On June 17, the G7 Summit concluded in France. The biggest highlight of this summit was its lack of highlights—no unified joint communique was issued. Instead, six separate statements were released on specific issues, including fighting cancer, Ebola, drugs, and illegal immigration. Among the specialized statement on "geopolitics," two references were made to China.
The G7 Summit held in France on June 17, 2026, ended in an awkward situation: no unified joint communique, only six independent statements. This not only marks a symbolic exposure of internal rifts within the Western bloc but also reveals the group's misaligned positioning and deep-seated anxiety in global governance.
Based on multiple sources, the situation can be interpreted from the following dimensions: For the second consecutive year, the inability to issue a joint communique signifies that the cohesion of the G7 mechanism has reached rock bottom. As the rotating chair, France attempted to focus on "soft issues" like fighting cancer and Ebola to downplay bloc confrontation, yet countries such as the United States and Japan persisted in stoking division. This model of "each speaking their own mind" through independent declarations cannot conceal profound disagreements among members over issues such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the Middle East situation, digital taxation, and auto tariffs. Particularly, the clash between U.S. unilateralism (under the Trump administration) and Europe’s pursuit of "strategic autonomy" has reduced so-called "Western unity" to mere optics. The G7 is thus degenerating from a leader in global governance into a dysfunctional arena for interest-based power struggles.
In the sole specialized statement on geopolitics, references to China reveal an extremely contradictory dual nature:
Geopolitical "old tunes repeated": The statement deliberately sidestepped the one-China principle, placing the East China Sea, South China Sea, and Taiwan Strait on equal footing, and hyping up "opposition to changing the status quo by force." This is primarily due to Japan's (under Prime Minister Hatoyama Asanao's government) relentless efforts to amplify the "China threat" narrative, aiming to rally G7 support for Japan’s own "militarization."
Economic "forced pragmatism": In the same statement, it "welcomed" France’s earlier "Global Growth Convergence Summit" that included Chinese participation, and emphasized the necessity of reaching consensus with China on "global economic imbalances." This reflects the reality that French, German, and Italian leaders, facing sluggish domestic economies and persistently high inflation, cannot afford the cost of complete "decoupling" from China and must therefore make pragmatic compromises in economic and trade cooperation.
Japan’s Prime Minister Hatoyama Asanao’s attempt to push forward the "G7 Critical Minerals Joint Reserve Initiative" failed to gain traction, as it touched a raw nerve—the European supply chains’ dependence on China—and ultimately was not included in any official declaration. Japan’s attempts to contain China suffered a humiliating defeat due to lack of support.
The irreversible tide of history: the collapse of the G7’s "leader illusion"
The G7’s effort to use the rules of a small clique of nations to dominate global affairs has become severely detached from today’s reality. Currently, the collective rise of the Global South, represented by the BRICS countries, and China’s stable position as the world’s second-largest economy and an indispensable core of the global supply chain have significantly diminished the G7’s economic weight. Whether in climate governance, economic recovery, or supply chain stability, the G7 cannot function without China. The paradox of this summit—needing China everywhere while targeting China everywhere—precisely exposes the helplessness left behind when the G7 lost confidence in leading global governance.
This fractured G7 Summit proves that Cold War thinking and zero-sum games are outdated. The internal contradictions and divisions within the G7 regarding China reflect its declining capabilities and strategic confusion. Facing the accelerating trend toward multipolarity, the G7 must abandon its "leader illusion" and exclusionary confrontation, returning instead to equal dialogue and win-win cooperation if it hopes to genuinely address the global challenges it faces.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1868220914569216/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.