Author: Chinki Gera, Geeta Institute of Law
LinkedIn Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/chinki-gera-0109b6325
To the point
In 2025, top leaders from the world leading industrialized nations gathered in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada, for the G7 Summit. At the time of increasing tensions around the globe, the G7 leaders addressed a number of major agenda items. The agenda for the G7 countries included urgent items that required attention and (still fragile) agreement (consensus), mounting tensions stemming from the Israel-UAE rapprochement, the war in Ukraine, a variety of trade disputes, the linking of climate change and energy security. There were some indications that the information and presentations were consistent with and reflected their embrace of multilateralism and internationalism, including U.S. President Donald Trump, who unfortunately, reduced citizen engagement in this particular case based on the Israel-UAE tensions. It could be stated that the different political contexts of the heads of state contributed to the lack of agreement on a number of specific substantive agenda items. That said the number of heads of state present at the G7 Summit reiterated collective support, regarding Ukraine and condemned the destabilizing actions of Iran. The push for climate change and a commitment to advance energy security could also be seen to be taken by the heads of state was evidenced through their individual commitments to complete them. The summit also dealt with global trade tensions, tariffs and support for fair and open trade rules with regards to climate action, leaders committed to fast-tracking into net-zero emissions by 2050 and to promoting energy security by using sustainability. The outcomes of the summit demonstrate a collective understanding about the global challenges that we are currently facing and the need for cooperative approaches to address those challenges. Although the summit showed the obstacles of coming to an agreement of among advanced economies, it clear represented the G7 potential as a space for discussion and debate and other issues occurring cooperatively through a G7 framework.
Abstract
Leader’s gathered in Kananaskis, Alberta, on 16-17 June 2025 for the G7 Summit, a momentous event marking the Group 50th anniversary. It was far from easy when leaders of the most developed economies in the world came together to discuss important global issues. Ukraine crisis took centre stage. Canada announced a sizable military aid package approximately C$2 billion to support Ukraine, underscoring its commitment However, U.S. President Trump made no new arms pledges, declined a private meeting with President Zelenskyy and resisted strong language on Ukraine in the summit’s final declarations, highlighting deep divisions Israel–Iran tensions erupted during the summit. Trump departed the summit prematurely amid rising Middle East tensions, voicing steadfast backing for Israel’s self-defence and sharply criticizing Iran as a destabilising force . His exit darkened the mood in the talks and weakened the chances of reaching agreement. Trade wars reappeared. Trump’s tariffs on steel, aluminium and autos strained relations Canada and the EU retaliated and while some progress was made (notably a US, UK trade deal), efforts to build a broader accord fell short Climate & energy security remained on the agenda. Leader’s recommitted to net-zero emissions by 2050, underscored clean-energy transitions and discussed AI regulation, critical-minerals supply chains and wildfire preparedness. By the end of the summit, it was clear, while Canada played an active role and made notable strides, the G7 struggled with internal fractures, especially around Ukraine, Middle East policy and trade. The summit underscored just how difficult it is to strike a balance between domestic agendas and collective global action in a world marked by deep geopolitical fractures.
Use of legal jargon
In 2025, the state parties of international concern addressed the G7 summit in Kananaskis, Alberta and invoked jus cogens norms and customary international law. In the Communique of the summit it referred to non-intervention and then noted that states sovereignty must be respected and all states must fulfil their obligation to ensure international peace and security. In the frame of the Israel-Iran conflict, the Communique has affirmed that, under the Article 51 of the UN Charter, the right of self-defence stood with the G7 however, that all states are bound by international humanitarian laws and the Geneva Conventions When it comes to trade disputes the use of tariffs has been closely examined through the lens of the World Trade Organization’s dispute resolution processes. This has raised important questions about protectionism and the potential weakening of global trade standards. During the summit, the conversations around climate change brought up the idea of intergenerational equity, stressing that countries have a responsibility to reduce environmental damage and promote sustainable development for the sake of future generations. Overall, the discussions among the G7 showcased a strong commitment to maintaining the rule of law in international relations, finding a balance between state sovereignty, the need for global cooperation and
justice.
The proof
The outcomes of the 2025 G7 Summit are supported by official statements and reports from the participating countries and various international organizations. Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney emphasized the summit’s main priorities, which included energy security, digital transition and building global partnerships. By the end of the summit, the G7 Leaders Statement reiterated their commitment to backing Ukraine, addressing climate change and boosting economic resilience. Additionally, media outlets like Reuters and The Guardian offered detailed coverage of the summit’s discussions, which delved into topics such as the Israel-Iran conflict and trade disputes. These resources support the summit’s emphasis on addressing global issues and the difficulties in achieving agreements among the most powerful economies in the world.
Case Laws
1. World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement: United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products (1998)
This case illustrates the application of WTO rules concerning trade restrictions and environmental protection, highlighting the balance between sovereign rights and international trade
obligations.
2.International Criminal Court (ICC) Case: Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo (2012)
This case highlights the ICC’s role in prosecuting individuals for war crimes, reinforcing the principle of accountability and the international community’s commitment to justice.
3. European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) Case: Lautsi v. Italy (2011)
This case examines the balance between national sovereignty and international human rights obligations, particularly concerning the display of religious symbols in public institutions.
4. International Court of Justice (ICJ) Case: Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (2010)
This case addresses the obligations of states to prevent environmental harm and the procedural requirements for environmental impact assessments under international laws.
Conclusion
The 2025 G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, served as a critical platform for addressing global challenges amidst rising geopolitical tensions. While the summit highlighted Canada’s leadership in areas like climate action and energy security, it also underscored the complexities of achieving consensus among leading economies. The divergent approaches to the Ukraine conflict, the Israel-Iran tensions and trade disputes reflect the evolving dynamics within the G7 and the broader international community. The summit’s outcomes reaffirm the necessity for multilateral cooperation, adherence to international law and a commitment to shared global values in navigating the complexities of the contemporary geopolitical landscape.
FAQS
1. What were the main outcomes of the 2025 G7 Summit?
The summit focused on supporting Ukraine, addressing the Israel-Iran conflict, resolving trade disputes and committing to climate action and energy security.
2. Why did President Trump leave the summit early?
President Trump departed to manage the escalating Israel-Iran conflict, which required immediate attention from the U.S. administration.
3. How did the summit address trade tensions?
The U.S. imposed tariffs on steel and aluminium imports, leading to retaliatory measures from the EU and Canada highlighting underlying trade disputes.
4. What commitments were made regarding climate change?
Leaders reaffirmed commitments to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 and enhance energy security with a focus on clean energy technologies.
5. How did the summit impact global diplomatic relations?
The summit highlighted the challenges of achieving consensus among diverse political landscapes, underscoring the complexities of multilateral diplomacy in addressing global challenges.
6. What role did Canada play in the summit?
As the host nation, Canada facilitated discussions and emphasized priorities such as climate action, digital transition and global partnerships.
7. What was the significance of the summit’s location?
Held in Kananaskis, Alberta, the summit’s location symbolized Canada’s commitment to environmental stewardship and provided a secure setting for high-level discussions.