Kananaskis Summit 2025: A World Divided, A Summit in Search of Unity

The 51st G7 Summit 2025, hosted by Kananaskis, Canada, brought together the leaders of the world's most advanced economies to discuss pressing global issues ranging from climate change and economic stability to geopolitical tensions and technological governance.

G7 is a term that is used to describe the “Group of Seven”, a coalition of seven countries that have the largest and most advanced economies in the world: the United States, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Canada, along with the European Union. Based on Nominal Values, the G7 members represent over 46% of the gross domestic product globally. Based on purchasing power parity, these countries represent over 32% of the GDP. In 2018, the countries in this group comprised more than 60% of the global net wealth of $317 trillion.

In Turkey’s Backyard, India and Cyprus Signal Strategic Solidarity:-

Prime Minister Narendra Modi landed in Cyprus on June 15 for the first leg of his three-nation tour, which will also see him visit Canada for the G7 summit and then Croatia. This is the first visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Cyprus in over 20 years, and is being seen by many as a strategic signal to Turkey, which has steadily deepened its ties with Pakistan.

In 1974, the Greek Cypriots staged a coup with the help of the Greek Junta, to merge the island with Greece. Turkey then invaded, and while the legitimate government in Nicosia was restored, Turkish forces have never fully left the island. In fact, the north-eastern part of the island has declared itself independent as the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, which only Turkey recognises. A Ministry of External Affairs release on India-Cyprus ties says the country “remains one of India`s dependable friends.” “It supports India`s candidature as a permanent member of the expanded UN Security Council. It has also extended its full support for the India-US Civil Nuclear Agreement, within the Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which helps India address its increasing energy needs and benefit its economic development,” the MEA document says.

Turkey, on the other hand, has not just supported Pakistan in terms of international resolutions and statements on Kashmir, during the recent conflict after Operation Sindoor, many of the drones Pakistan attacked India with were found to have been of Turkish origin. This has crossed a line for India. Also, its geographic location makes it a crucial part of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), an infrastructure project that India expects multiple benefits from. IMEC is supposed to boost trade and connectivity between India and Europe via the Middle East, and Cyprus, in the Mediterranean, has an important role to play.

Next Carney's invitation to Modi to attend the G7 Summit signalled the new government's intent to repair the ties with New Delhi that plummeted to an all-time low over the killing of pro-Khalistani separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar.

Reset in Kananaskis: India–Canada Dialogue at the G7 Summit:-

Prime Minister Narendra Modi was in Canada to attend the annual G7 Summit where he discussed important global issues and highlighted the issues of the Global South at the international forum. PM Modi also held a host of bilateral meetings on the sidelines of the summit. This was Prime Minister Modi's first visit to Canada since relations with the north American country slumped over the last two years over then Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's support to separatists and radical elements acting against India and Indian interests. India and Canada now aim to iron out differences with Prime Minister Mark Carney at the helm of the Canadian government. During last year's diplomatic fallout between the two nations, India's foreign ministry had squarely pinned the blame on Justin Trudeau and the actions taken under his leadership.

As PM Modi tweeted about the Bilateral relations that PM Carney and I look forward to work closely to add momentum to the India-Canada friendship. Areas like trade, energy, space, clean energy, critical minerals, fertilisers and more offer immense potential in this regard.”

As PM Carney described his bilateral meeting with PM Modi as “important”. “But I would describe it as foundational, as a necessary first step, an exchange of views, frank, open exchange of views around law enforcement, transnational repression, an agreement to provide the necessary foundations to begin to rebuild a relationship based on mutual respect, sovereignty and trust.”

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said the meeting provided an opportunity for both sides to hold frank and forward-looking discussions on the state of India-Canada relations and the way ahead.

Among the most significant developments was the first meeting between Modi and Carney, which helped unfreeze bilateral ties. The two nations, embroiled in mutual recriminations since Sept 2023 - including diplomatic expulsions and collapsed political dialogue- used the summit for a purposeful reboot. Carney, a technocrat with a globalist bent, hadn't visited India during his previous role as vice chairman at Brookfield Asset Management, among largest foreign investors in India. Yet his professional familiarity with global economic landscapes added ballast to the conversation. Despite ongoing pushback from noisy diaspora groups, both sides pressed the reset button.

Readouts spoke of calibrated steps: return of high commissioners to New Delhi and Ottawa, resumption of stalled ministerial dialogue, and renewed cooperation in clean energy, food security, Al, and critical minerals. Most crucially, negotiations on the paused Early Progress Trade Agreement (EPTA) will resume - potentially setting the stage for a full Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA). This wasn't a spontaneous reset, it was months in the making. Quiet diplomacy between the foreign ministries, particularly the foreign ministers, backchannel and track-2 efforts paved the way. For New Delhi, the political de-escalation created strategic space to recalibrate. For Ottawa, the arrival of a new PM with no baggage from Khalistan activists allowed a policy rethink.

Crossroads of Diplomacy: Canada Welcomes Modi Amid Khalistani Protests

Khalistani extremists gathered in Kananaskis, Alberta, to launch what they described as an “ambush” protest targeting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who arrived in Canada to participate in the 51st G7 Summit. In the lead-up to Modi’s arrival, Khalistani separatists organised a protest in Calgary that drew sharp reactions. Canadian journalist Daniel Bordman reported that the protesters resorted to intense anti-Modi rhetoric, calling on Canadian PM Mark Carney to “kill Modi politics” and urging U.S. President Donald Trump to “kill India politics.”

Some demonstrators went as far as advocating for the “Balkanisation of India.”

Carney’s move to invite PM Modi signifies a shift in Canada’s Liberal leadership, marking a departure from what many viewed as a permissive stance on separatist elements. By inviting PM Modi, it is a pretty hard shift for Mark Carney to distance the Liberal brand from the permissive stance on terrorists and separatists. This is a good first step to counter-radicalisation.

The Canadian Security Intelligence Service(CSIS) released report on June 18,2025, that Canada-based Khalistani extremist groups for the first time to its section on Politically Motivated Violent Extremism (PMVE), indicating that the CSIS is taking India’s complaints about violence from these groups more seriously than before, which has been a source of New Delhi’s long-held grievance against Ottawa.

However, it said that while some of Khalistani separatist supporters took part in legitimate protests and other activities, only a small group of individuals are considered Khalistani extremists because they continue to use Canada as a base for the promotion, fundraising or planning of violence primarily in India. The CSIS found no attacks in Canada in 2024 carried out by these groups, but said their ongoing involvement in violent activities continues to pose a national security threat to Canada and Canadian interests, an assessment which will find favour in India.

The Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) also reported, in which it named India, along with China, Iran, Pakistan and Russia as the “main perpetrators of foreign interference and espionage against Canada”, was released online on June 18, 2025, a day after Prime Minister Narendra Modi met with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney at the G7 Summit outreach in Kananaskis and agreed to restore High Commissioners and a number of dialogue mechanisms. It was tabled by the CSIS in the Canadian Parliament last week. According to CSIS, Indian officials and their proxies have tried to influence Canadian leaders and manipulate policies in favour of New Delhi, especially on the issue of Khalistan.

This visit is undeniably a positive development, a crucial first step on a path that promises to be long and arduous. It is not a magical cure for the deep-seated issues plaguing the relationship. Trust, once eroded, demands time and consistent effort to rebuild. The appointment of high commissioners is a vital beginning, but the real work of repairing trust and fostering deeper cooperation still lies ahead. India-Canada relations have strong foundations and significant potential, especially in trade, education, and clean energy. However, bilateral ties remain fragile, with political and security concerns acting as key irritants. The future of the relationship depends on how both countries manage these differences while leveraging shared interests. The Modi-Carney meeting highlighted the mutual desire for a "constructive and balanced" partnership, underpinned by strong people-to-people ties and economic complementarities.

Modi in Croatia: Expanding India’s Footprint in Central Europe:-

Modi’s trip to Cyprus and Croatia, both members of the European Union (EU), has come after External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar visit to France, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, and the EU within a month.  This highlights the growing importance of India-EU ties, especially after the war in Ukraine, the election of Donald Trump to the White House, and the EU trying to de-risk from China. The unprecedented visit of Ursula von der Leyen to India in February this year was also part of this EU approach of diversification.

Strategically located on the Adriatic Sea coastline, acting as a significant gateway to Europe, Croatia offers India a crucial opportunity in engaging with the continent. The location of Croatian ports such as Rijeka, Split and Ploče puts the country at the intersection of key European transport corridors, such as the planned Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T). Its geographic location makes Croatia a potential hub in the ambitious India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), which aims to promote Indian trade with Europe through the Mediterranean. Extension of IMEC to the Adriatic will connect India with the Central and Eastern European nations that are also part of the Three Sea Initiative (3SI), a north-south axis of trade and energy cooperation among 12 countries (including Croatia).

PM Modi’s visit, thus, is aimed at giving new energy to bilateral relations with Croatia and facilitating India’s broader engagement with the Balkans, and Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), which has seen significant Chinese investments through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It is imperative that India specifically focuses on this region and does not let its engagement with Western Europe guide its relations with the CEE countries, which are at the crossroads of Europe and Asia and many of whom support India’s bid for permanent membership in the UNSC.

In 2025, G7 Leaders focused on economic developments. In a context of rising market volatility and shocks to international trade, as well as longer-term trends toward fragmentation and global imbalances, they discussed the need for greater economic and financial stability, technological innovation, and an open and predictable trading regime to drive investment and growth. They considered ways to collaborate on global trade to boost productivity and grow their economies, emphasizing energy security and the digital transition. They acknowledged that both are underpinned by secure and responsible critical mineral supply chains and that more collaboration is required, within and beyond the G7.

Leaders undertook to safeguard their economies from unfair non-market policies and practices that distort markets and drive overcapacity in ways that are harmful to workers and businesses. This includes de-risking through diversification and reduction of critical dependencies. Leaders welcomed the new Canada-led G7 initiative the Critical Minerals Production Alliance working with trusted international partners to guarantee supply for advanced manufacturing and defence.

Summit Of Strains: G7 2025 Amid War, Trade, and Terror

G7 stand with respect to Russia-Ukraine war:

As Russia-Ukraine war still going on, President Volodymyr Zelensky arrived in the G7 Canadian Rocky Mountains on 17 June hoping to meet with President Trump and secure more support for Ukraine from the Group of 7 industrialized nations. Instead, Mr. Trump left the global powers’ summit early, cancelled his meeting with Mr. Zelensky, lamented Russia’s absence from the leaders’ get-together and rejected the idea of issuing a joint statement in support of Ukraine.

A single, brief reference to Ukraine in a summary of the talks’ conclusions, released by the host, Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada, backed Mr. Trump’s peace-making efforts and did not directly criticize Russia, though it said the leaders would explore ways to bring more pressure to bear on Moscow. The G7 wealthy nations struggled to find unity over the conflict in Ukraine after Trump expressed support for Russian President Vladimir Putin and left a day early to address the Israel-Iran conflict from Washington. No joint statement on Ukraine due to U.S. resistance, reflecting internal G7 divisions. Individual commitments (e.g., Canada’s aid, UK’s sanctions) were made, but collective action stalled.

G7 stand with respect to Iran-Israel conflict:

The leaders of the G7, reiterate their commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East. In this context, they affirm that Israel has a right to defend itself.  G7 leaders reiterate their support for the security of Israel. Also mentioned that Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror, they have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.  G7 leaders urge that the resolution of the Iranian crisis leads to a broader de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East, including a ceasefire in Gaza. They said they will remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability.

Why TRUMP Exit early from the G7 meet up?

Donald Trump left the G7 summit in Canada a day early, skipping meetings with leaders, as he returns to Washington amid escalating war in the Middle East. The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the president would return to the US after an official dinner with the G7 leaders on Monday night. Trump told Canada’s prime minister and summit host, Mark Carney, the other leaders of the world’s biggest economies would understand his early exit. The move came after he declined to join a joint statement from the G7 leaders calling for both sides in the conflict to de-escalate, and after he warned residents of Iran’s capital, Tehran, to evacuate in a social media post.  Trump’s early exit reflected a U.S. desire to prioritize crisis response at home and avoid being overly entangled in multilateral frameworks, consistent with his "America First" approach.

Implication of early exit led to?

On June 21, US attacked three key nuclear sites of Iran — Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow — as it joined Israel in its offensive against Iran. All the three sites are crucial to Iran’s controversial nuclear programme that the US, Israel and many other countries see as a threat. America reportedly used the GBU Massive Ordnance Penetrator, a powerful bunker-busting bomb, during the strikes.  The US contacted Iran via diplomatic channels to claim the strikes were all it intended to do and that "regime change efforts" were "not planned".

Trump’s Early Exit Leaves G7 Divided and Directionless:

There is no founding charter or admissions process to the self-selecting group of “leading” economic powers that currently numbers seven. It was the G8 from 1997 to March 2014. Then Russia annexed Crimea and had its membership suspended, establishing the rule that participating nations should not seize their neighbours’ land.

The White House used to condemn that sort of thing on the grounds that it violates the principles upon which the international system is built. These days, not so much. On June 16, shortly after arriving for a G7 meeting in the Kananaskis resort in Alberta, Donald Trump told his host, the Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, that Vladimir Putin’s expulsion from the club from the club had been a “big mistake”.

 Within 24 hours Trump was back in Washington. There is precedent for the early departure. In June 2018, during his first term, Trump bailed on a G7 summit to meet North Korea’s supreme leader, Kim Jong-un. This time he cited the escalating Israel-Iran conflict. That crisis is serious enough to justify the president clearing his diary of extraneous commitments. But it is revealing that dialogue with the US’s closest allies is a disposable engagement.

Arrogant unilateralism is an old feature of US foreign policy, especially in the Middle East. It is the prerogative of a superpower to disregard input from its strategic dependents. But Trump’s G7 snub is not just a crass exaggeration of the usual American style. Sympathy with dictators and discomfort in the company of democrats express Trump’s governing ethos. “America First” is a doctrine that cannot conceive of mutual obligation between nations. There can be no G7, only the G1 and clients. Leaders who operate in difference to law and independent institutions are weak and incompatible.

Strongmen who recognise no legitimate brake on their actions, who have folded the national interest into a personality cult, are admirable.

The G7 Summit drew to a close with top leaders failing to reach a consensus on several key issues. US President Donald Trump had left the event early , where leaving six of the Group of Seven leaders to shape global policy. The remaining leaders agreed to jointly attempt to combat ‘non-market policies that could jeopardize global access to critical minerals’ and reached consensus on other issues.

They also pledged to limit the downsides of artificial intelligence on jobs and the environment while still embracing the potential of the “technological revolution.” The Summit, however, failed its rather significant task of showcasing a unified front on global concerns  with no joint statement being released on the Ukraine conflict. The office of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney had also released a briefing statement that claimed the US had asked to “water down” a joint statement in support of Ukraine. 

Campaigning Beyond Borders- Modi’s G7 Pitch for Global South Leadership:

PM Modi, a G7 guest, channelled the conscience of the ‘global south’, advocating for equitable access to green technologies, debt relief for developing nations, and a climate agenda that is inclusive, not prescriptive. Amid widening North-South divides, India positioned itself as a pragmatic bridge one that understands both the aspirations of developing countries and responsibilities of global leadership. For a world on the brink of fragmentation, this was a blueprint for cooperation rooted in clarity, courage, and common purpose. The restoration of ambassadorial ties between India and Canada marked a decisive moment in global diplomacy. This move underscores India’s emergence as a stabilising power in an increasingly fractured world order.

Prime Minister expressed that uncertainty and conflicts in various parts of the world have had a debilitating impact on the countries of the Global South, and India took it as its responsibility to make the voice of the Global South heard at the world stage. He underlined that it was important for the world to understand the priorities and concerns of the Global South if the international community was serious about a sustainable future. Emphasising on security challenges, he called upon countries to strengthen the global fight against terrorism.

He also expressed that the Pahalgam terror attack was not just an assault on India but on the entire humanity, he called for strict action against countries who support and promote terrorism. Prime Minister highlighted that energy security was among the leading challenges facing future generations. While elaborating on India’s commitment to inclusive growth, he noted that availability, accessibility, affordability and acceptability were the principles that underpinned India’s approach to energy security. He further emphasised that even though India is the fastest growing major economy in the world, it has successfully met its Paris commitments ahead of time. Highlighting India’s commitment to a sustainable and green future, he underscored that India has undertaken several global initiatives such as the International Solar Alliance, Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, Global Biofuels Alliance, Mission LiFE and One Sun- One World- One Grid, and called upon the international community to further strengthen them.

The G7 is Failing- A Club of Powers Without Purpose:

At 50, the G7  a grouping of the most advanced economies should appear robust, cohesive and experienced in managing global conflict. Instead, the G-7 Summit and Outreach session in Kananaskis, Canada presented a disunited and ineffective force in the face of some of the most testing conflicts including an escalating Russia-Ukraine war, the Israel-Iran strife and Israel’s ceaseless bombardment of Gaza. In addition, it has been unable to deal with the biggest disruptor in global trade  that of the U.S. Trump administration’s reciprocal tariffs worldwide. This year’s G7 was rocky from the start as host Canada saw an unexpected election just months before the summit.

The government of Mark Carney was still finding its feet, which meant leaders such as Prime Minister Modi were invited just days before the summit. Upheavals in U.S. foreign and trade policy have also caught the grouping off-guard: U.S. President Donald Trump’s pivot to Russia on the Ukraine crisis, and ambiguous approach to China have been particularly noted. In Kananaskis Mr. Trump even suggested that the G-7 become the “G9, including Russia and China”, much to the chagrin of other leaders, including the Ukraine President, who was a special invitee. President Trump’s volte face from proclaiming to be a “Peace-time President” to actively supporting Israel’s aggression was another issue. The U.S. refused to sign on to a draft statement by G-7 members that called for a de-escalation or any criticism of Israel, and pushed for a statement that condemned Iran.

Mr. Trump’s early exit dealt another blow. Eventually, the G-7 was unable to issue a joint statement on key issues, and a Chair’s Summary was issued to deal with the crises at hand, along with statements on less divisive issues such as AI and quantum computing, critical minerals supply chains, wildfire and prevention, and transnational repression, but not on terrorism, as India had hoped.

The G7 format is gradually losing its relevance in the context of rapid changes in global politics. Thus, the group lacks key economic and political players such as Russia, China, India and a number of countries with rapidly growing economies that have a significant impact on global security. This limits the G7's ability to address complex international issues that require broad participation and consideration of the interests of diverse regions. In addition, global challenges, in particular, climate change, digital transformation, food security issues and pandemics, require coordination at a broader international level than the narrow format of the seven developed countries can offer. At the same time, for several years there have been disagreements within the G7 itself on key issues of foreign policy and economic strategies, which reduces the group's ability to develop a unified and consistent position that affects global processes.

The 2025 G7 Summit was not just a missed opportunity; it was a mirror to the declining coherence of the G7 and the challenges India faces in engaging with such forums. While symbolic inclusion affirms India’s diplomatic stature, it must be matched with policy influence, meaningful engagement, and agenda alignment. Without these, participation in G7 Outreach Sessions may remain a ceremonial exercise rather than a strategic gain. India’s foreign policy apparatus must now undertake a sober evaluation of the costs, benefits, and future direction of its involvement in the G7. In a world moving toward multipolarity, India’s diplomatic energy may be better invested in platforms where its voice is not just heard, but valued.