G7 2025: A Summit Caught Between Old Alliances and New Powers

The 2025 G7 summit in Canada, which brought together leaders of developed economies and countries of the Global South, highlighted the transition to a multipolar world. However, differences among participants and Donald Trump's demarche made it difficult to reach consensus, leaving key issues, such as support for Ukraine, without clear decisions

The 51st G7 summit, held on June 15–17, 2025, in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada, was one of the most controversial in recent decades. Chaired by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, the meeting brought together leaders from the world's seven leading economies — Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States — as well as representatives from the European Union.

In addition to the traditional participants, the summit was joined by leaders from countries that are not members of the G7, including Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, South Korean President Lee Jae-myung, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, and others.

This unprecedented presence of invited leaders demonstrates the G7's attempt to adapt to a multipolar world where the influence of developed democracies coexists with the growing role of new global players. However, the results of the summit were mixed, highlighting both the new realities of global politics and internal differences among participants.

Controversy Surrounding the Summit: New Leaders and Communication Format

This year's summit was unique due to the participation of new G7 leaders, including British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and the return of US President Donald Trump, who attended the summit for the first time since 2019.

The presence of new faces, combined with an expanded number of invited leaders such as Narendra Modi, Lee Jae-myung, and Anthony Albanese, underscored the G7's desire for a more inclusive format. The invitation of India, the world's fifth-largest economy, was particularly significant, despite tense relations with Canada over allegations of India's involvement in the 2023 assassination of a Sikh activist.

Global South and G7 need to work together 

This approach reflects the G7's recognition of the need to engage countries of the Global South and other regional leaders to address global challenges. The summit was an attempt to find a new format for communication that would take into account the multipolarity of the world, where economic and political weight is distributed among several centers of influence. However, no concrete results were achieved, which shows how tricky this transition is.

The summit agenda covered key global issues: international peace and security, economic stability, digital transformation, and climate action. As the host country, Canada identified three main priorities: protecting communities and the world, ensuring energy security and accelerating digital transformation, and strengthening partnerships for the future. However, despite the ambitious agenda, the summit did not end with the adoption of significant joint decisions, highlighting the differences between the participants.

Discussions on international peace and security focused on the escalation of the conflict between Israel and Iran, which became the dominant topic due to large-scale Israeli strikes on Iranian military and nuclear facilities. The G7 expressed support for Israel's right to self-defense, calling Iran “the main source of regional instability and terror,” but called for de-escalation, in particular a ceasefire in Gaza. At the same time, the issue of the Russian-Ukrainian war received less attention, which posed a challenge for Ukrainian diplomacy.

Too big shoes to fill: Ambitious Agenda Without Any Big Decisions

Economic stability was another key topic, especially in light of the trade tariffs imposed by President Trump, which caused concern among allies. G7 leaders called on Trump to lift these tariffs, arguing that they weaken the G7 economies and strengthen China. However, the only notable economic outcome was a US-UK trade agreement that reduced tariffs on British cars and aerospace products.

Digital transformation was represented by discussions on the ethics of artificial intelligence (AI), in particular through support for the Hiroshima Code of Conduct and the OECD framework. Climate action included initiatives on energy security and resilience to natural disasters, such as the forest fires in Alberta, but no concrete commitments, such as on green energy financing, were reached.

The lack of meaningful decisions reflects the difficulty of reaching consensus in a multipolar world where the interests of the G7 countries and invited states often diverge.

Trump's Demarche: Global Elites Are Concerned about US Isolationism and its Expected Consequences

One of the most resonant moments of the summit was the premature departure of US President Donald Trump due to the escalation of the conflict between Israel and Iran. His move, as well as his statements in support of Russia and criticism of its exclusion from the G7 in 2014, underscored the isolationist policy of the United States. Trump said that Russia could help resolve global issues and called its exclusion “a big mistake.” This caused tension among other leaders who were trying to maintain unity in their support for Ukraine.

Trump also skipped a planned meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, which complicated negotiations on further support for Ukraine. His emphasis on his own military and economic power, particularly through threats to impose 500% tariffs on Russian energy, aimed primarily at China, confirmed the US's departure from multilateral agreements in favor of unilateral action. French President Emmanuel Macron, commenting on Trump's departure, said it was “positive” for the ceasefire negotiations in Iran, but highlighted the tension in transatlantic relations.

This move has become symbolic of a broader trend: the US is increasingly relying on its own strength rather than multilateral cooperation, which weakens the unity of the G7 and contributes to a multipolar world where individual countries act autonomously.

The Topic of the Russian-Ukrainian War Has Become a Challenge for Ukrainian Diplomacy

The G7 was unable to adopt a joint statement on Ukraine due to resistance from the US, which sought to soften the wording on Russia. Instead, the final statement, published by Mark Carney, said that the G7 supports Trump's efforts to achieve “a just and lasting peace” in Ukraine, but that Russia must also agree to an unconditional ceasefire. Canada separately announced that it would allocate 4.3 billion Canadian dollars ($3.1 billion) to support Ukraine, including drones and military equipment.

This situation underscores the need for additional efforts by Ukrainian diplomacy to maintain the support of its partners. Ukraine will have to intensify bilateral negotiations, particularly with European countries and Canada, to ensure continued financial and military assistance.

For Ukraine, the summit was a signal of the need to strengthen diplomatic efforts to keep its partners' attention focused on the Russian-Ukrainian war. The growing multipolarity of the world requires the G7 to be flexible and open to inclusive dialogue, but it also creates challenges for countries that depend on the support of this club. In the future, the G7 will have to rethink its format to stay relevant in the new global architecture.

Anton Kuchukhidze, political scientist and foreign policy analyst, expert at the “United Ukraine” Think Tank