Once considered a major forum for shaping the global agenda among the world's major democracies, the Group of Seven (G7) is facing mounting questions regarding its relevance and effectiveness in an increasingly fractured world.
The summit, held this year in Alberta, Canada under first-time host Mark Carney, had a "carefully planned agenda", said the BBC. But the programme was "upended" by the escalating war between Israel and Iran, as well as the early departure of US President Donald Trump.
No 'unified front'
There may be "precedent" for Trump's early departure – he also "bailed" on the summit in 2018 to meet North Korea's supreme leader Kim Jong-un – but it is "revealing" that he views "dialogue with the US' closest allies" as a "disposable engagement", said Rafael Behr in The Guardian.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Trump's G7 snub this year is not just a "crass exaggeration" of America's usual "arrogant unilateralism", said Behr. His "America First" doctrine is one that "cannot conceive of mutual obligation between nations". That means there can be no G7, "only the G1 and clients".
Divisions were also evident on the issue of Ukraine. Despite hopes "of finding wording that was palatable to all G7 leaders", including the US president, the summit ended without a joint declaration supporting Kyiv, said Politico. This was because, as one Canadian official said, Trump "would not agree to strong language against Russia".
Instead, Carney issued a "chair's summary" that noted G7 leaders "expressed support for President Trump’s efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine" and called on Russia to implement a ceasefire. But, "behind the bluster" is the "harsh reality" that the other G7 leaders did not manage to convince Trump to agree on "new joint measures against Russia". Indeed, Trump used the summit to question the exclusion of Russia from the group since its invasion of Crimea in 2014, and "openly doubted" the need for new sanctions on Moscow, said the Financial Times, which is something "many European leaders and members of Congress are calling for".
There were some bright spots: Trump agreed with Keir Starmer to implement the trade pact they reached last month, and also held a meeting with Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, "raising hopes that they can avoid a burst of new transatlantic tariffs next month", said the FT. Still, "it's really not the unified front one might expect in the face of serious global challenges".
Moving forward without the US
It may appear that the G7's influence has "diminished", but it has a long history of "achieving consensus on previously divisive issues", said the Council on Foreign Relations. At last year's summit in Italy, G7 leaders agreed to a long-debated plan to fund Ukraine using the future expected proceeds from seized Russian assets.
It also successfully coordinated actions among governments during the financial crisis in 2008, "calming the markets with an effort to provide banks with liquidity", said Bloomberg, as well as tackling the Covid pandemic in more recent years. And in 2019, "when tensions over Iran's nuclear program again loomed large", French President Emmanuel Macron surprised counterparts by flying in Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif for talks.
Indeed, the remaining G7 leaders "forged on" with discussions this year, despite Trump's absence, "issuing a series of agreed-upon statements on issues including artificial intelligence, critical minerals, wildfires and immigration".
The proceedings gave leaders "a sense of what it’s going to be like to work among themselves to find common ground and areas they can move forward without US leadership," said economist Doug Rediker, a former representative for the US at the International Monetary Fund. "Clearly, they're going to have to figure out how to operate on a different basis".
-
Will there be peace before Christmas in Ukraine?Today's Big Question Discussions over the weekend could see a unified set of proposals from EU, UK and US to present to Moscow
-
Quiz of The Week: 6 – 12 DecemberQuiz Have you been paying attention to The Week’s news?
-
The week’s best photosIn Pictures A man's best friend, the elephants in the room, and more
-
Is a Putin-Modi love-in a worry for the West?Today’s Big Question The Indian leader is walking a ‘tightrope’ between Russia and the United States
-
Is a Reform-Tory pact becoming more likely?Today’s Big Question Nigel Farage’s party is ahead in the polls but still falls well short of a Commons majority, while Conservatives are still losing MPs to Reform
-
Canada joins EU’s $170B SAFE defense fundspeed read This makes it the first non-European Union country in the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) initiative
-
The US-Saudi relationship: too big to fail?Talking Point With the Saudis investing $1 trillion into the US, and Trump granting them ‘major non-Nato ally’ status, for now the two countries need each other
-
US government shutdown: why the Democrats ‘caved’In the Spotlight The recent stalemate in Congress could soon be ‘overshadowed by more enduring public perceptions’
-
Defeating Russia’s shadow fleetThe Explainer A growing number of uninsured and falsely registered vessels are entering international waters, dodging EU sanctions on Moscow’s oil and gas
-
Revisionism and division: Franco’s legacy five decades onIn The Spotlight Events to mark 50 years since Franco’s death designed to break young people’s growing fascination with the Spanish dictator
-
Sheikh Hasina: why ousted Bangladesh PM has been sentenced to deathThe Explainer The country’s longest-serving leader spearheaded a ‘ruthless, state-led crackdown’ of protestors in 2024, and faces extradition from India
