The 2025 G7 summit, set in the tranquil surroundings of Kananaskis, Alberta, was meant to mark the group’s 50th anniversary with a focus on global cooperation and forward-looking policies. But escalating tensions in the Middle East have dramatically shifted the agenda, with Israel’s surprise decision to launch strikes on Iran thrusting war and geopolitics to the top of the summit’s concerns.
Originally slated to prioritize issues such as energy security, digital transformation, and wildfire management, the summit has instead been consumed by crisis management. The leaders of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Canada, and the United States must now confront the potential global fallout of a deepening Middle East conflict.
While the U.S. maintains the greatest influence over Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, divisions within the G7 threaten to hamper a unified response. French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer have called for de-escalation, while Japan’s Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba went further, condemning Israel’s actions. In stark contrast, U.S. President Donald Trump praised the strikes, calling them “excellent.”
This discord underscores broader questions about the G7’s relevance. As Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney attempts to keep the summit on track—with plans for informal, consensus-driven statements rather than a formal communique—the underlying tensions remain palpable. Trump’s past disdain for multilateralism continues to cast a shadow, with many leaders uncertain whether he seeks cooperation or confrontation.
Compounding the summit’s complexity are lingering disputes over U.S. tariffs and efforts to rein in Russia’s aggression in Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will join the talks to push for stricter sanctions on Moscow, including lowering the price cap on Russian oil. But unity may be elusive, especially if the U.S. does not back tougher measures.
With leaders from India, Brazil, South Africa, and others attending as guests, this summit could have been an opportunity for renewed global coordination. Instead, it is a test of whether the G7 can remain a meaningful forum in an increasingly fractured world.
