets of relations among countries in areas such as trade, the international financial system, maritime and aviation coordination, public health management, dispute settlements, human rights, labour standards, climate change and disaster mitigation.

Equality without equity

Have those arrangements provided a perfect fix to secure a perfect world? Absolutely not! Many countries continue to be disadvantaged by the evolving international order. The playing field has never been level. Poor countries with weak capabilities are required to compete with the rich and powerful as if they were equals. There is a fundamental difference between equality and equity that is yet to be fully appreciated.

The world continues to experience a significant transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. The evidence stares us in the face. The 100 poorest countries of the world which represent 59 per cent of the world’s population account for merely 11 per cent of the world’s gross domestic output. On the other hand, the 15 wealthiest countries representing only 12 per cent of the world’s population command 54 per cent of the world’s gross domestic output.

The disparity is even more stark when one examines the concentration of wealth because there are vast imbalances even within the rich countries. Less than two per cent of the world’s population owns nearly a half of global wealth while the bottom 50 per cent owns only two per cent — an alarming symmetry. More startlingly, the top one per cent of the population is wealthier than the bottom 90 per cent combined. The extent of this inequality has been widening consistently over the last 40 years.

Fixing the system — not capsizing it

There can be no question that the international order needs to be drastically overhauled to make it more equitable and beneficial to all the people of the world. What we don’t need is to take a wrecking ball to it. Flawed as it is, it provides established rules and predictability and, tedious as they are, it provides avenues through which meaningful reform can be pursued. Its basic principles — shared economic and social development, the elimination of poverty and disease and respect for sovereign integrity and human rights cannot be contested. What is needed is for those principles to be effectively translated into global policies and actions.

But we have cause to be deeply troubled. Recent developments do not merely suggest but, indeed, confirm that the world is being dragged back to an era in which might is right, the law of the jungle prevails in which only the strong survive and the weak become nutrition for the powerful.

Most disturbing is the absence of any real push-back from most of the major countries of the world which are clearly disturbed by these new developments and whose voice and influence can halt the trajectory but which appear to be as intimidated as the rest of us, unwilling to confront this disruption or risk paying the price that it might demand.

It is in that context that I wish to highlight the two issues set out in the theme of my presentation: Commonwealth Partnerships and the Belt and Road Initiative.

The Commonwealth

Apart from the United Nations, the Commonwealth is the world’s largest international organisation consisting of 56 sovereign countries that span Africa, Asia, the Americas, Europe, and the Pacific, with a combined population of 2.6 billion people, approximately one-third of the world’s population. It’s diversity lies in the fact that it includes some of the world’s largest, smallest, wealthiest, and poorest nations and people of many different ethnicities, religions, cultures and languages — indeed, a microcosm of the world. But despite that diversity, it has found common cause in a set of shared values. That it has endured for the last 77 years is a testament to the strength of those values.

Democracy, good governance, human rights, peace and security and sustainable development which are its essential focus are critical elements in human welfare and national development. The success of its efforts is, understandably, subject to access to the resources to execute the required programmes and projects but it serves a useful purpose in their conceptualisation and readiness to secure financing from international agencies.

The Commonwealth must, of course, be mindful of the need to ensure its continued relevance and fitness for purpose. It will never be an internationally powerful organisation — it is not a military or economic grouping, it has no troops or a trove of resources and it does not have the power of enforcement, just gentle persuasion — but it must not lose sight of its purpose and usefulness.

The urgency of reform

I recall that during my time as prime minister of Jamaica, serious doubts arose about its continued relevance. Critics flayed its lack of formal enforcement powers, its colonial legacy and minimal economic impact compared to other international organisations. One critic described it as “an irrelevant institution wallowing in imperial amnesia”.

The Commonwealth Heads of Government were not oblivious to these concerns and the deficiencies they highlighted and appointed an Eminent Persons Group (EPG) in 2009 to review its effectiveness and operational modalities. That EPG made 106 recommendations for reform, 90 of which were adopted by the Heads of Government in 2011.

Most significant of these was the Commonwealth Charter, approved in 2012, that outlines the core values, principles, and commitments of the 56 member states. Of importance, too, the mandate of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), the organisation’s primary watchdog, was strengthened to better address serious or persistent violations of the charter.

However, 15 years after the majority of reform measures were approved, there remains a huge implementation deficit. That implementation has lacked the required political will and sense of urgency and has been bedevilled by the need for further nurturing of consensus among member governments. Reforms involving human rights oversight, one of the most fundamental provisions in the charter, have met significant resistance from governments on the grounds that it amounts to interference with their sovereign authority.

Additionally, some of the recommendations were adopted with caveats that some members of the Eminent Persons Group contend significantly undermined their intended purpose.

Also, implementation of the agreed reforms has been hampered by the lack of resources to which I earlier referred and the failure of some member states to honour their financial commitments.

The next Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting is scheduled to be held in my region — specifically, Antigua and Barbuda — in November and I respectfully suggest that taking urgent action on this implementation deficit should be one of the principal items on its agenda. In the context of the collapsing international order, the Commonwealth has an inescapable duty to reinforce the values that bind it together and the crucial imperative of not just preserving the concept of multilateralism but helping to redefine it so that it can become more meaningful and is not as susceptible in the future to the machinations of any one political regime and so easily disrupted.

All of us across the world have, perhaps, been somewhat complicit in going along with a system on which we find it convenient or are forced to rely but which is so heavily dominated by a single power. Canada’s prime minister, Mark Carney, in his quest for cross-border realignment, seems to understand the pressing need to change course. I hope he appreciates that this cannot be structured around only rich and developed countries like Canada but must include countries that have been hard done by and have not benefited commensurately from the existing arrangement but which countries have much to contribute to global prosperity — an issue to which I now turn.

Reimagining the process of international development

There is a concept of international development that the developed countries have refused to embrace. These countries produce far more than they can consume or absorb themselves. Their economic success is derived from the vast volume of goods and services that they sell to other countries. Other developed countries that produce their own surpluses cannot provide adequate markets for them. Their success depends significantly on what poor and developing countries are obliged to buy from them. The value of that trade amounts to almost US$6 trillion annually — equivalent to 20 per cent of the gross domestic product of the developed countries.

My country, for example, does not produce industrial equipment or motor vehicles. Much of the food we consume — wheat, for example — has to be imported from developed countries. We depend on them for energy and technology, pharmaceuticals, raw materials, a host of other critical inputs and a vast range of manufactured goods.

There is an inherent mutuality in the relationship between the developed countries and those struggling for development but the fruits of the mutuality are not proportionately enjoyed.

If the international system not just allowed but enabled poor and not-so-poor countries to develop themselves — educating and training their people, improving their health services, building the infrastructure so vital to achieving efficiency and productivity, attracting investment, increasing their value-added coefficient and vastly expanding their standard of living and purchasing power — they would end up purchasing so much more from the developed countries and boosting the economies of the developed countries in the process. It seems to me to be a no-brainer.

Thankfully, China clearly understands this, which brings me to the other important issue in the theme of my presentation — the Belt and Road Initiative.

The Belt and Road Initiative

The Belt and Road Initiative was launched by President Xi Jinping in 2013. Prior to that, I had paid an official visit to China in 2010. Up to that time, China had provided Jamaica with significant loans for infrastructure projects at very attractive rates and without burdensome conditionalities. In my discussions with President Hu Jintao and Vice-President Xi Jinping, I was assured that China was happy to provide Jamaica with additional development loans. Grateful as I was for this assurance, I had to point out that we were already over-indebted and could not afford to borrow any more money, that what we needed was non-debt, long-term investment in Jamaica’s development.

The president dispatched a high-level mission to Jamaica to explore investment possibilities. That resulted in a new economic partnership between Jamaica and China that has seen huge investments in infrastructure, port development, and bauxite mining with major planned investment in hotels, industrial parks, and special economic zones.

It was China Harbour Engineering Company that invested in completing and operating a major highway linking our north and south coasts that had been abandoned by a French construction company because of geotechnical challenges. China Harbour overcame those challenges and completed the project which has yielded huge benefits for Jamaica’s economy.

This new economic partnership was, in a sense, following the blueprint of the Belt and Road Initiative which was launched subsequently. That initiative has so far embraced over 150 countries that represent nearly 75 per cent of the world’s population and account for over a half of global GDP. It is the most extensive bilateral arrangement the world has ever seen that is geared to stimulate economic growth and development and enhance global trade and connectivity. It is of special significance and value to developing countries, so often marginalised in the flow of capital and the implementation of international development programmes.

Unwarranted alarm

Not unexpectedly, the programme has earned the displeasure of the United States which sees it as a challenge to its political dominance, especially in the Western Hemisphere, and a not so subtle effort to strengthen the influence of China across the world. For heaven’s sake, give me a break!

Certainly, in my negotiations with the Government of China — and I don’t believe that that situation is any different today — I have never been confronted with any extraneous demand, request or proposition. Our discussions always proceeded on the basis of mutual respect, acknowledgement of our different political systems and with a sharp focus on our shared benefit.

Investments from the US and other developed countries in places like Jamaica are largely confined to high growth sectors and calibrated on speedy recovery of capital. China, on the other hand, thinks long-term and sees potential to which others are reluctant to commit themselves. China is patient, understanding of the challenges that confront developing countries, and it is in it for the long haul. That is what countries like mine need.

Much of the projects under the Belt and Road Initiative, especially in infrastructure development, are designed to increase productive capacity. That is critical if our economies are to be modernised and efficiency in production is to be achieved. But I would like to hope, again humbly, that in its continuing evaluation of the Belt and Road Initiative and its outcomes, China will also consider another critical component of economic advancement — human capital.

Enhancing the Belt and Road approach

Especially in an age where technology — and Artificial Intelligence, in particular — will define a country’s prospects for development, the capacity of our people will determine whether or not we make the grade. Too many of our countries are still unable to achieve satisfactory levels of literacy and numeracy, skills training and the intellectual agility to adapt to constantly evolving technological demands. It seems to me that that is an essential component, critically complementary to the established objectives of the Belt and Road, that should be considered.

This involves the infrastructure to support our under-equipped schools, the appropriate training of our teachers, the development of relevant curricula, technology-driven learning and student exchange to deepen our sharing of intellectual knowledge and experiences.

China recognises the importance of this element and has distinguished itself in the amazing success it has achieved here in China. That experience and the importance of it should inform some consideration in the evaluation and continued roll-out of the Belt and Road Initiative.

I am no longer the prime minister of Jamaica. I have no control over the direction of Government policy. I understand the external pressures that are being exerted on my Government. But I hope we will not succumb to the pressure to eschew this valuable initiative presented by the People’s Republic of China and deprive ourselves of the opportunities that it offers for us to achieve the economic and social development that has for so long eluded us.

Long live the Commonwealth of Nations. Long live the People’s Republic of China. And long live the country of my birth, Jamaica.

GOLDING… there can be no question that the international order needs to be drastically overhauled to make it more equitable and beneficial to all the people of the world