G7 splits likely to resurface at Biarritz summit

The G7 presidents and prime ministers meet in Biarritz, France, this weekend and it may not just be the weather that proves to be hot. On a range of issues, further disagreements are likely between the Western powers, with US President Donald Trump expected to raise the diplomatic temperature.

The context for this weekend’s session is last year’s Canadian meet, which saw an unprecedented failure to agree an end-of-summit communique. And this was given added spice by some remarkably undiplomatic language, including Trump’s characterization of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “so indignant,” while the latter called the US president’s trade tariffs “laughable.”

The personal animosity on display between Trump, who left early to visit Kim Jong Un in Singapore, and the other leaders set the scene for wider policy splits. Trump, for instance, called for Russia to be allowed to rejoin the group (as the G8), which he renewed on Tuesday.

But other G7 leaders called for a “rapid and unified” response to malign international interference, including by Moscow, such as cyber and chemical weapon attacks like the one last year in Salisbury, England. Despite the US president’s desire for warmer ties with Vladimir Putin, there is little sign that Russia will be invited back to the club any time soon.

Amidst continuing divisions, from trade to climate change, which gave rise to talk last year of a “G6 plus 1,” there may be cause for a positive surprise this year given the changing dynamics of the leadership. For instance, new UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson joins the meeting for the first time and it is possible he could act as a bridge between Trump and the other G7 leaders.

Leadership transitions are underway not just in the UK, but also the EU and Italy too, with Jean-Claude Juncker, Donald Tusk and Giuseppe Conte stepping down. Potentially, in the next 12 months, this could also be the case in Canada, with an election scheduled for the autumn, and Germany, with Angela Merkel’s long reign in its twilight.

Looking further out to the second half of 2020, much may also depend on whether Trump is returned to power. While the fissures within the G7 did not begin with his election, they have been exacerbated by it.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there have been a series of intra-Western disagreements over issues from the Middle East, including the Iraq War, which was opposed in 2003 by France and Germany, through to the rise of China, with some European powers and the US having disagreements over the best way to engage the rising superpower.

While the fissures within the G7 did not begin with Trump’s election, they have been exacerbated by it.

Andrew Hammond

Despite occasional discord, key Western nations generally continued to agree on a broad range of issues, such as international trade, backing for a Middle Eastern peace process between Israel and Palestine along Oslo principles, and strong support for the international rules-based system and the supranational organizations that make this work. But more of these key principles are now being disrupted, if not outright undermined, by Trump’s agenda.

Take the example of international trade, which saw Trump isolated last year following the “unanimous concern and disappointment” of Canada, the UK, Japan, France, Germany and Italy. Trade will again be an undercurrent of tension in Biarritz, with Washington considering imposing new tariffs on European car imports.

To paper over these cracks, it is therefore possible that significant emphasis could this weekend be put on finding greater G7 consensus on a range of security and geopolitical issues. Potential examples here could include North Korea and the continuing clampdown against terrorism.

There is also the possibility of a further G7 statement outlining its concerns over Venezuela. Western leaders remain worried about the destabilizing political effects of that situation for the wider region, including the bordering states of Brazil and Colombia.

This would, yet again, highlight the group’s often underappreciated importance as an international security linchpin — despite the fact that it was originally conceived in the 1970s to monitor developments in the world economy and assess macroeconomic policies. The 2017 G7 summit, for instance, was dominated by the development of a new terrorism action plan.

The G7’s involvement in this multitude of geopolitical dialogues is not without controversy, given its original macroeconomic mandate. For instance, China strongly objected to the discussion of maritime security in Asia at the 2016 Japan-hosted summit.

It is sometimes asserted, especially by developing countries, that the G7 lacks the legitimacy of the UN, or even the G20, to engage in these international security issues; or that it is a historical artefact given the rise of new powers, including China and India. However, it is not the case that the international security role of the G7 is new. An early example of the function the body has played here was in the 1970s and 1980s, when it helped coordinate Western strategy toward the then-Soviet Union.

Taken overall, Biarritz will again see splits, including on Russia and trade, but Johnson’s stance toward Trump may be significantly warmer than other leaders. While some Western fissures pre-date the latter’s presidency, his agenda has grown these gaps and next year’s US election is by far the most important of the potential G7 leadership transitions in 2019 and 2020.