G7 2026 – France – Evian
France holds the G7 Presidency in 2026 and convened the Leader’s Summit in June in Evian. France’s aims under its Presidency were to return to the G7 to its original purpose, which is to serve as a ‘forum for major powers to respond to the economic challenges of our times’. For the French Presidency, the G7 can facilitate dialogue between emerging and major powers, and other committed stakeholders, to work together to ‘reduce global imbalances’ which affect the growth and development of all countries. For France, this goal is underlined by the view that ‘major economies have a particular duty to safeguard global financial stability and to build fair partnerships with developing countries’.
France’s priorities for its Presidency are:
- settling major geopolitical crises, including through G7 support to Ukraine and Ukrainians;
- childhood matters, from supporting development to online protection;
- the fight against organized crime and illegal flows;
- the new rules of play of global governance.
- strengthening the resilience of critical minerals value chains as a cross-cutting priority.
Paris sees the G7 as playing a role of leadership and support to multilateral initiatives. It thus hopes to use its presidency as an opportunity to follow up on international summits that were hosted in France in 2025, including:
- the United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14 : Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
- the Nutrition for Growth Summit
- the Artificial Intelligence Action Summit
France takes over the G7 Presidency during a time where the Group has become deeply divided by the actions of Washington. Members are sceptical of Trump’s war with Iran. Many of the Group’s members are in NATO, which recently rejected Trump’s call to help him secure the Strait of Hormuz (more below). The war in the Middle East adds to the existing tension between the US and the rest of the G7 following the US’s antagonism towards Denmark over Greenland, and Trump’s close relationship with Russia.
France’s emphasis on reasserting the G7’s role as a forum for dialogue is the French Presidency’s way of saying no to a ‘might is right’ approach, which it sees as leading to ‘subservience and bloc mentality, or moral posturing that condemns one to ‘marginalisation and powerlessness’. Much like previous G7 hosts, Canada, France is leaning into its status as a middle power, even though it may still hold onto its ambitions as a Great Power. Paris will not follow suit on the actions of powerful countries, particularly the US. However, it also understands that it cannot maintain any rules-based international order built on mutual interests without the cooperation and assistance of other powers. This was evident in the recent G7 Foreign Minster’s meeting, where French Minister of the Armed Forces, Catherin Vautrin, said that the war ‘is not ours’, and stressed that a diplomatic approach is ‘the only one that can guarantee a return to peace’. It is likely that France’s emphasis on mutually beneficial partnerships, with emphasis on transforming partnerships with developing countries, is also part of its strategy to navigate the weakening rules-based international order by building and bringing in the cooperation of emerging powers.
However, news reports suggested that France cannot disengage from the influence of Great Powers, who still hold sway in international cooperation and multilateral forums for the time being. For the upcoming Leader’s Summit in June, France had invited South Korea, India, Brazil, and Kenya. South Africa has been a regular guest at the Leader’s Summit, in the past few years, but was a notable omission with Kenya being invited instead. A spokesperson for the South African presidency suggested that Pretoria had been excluded after initially being invited during the G20 Summit in Johannesburg due to ‘sustained pressure from the US’. France had denied this claim, citing that the decision to invite Kenya was to prepare for a France-Africa summit that will be held in May. South African President, Cyril Ramaphosa later downplayed the claim of US pressure on France, stating that there was ‘no pressure from any country’ and that it should not be a surprise if non-members do not get invited to the Summit. However, it should also not be a surprise if the US had some influence in South Africa’s absence from the G7. Washington, who takes over as host of the G20 – of which South Africa is a member and former host – has explicitly excluded South Africa from participation under the US’s G20 Presidency, and currently does not list the previous year’s hosts on the current G20 website.
Evian Agenda
Financial and Trade Priorities:
The French Presidency released its priorities under its Finance and Trade tracks,.
The priorities of the Finance Track are:
- Reducing macroeconomic imbalances and strengthening economic security: France seeks to initiate discussions on imbalances in the economy, including differences in current account balances, industrial policies, and supply chain pressures, which it sees as producing unbalanced growth models that contribute to geopolitical and trade tensions.
- Shifting from support to partnerships, redefining the framework for international partnerships with developing countries in order to protect it: At a time of declining levels of official development assistance in the face of high demands for investments, the current development assistance model has been called into question by both donors and developing countries. France aims to redefine how international partnerships operate by transitioning from an assistance-based approach to mutually-beneficial partnerships.
- Supporting growth that is balanced, sustainable and safeguards financial stability by ensuring a level playing field: the French Presidency has identified international tax reform, competition in the AI sector, and multilateral rules for exporting companies as its sub-priorities. In terms of ensuring the stability of the financial system, the sub-priorities here are combating financial crime, greater consideration for climate risks and extreme weather, analysing non-bank financial intermediaries, and anticipating the impacts of new technologies.
The priorities of the Trade Track are:
- Addressing excess production capacity
- Improving resilience and economic security
- Contributing to multilateral trading system reform
- Promoting sustainable e-commerce
War in the Middle East
On February 28, 2026, Israel and the US launched a joint airstrike on Iran, targeting key figures in Iran’s leadership and killing Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, and other high-level members of Iran’s leadership. This triggered retaliation from Iran, which proceeded to launch drones and ballistic missiles at military targets in Israel and US military bases in Qatar, Bahrain, Jordan, the UAE and Kuwait, and the US allies, Oman and Saudi Arabia.
US President, Donald Trump, initially stated the goal of the airstrikes was regime change and ‘freedom of the people’.
The US-military strikes have also been motivated by concerns of Iran’s nuclear enrichment. Although talks had taken place between the US and Iran regarding Iran’s nuclear program, Trump had been unhappy with the progress and indicated such on 27 February, and launched the airstrikes hours after. The US had already been speaking openly about attacking Iran following Tehran’s crackdown on its protestors. Since the initial strikes from the US and Israel, Iran continues to launch retaliatory strikes across the Gulf, while the US and Israel have carried out waves of attacks on Tehran and military and infrastructure sites belonging to the Iran government. This has implicated other parties in the Gulf region. The Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon had also launched retaliatory strikes in Israel, who then continued its war with the armed group. Elsewhere, Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen have launched attacks on Israel. Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, which has generated a global energy shock.
The first Leaders meeting under France’s Presidency took place on 11 March 2026 and was centred on the economic consequences of the war in the Middle East, with the aim of ensuring ‘‘necessary coordination on this issue’, particularly with regards to the transport of vessels in the Middle East. Of particular concern for world leaders is the Strait of Hormuz, which serves as a key route for global oil transport, accounting for approximately 20% of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas originating from the Gulf states. Although most of that oil is headed towards Asian states, other important goods pass through the strait, including medicine, technological supplies, and fertiliser – about one third of the total fertiliser traded. Countries dependent on imports from Gulf states – many of which are developing states – have resorted to measures ranging from fuel rationing, reducing work weeks, to closing schools and reducing business operations. The UK and Europe have also faced fuel price increases, while thousands of flights have been cancelled, and supermarkets are bracing themselves for food prices increases. G7 leaders have been working on the possibility of escorting vessels through the Strait. G7 countries have also worked with the other member states of the International Energy Agency to release 400 million barrels of oil from their emergency reserves to address the disruption in oil markets.
On April 7, the US and Iran agreed to a ceasefire, brokered by Pakistan. The ceasefire will allow Washington and Teheran to negotiate a peace agreement. Peace talks have been unsuccessful so far, with both sides accusing the other of making unreasonable demands, while sporadic strikes have tested the ceasefire. Iran continues to fire at commercial ships attempting to cross the Strait of Hormuz, while the US has blocked Iranian ports to pressure Tehran into agreeing to a peace deal. Until this stalemate is addressed, there will continue to be massive uncertainty in the economy and make the war in the Middle East a major issue for the G7, bleeding into meetings on trade and development.
Online child protection
The French Presidency has focused on incorporating the protection of minors online as part of its overall focus on AI regulation. France considers the protection of minors online to be a public health issue, as the content they are exposed to can have impacts on their mental health. At the AI Impact Summit in Delhi in February 2026, a summit that forms part of a series of high-level summits on AI, President Emmanuel Macron called for stronger measures to protect children from ‘digital abuse’ and defended the EU’s attempts to regulate AI as part of these measures. Macron’s comments followed the ‘nudification’ trend that was popularised on the social media platform, X. This trend saw users commanding X’s AI tool, Grok, to strip the clothes from photos of women. Grok complied with numerous requests to generate increasingly sexualised images of women, and this extended to images of minors. Ministers in France had reported X to prosecutors. France looks to implement legislation banning social media access for children under the age of 15. The French National Assembly passed the bill, which will see it sent to the France’s Senate for approval. President Macron, who made the protection of children online a major priority in his re-election campaign, is pushing for the bill to come into effect before the start of the school year on 1 September 2026. Macron hopes to make France a global influencer on this issue. Paris launched an Expert Commission on Generative AI and called for contributions ‘to assess the risks and vulnerabilities generated by the general public uses of generative artificial intelligence with respect to minors’. Findings from this Commission will inform the work of the Digital Track under the French G7 Presidency, with the goal of developing a shared framework for strengthening children’s online safety.
Mutually beneficial partnerships
A major priority for France is the development of partnerships that go beyond the inefficiencies and limits of traditional official development assistance. France has called for the continued ‘reflection’ on development finance reform to ‘break away from the assistance mindset’. The first meeting of the Sherpas, who are key representatives from each G7 Member State, took place on 20 January, 2026, and began the preparations for the final Leader’s Summit in June. The focus of this meeting was the renewal of international partnerships and the reduction of global macroeconomic balances. It was highlighted by the French Presidency as ‘an opportunity for a collective reset’. Since then, the G7 has specified four principles for a renewed approach to development: resilience, sovereignty, effectiveness, and coherence. These principles will be translated into three priorities: reaffirming solidarity with the most vulnerable countries; strengthening the capacities of partner countries; and improving the effectiveness of development assistance.
Summary of the Evian Summit
The Evian Summit was a kind of ‘back to the future’ moment as leaders met, as they did in 1973 when the G7 Summit first took place, to develop a coordinated response to disruptions in oil supplies, among other shared concerns. Where the first summit in 1973 saw states coming together to forge a consensus on common issues, the 2026 Summit was a test of the endurance of this consensus. Any unity would be a success for this once-aligned group, given the developing internal divisions, and the early exit by US President, Donald Trump, at the previous G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Canada. Unity among the G7 would also be necessary to reaffirm the legitimacy of the Group, as its relevance continues to be called into question, given its declining share of the economy. That being said, the G7 continues to hold significant sway due to its military spending, which accounts for half of the world’s total. The US’s unilateral actions in both geopolitics and trade complicate the influence the Group has collectively, given that US President, Donald Trump has often turned against its closest allies. With these stakes and dynamics in mind, the French Presidency still sought to underline the relevance of the Group and secure a pragmatic unity that would keep the US on board with the overall direction of the Group.
As it was for the previous G7 Summit under the Canadian Presidency, the Evian Summit produced multiple Leaders’ statements on specific issues rather than a Leaders’ Communique, which would have required consensus from all G7 Members. The leaders’ statements for the Evian Summit highlighted that some priorities remained the same for the G7 across its presidencies, such as geopolitical issues in the Middle East and Ukraine; combatting illicit transnational networks; governing AI; critical minerals; and migrant smuggling. Host country-specific priorities were also reflected in the leaders’ statement this year, as tends to be the case for any G7 or G20 agenda. For France, the digital space as it relates to minors, and cancer, respectively, held a more central role in the discussions among leaders.
A pared down G7 agenda, which saw the removal of issues such as the environment and gender equality were likely done to keep the US engaged in G7 talks, along with the non-invitation of South Africa, who had previously been frequent attendees. France attempted to forge unity between the Group on long-term goals such as governing AI and combatting drug trafficking, which it cannot do without the US. However, it is also Washington’s current actions with regards to the war with Iran and Trump’s ongoing Liberation Day tariffs, that hinder any progress the G7 wishes to make on some of its long-term goals. The war in the Middle East and the economic disruptions caused by Trump’s tariffs have been an underlying concern in the various Leaders’ statements, even as they attempted to articulate more long-term ambitions.
The topline summaries for the nine Leader’s declaration were the following:
Geopolitical issues: The G7 reiterated its support for Ukraine and agreed to increase the delivery of air defence capacities and long-range capabilities. The Group also agreed to apply greater pressure on Russia through strengthening sanctions on oil and gas sectors. On Iran; at the time of the release of the Leader’s statement, US President, Donald Trump, had announced a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Iran that would initiate a 60-day period of negotiations and technical talks encompassing Iran’s nuclear programme and sanctions relief. The MoU, mediated by Pakistan, would see both sides cease military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon, and would see the Strait of Hormuz reopened. However, the MoU has remained fragile because of Israel’s continued breach of the ceasefire in Lebanon, and over the unrestricted and toll-free use of the Strait, something which G7 Members wanted to maintain. The G7 reiterated its support for the MoU and reaffirmed that Iran will never obtain a nuclear weapon. The G7 has also continued to push for a Franco-British maritime task force to escort ships through the Strait, although Trump appeared to have waved away this proposal. The US-Iran MoU, while seen as a failure of US unilateralism, also indicates the split between Washington and its allies, which adds to the fracture within the G7.
The Indo-Pacific remains one of the top concerns for the G7. Wary of China’s continued dominance in the region, the Leaders’ Statement expressed opposition to ‘any unilateral attempts to change the status quo, in particular by force or coercion’. Nonetheless, the G7 expressed support for the Global Convergence for Growth Summit, convened by the hosts just before the G7 Summit, with particular recognition of China’s involvement, and reiterated a shared interest in working with other economies in the G20 to address persistent global imbalances.
Macroeconomic imbalances: the G7 has noted how the US-Iran conflict has created economic uncertainty with significant impacts on economic growth. This uncertainty manifests in pressures on energy and agricultural input supply chains, with impacts on farmers and households everywhere, but especially those in lower income countries. While the G7 has committed to cooperating on addressing the immediate trigger of macroeconomic imbalances in conflict in the Middle East, it is also looking to develop resilient economies through diversified supply chains, and expressed the importance of engaging with countries beyond the G7, including emerging and developing countries to support effective responses. The G7 expressed its concerns regarding non-market policies and practices – likely Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs – and called for countries to address their imbalances through national actions and domestic sources. In other words, the Leaders Statement on macroeconomic policies appears to be a critique of trumps liberation day tariffs.
Digital issues and AI: The digital issues that were a specific focus under the French Presidency centred on creating a safer digital space for minors, and is connected to France’s ambition to setting a precedent on this matter. Here, the G7 called for governments, digital service providers, and public authorities to prioritise the protection of children and the youth’s mental and physical health and safety online. This includes parental controls, default safety settings, promoting digital literacy, and closer collaboration with the public and local authorities on content transparency and prevention of exposure to violent extremism. The importance of this agenda item was underscored by the adoption of the G7 Common Set of Principles defining a safer and more secure digital space for minors.
Critical minerals: The Leaders’ Statement echoed similar concerns to that expressed in the Leaders’ statement on macroeconomic imbalances. The G7 aims to reduce dependencies on single suppliers and supply chains outside of the G7 Group (important to note here is that China remains a key source of critical minerals), and prevent weaponised economic dependencies. The goal for the G7 is to reduce its dependency for rare earths to under 60 percent by 2030, and 50 percent as soon as possible. In light of these concerns, the G7 reaffirmed their commitment to the G7’s Roadmap to Promote Standards-based Markets for Critical Minerals, which was announced at the previous G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Canada. The G7 also established the Critical Minerals and Production Alliance, a framework for collaboration on critical minerals for G7 members and ‘like-minded non-G7 partners’,
Cancer: Cancer has been an important issue for France, having established the International Agency for Research on Cancer in 1965 under General Charles de Gaulle. In continuing its mission to facilitate research on cancer, France, along with the G7 and the invited countries to the Summit, have reaffirmed their commitment to research against cancer, with a particular focus on three priorities: paediatric cancers, cancers with poor prognoses (lung, liver, pancreas), and universal access to care in wealthy and developing countries.
Ebola: the G7 affirmed its commitment to the ongoing initiatives that are underway to address the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda. The G7 did not commit new resources to addressing the outbreak, however, its Member States have contributed to the ongoing efforts in the form of the US’s deployment of health and humanitarian sources, and the EU’s provision of emergency aid and treatment to the region.
Combatting Drug Trafficking: The G7 committed to intensifying its fight against drug trafficking, as it regards it as an increasing threat to national security and a fuel to corruption. The steps it has committed to include strengthening maritime and port security through the creation of a G7+ Ports Network to Combat Drug Trafficking; countering attempts by criminal networks to infiltrate legitimate private and public institutions; supporting international and regional partners to combat drug production and transportation; enhancing policy measures for reducing the demand and minimizing the consequences of drug use on our communities; and tackling other forms of transnational organised crime and illicit flows associated with drug trafficking. Together, these measures make up a whole-of-government approach that tackles the drug trafficking issues from both the supply and demand sides.
International partnerships: the G7 acknowledges, like many multilateral organizations, that the current model of development assistance is failing. Developing states have long questioned the recognition of their agency and extent of their financing requirements for development in existing approaches, and called for a transformation of international financial architecture. The Leaders’ declaration on mutually beneficial partnerships suggest that G7 members are beginning to pick up this narrative. However, the emergence of mutually beneficial partnerships in the G7 has been driven, in part, by the strain that development assistance has on donors’ own fiscal capacities, as well as a need to diversify away from existing trade partners. While the narrative on development in the G7 is shifting away from a relationship of high dependency on external assistance, it remains to be seen if this enables donor countries to eschew their overarching responsibilities, or this will open a door for developing states to have a more prominent role in development initiatives.
Combatting migrant smuggling: The leaders at the Evian Summit reaffirmed the Leaders’ Statements adopted at the Apulia Summit in 2024, and the Kananaskis in 2025 on the matter of preventing and countering organised criminal networks involved in the smuggling of migrants and trafficking of persons. On this front, the leaders’ urged the continued implementation of the G7 Action Plan to Prevent and Counter the Smuggling of Migrants that was adopted in the 2024 G7 Summit in Apulia.
As multilateralism continues to be called into question, too, the G7 and G20 Summits have become important sites for understanding how multilateralism may be evolving. If that is the case, then the outcomes of the Evian Summit suggest that coordinated action will take place through issue-based coalitions of the willing, and that states that have high performances on the governance of specific issues will have a more significant role to play. This may be where Middle Powers can adopt a more assertive role in global governance. This may bode well for charting a path forward when Great Power politics deadlocks consensus. However, the continued influence of US foreign policy on the broader G7 agenda demonstrates that, even as pragmatic consensus and alternative coalitions are formed, the influence of large powers will complicate any progress.