LS ‘ Canada Pushes Back Against Trump’s G7 Demands — And Mark Carney’s Response Leaves Leaders Stunned Tense moments unfolded behind closed doors as U.S. proposals clashed with Canada’s economic stance, prompting an unexpectedly firm reaction from the Canadian delegation. Witnesses say Mark Carney delivered a sharply calculated rebuttal that shifted the tone of the entire meeting, catching even longtime diplomats off guard.’ LS
In a stunning display of diplomatic defiance, Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney shocked world leaders at the G7 summit by scrapping the traditional closing communique before talks even began. This unprecedented move signaled a clear rejection of U.S. President Donald Trump’s aggressive demands, including increased military spending and fresh tariffs, and underscored a growing rift within the G7.
As Air Force One touched down in the Canadian Rockies, tensions were palpable. Carney’s decision to forgo the communique, a document that typically symbolizes policy unity among allies, left the summit devoid of a cohesive message. This deliberate choice was a stark signal that Canada would not legitimize U.S. trade coercion, particularly following Trump’s announcement of a 10% universal tariff affecting over $1.1 trillion in imports from allies. According to Reuters, this move blindsided both the White House and European delegations, marking a significant departure from the collaborative spirit expected at such gatherings.
The backdrop of the summit was equally fraught, with leaders arriving not to forge new alliances but to limit damage from the ongoing trade war. Macron’s detour to Greenland, a rebuttal to Trump’s previous territorial ambitions, and Japan’s filing with the WTO reflected a shared apprehension about U.S. policies destabilizing the global economy. Behind closed doors, the narrative was clear: the United States was increasingly seen as the driver of volatility, rather than a stabilizing force.
The implications of Carney’s actions extend far beyond the summit. By refusing to issue a joint statement, he effectively denied Trump a narrative victory, leaving the U.S. president without a document to wave in triumph upon his departure. This calculated silence not only muted Trump’s rhetoric but also reframed the G7 as a platform for damage control rather than multilateral governance.
As the summit unfolded, it became evident that the G7 was no longer functioning as a cohesive unit. Each leader was on the defensive, grappling with their own national interests in the face of U.S. tariffs. Germany, Japan, and Mexico all arrived with their own strategies to counteract U.S. pressures, while the UK managed to secure a temporary digital trade exemption that fell short of comprehensive relief.
The stakes were high, with the World Bank attributing a global GDP downgrade to the uncertainty stemming from U.S. tariff policies. Canada alone has already incurred significant losses, totaling $4.2 billion in retaliatory impacts since the start of 2025. This economic backdrop further underlined the urgency of Carney’s stance, as Canada seeks to preserve access to crucial markets and protect its economic sovereignty.
In this tense environment, Carney’s refusal to endorse a joint statement marked a pivotal moment in G7 diplomacy. It highlighted a recalibration of alliances and a shift away from the cooperative spirit that once defined the group. As nations grapple with the reality of U.S. trade aggression, the G7 appears to be evolving from a forum for consensus into a battleground for national interests.
In a world increasingly characterized by geopolitical fragmentation, Carney’s actions may signal a new era of resistance against unilateral U.S. policies. The question remains: how long can this fragile coalition hold together, and what will the ramifications be as leaders prepare for the next round of negotiations, particularly within NATO? As the dust settles on this summit, one thing is clear: the dynamics of international diplomacy are shifting, and the G7’s future hangs in the balance.
