G7 foreign ministers issue wide ranging statement after their meeting in Canada

The Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and the High Representative of the European Union, met under Canada’s G7 Presidency, in Niagara, on November 11-12, 2025.

The Foreign Ministers of Brazil, India, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Mexico, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, and Ukraine, also joined the meeting for discussions on maritime security and prosperity, critical minerals, economic resilience and energy security.

At the end of their meeting the G7 foreign ministers said:

Ukraine’s long-term prosperity, security and defence

We reaffirmed our unwavering support for Ukraine in defending its territorial integrity and right to exist, and its freedom, sovereignty, and independence.

We reiterated that an immediate ceasefire is urgently needed. We agreed that the current line of contact should be the starting point of negotiations. We remain committed to the principle that international borders must not be changed by force.

We are increasing the economic costs to Russia, and exploring measures against countries and entities that are helping finance Russia’s war efforts.

We condemned the provision to Russia of military assistance by DPRK and Iran, and the provision of weapons and dual-use components by China, a decisive enabler of Russia’s war.

We acknowledged the ongoing discussions on a wide range of financing options, including further leveraging immobilised Russian Sovereign Assets in our jurisdictions in a coordinated way to support Ukraine.

We strongly condemned Russia’s recent direct attacks on energy infrastructure and reaffirmed our support for Ukraine’s energy security.

Peace and stability in the Middle East

We reiterated our strong support for President Trump’s Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict. We welcomed the ceasefire and the release of hostages. We stressed the urgency of returning the remains of deceased hostages. We also welcomed the increased flows of aid, but expressed concern about restrictions that remain in place. We called on all parties to allow for humanitarian assistance without interference at scale, through the United Nations and its agencies, and the Red Crescent, in addition to other international institutions and INGOs, as stipulated in President Trump’s plan.

It is vital that all parties continue to engage constructively on the next steps outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, in pursuit of a political horizon for peaceful and prosperous co-existence for the Israeli and Palestinian peoples that advances comprehensive Middle East peace and stability. We will also continue to maintain attention on the situation in the West Bank.

We urged Iran to fully implement its obligations both under UN Security Council resolutions and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Iran must resume full cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, including enabling inspections of all nuclear facilities and materials. We called on Iran to engage in direct talks with the United States, supported by the E3. We continue to call on all UN member states to adhere to their obligations following the legal implementation of the snapback mechanism.

Regional security and prosperity across the Indo-Pacific

We reaffirmed the importance of a free and open Indo-Pacific based on the rule of law. We reiterated our strong opposition to any unilateral attempts to change the status quo in particular by force or coercion, including in the East China Sea and the South China Sea.

We expressed serious concern over the use of dangerous maneuvers and water cannons in the South China Sea, as well as efforts to restrict freedom of navigation and overflight through militarization and coercion in the South China Sea. We reiterated that the award rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal on 12 July 2016 is a significant milestone, binding upon the parties.

We emphasized the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, and opposed any unilateral attempts to change the status quo, particularly by force or coercion. We encouraged the peaceful resolution of cross-Strait issues through constructive dialogue. We also expressed support for Taiwan’s meaningful participation in appropriate international organizations.

We remain concerned about China’s military build-up and rapid increase of nuclear weapons arsenal and call on Beijing to demonstrate its commitment to stability through improved transparency.

We strongly condemned the DPRK’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs and reaffirmed our commitment to the complete denuclearization of the DPRK, in accordance with relevant UN Security Council Resolutions. We expressed grave concern over the DPRK’s cryptocurrency thefts. We urged DPRK to resolve the abductions issue expeditiously.

Haiti

We stressed the need for voluntary personnel and financial contributions to implement UNSC Resolution 2793. We urged the Haitian authorities to present a concrete plan and timeline toward free and fair elections. We welcomed the launch of a Regional Maritime Security Initiative to address transnational organized crime and foster greater stability and resilience in Haiti and the Caribbean through improved maritime security.

Sudan

We strongly condemned the recent escalation of violence and attacks that are often ethnically-motivated, by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) against unarmed civilians and aid workers, particularly in El Fasher and North Kordofan. We deplore the devastating impact of this war on civilians including the famine that has led to the world’s largest humanitarian crisis. We unequivocally condemn sexual violence. We urged the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) to respect human rights, de-escalate, commit to an immediate and permanent ceasefire, and ensure rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance. We expressed our support for diplomatic efforts underway to restore peace and security and called upon external actors to contribute to that end.

Eastern DRC

We remain deeply concerned by ongoing violence and reports of human rights violations in eastern DRC, including conflict-related sexual violence. We called on all parties to protect civilians and facilitate humanitarian access. We urged all parties to engage in good faith in the peace process, to deliver lasting peace and security, in line with UNSC Resolution 2773. We called on parties to uphold commitments to fully implement the June 27 Peace Agreement and July 19 Declaration of Principles. We welcomed the Paris Conference on peace and stability in the Great Lakes region, held on October 30, 2025.

Migration and economic security

We noted the serious impact of conflict and instability on affected countries and regions, as well as on broader regional and international security, undermining growth and development, lessening opportunity and driving displacement and irregular migration. We committed to take up these issues at a future G7 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting.

Maritime security and prosperity

Maritime security and prosperity are fundamental to global stability, economic resilience, and the well-being of all nations. We reaffirm the principles reflected in the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea.

We recalled the G7 Foreign Ministers’ Declaration on Maritime Security and Prosperity, adopted in Charlevoix, Quebec on March 14, 2025. We welcomed the work carried out by the members of the G7 NB8++ Shadow Fleet Task Force.

We reiterated our commitment to strengthen G7 coordination with partners to prevent the use of unregistered or fraudulently registered, uninsured and substandard vessels engaged in sanctions evasion, risky navigation practices, arms transfers, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, illicit trade, and maritime crime.

We reaffirmed our shared commitment to address hybrid threats, including activity against critical undersea infrastructure, and to strengthening partnership in securing maritime ports and routes against the trafficking of illegal drugs.

Economic resilience, energy security and critical minerals

Building on the G7 Critical Minerals Action Plan, the G7 Roadmap to promote standards-based markets for critical minerals and the Production Alliance, we are pursuing partnerships that drive economic development, innovation, resilient and sustainable supply chains, and shared prosperity and security beyond the G7.

We expressed particular concern with the use of non-market policies and practices to disrupt critical minerals supply chains, as well as other forms of market distortions including overcapacity. In this regard, we welcome the results of the recent U.S. – China discussions and discourage any future policy impediments to predictable trade, including in critical minerals.

G7 members agreed to pursue concrete initiatives, jointly with partners, to address vulnerabilities by reducing our dependencies, and strengthening our collective economic resilience and security.

source: commonspace.eu

Latest

Editor's choice

Monday Commentary

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

19 October 2026

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).

Dennis Sammut

Editor's choice

News

In Astana, Ministers brief foreign diplomats on measures in Tokayev's "State of the nation" speech

13 November 2026

Popular

Editor's choice

Monday Commentary

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

7 September 2026

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996, Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe. But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides. Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)

Dennis Sammut

Editor's choice

Monday Commentary

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

21 September 2026

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)

Dennis Sammut