President of the Center for Diplomatic Relations and Political Research (DİPAM) Dr. Tolga Sakman wrote the prominent agenda items of the G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting in Paris for AA Analysis.
The G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting, held in Paris on 9-10 November within the scope of France's 2026 G7 term presidency, was one of the diplomatic grounds where the pains of structural transformation of the international system were observed most concretely. This last critical foreign affairs meeting before the term presidency is transferred to the USA at the beginning of 2027 gave clues not only about the internal consolidation quest of the traditional Western alliance, but also about the strategic divisions within the transatlantic bloc and the new engagement architecture that the G7 is trying to establish with the Global South.
The most obvious geopolitical tension in the background of the Paris meeting is the scissors between Washington's unilateral and unpredictable diplomatic pressures and European capitals' insistence on multilateralism and institutional participation. At a time when the Russia-Ukraine War has reached a critical threshold and the US-mediated peace negotiations between Moscow and Kiev in Abu Dhabi set the agenda, the main concern of European actors is to be excluded from the processes that directly concern the security architecture of the continent. US President Donald Trump's statements envisaging a comprehensive agreement with Russia that would concern not only Ukraine but "all of Europe" and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio's confirmation that "the post-war European security infrastructure is one of the main topics discussed in every meeting" triggered a 1945 Yalta-like anxiety of exclusion in European capitals.
While the European side argues that a just peace that preserves Kiev's territorial integrity is possible only with strong and binding security guarantees, the Washington administration's tendency to quickly freeze the conflict, leave the geopolitical burden on Europe, and establish a broader global equation with Moscow seems to be the biggest obstacle to transatlantic harmony. Strengthening the support given to Ukraine in the final declaration with its capacity, financing and energy dimensions is a diplomatic balancing move developed by Europe against this risk of exclusion.
However, the contacts with the participation of Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who made his first foreign visit after the US midterm elections, confirmed that tactical differences between Washington and European capitals, such as the use of force/diplomacy or loosening/tightening sanctions, could not be completely resolved, but keeping institutional dialogue channels open was a strategic necessity for both sides.
The second main center of gravity of the negotiations in Paris was the fragile balances in the Middle East. The uncertainty around nuclear threats and possible military intervention scenarios on the US-Iran line has created a serious need for strategic coordination among G7 members. The perception in the final declaration that Iran is involved in violent conspiracies against the citizens and lands of these states and the fact that they hold Iran responsible for the alleged incident against the UK's Fairford base on September 27 form the basis of this need. Moreover, the fact that these allegations include large-scale cyber attacks targeting retail supply chains in Europe and associated with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps by France proves that cyber deterrence has become an integral part of the G7 foreign policy agenda.
French Foreign Minister Barrot and his German counterpart Johann Wadephul clearly stated that a new military escalation in the region would create an unbearable cost for Europe. Europe's main priority is the full normalization of maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea. For the European economy, which has relied more on the Middle East and Gulf supply lines after breaking its energy dependence on Russia, a new hot conflict with Iran would mean a direct inflationary shock and supply crisis. At the meeting, where the importance of the free, safe and free passage of Hormuz was emphasized, it was confirmed that it was possible to meet these conditions by creating a multinational defense structure under the leadership of France and England.
Another critical topic of regional security, the expiration of the mandate of the United Nations Interim Task Force on Lebanon (UNIFIL) at the end of the year, was one of the issues on the meeting agenda. While Israel's attacks on Southern Lebanon continue, in order to prevent a security gap that may arise on the field, Paris proposed a multinational military transition coalition that would support the Lebanese Armed Forces on the field and contribute to the disarmament process of Hezbollah. Washington proposed a civilian and monitoring-oriented mission that would monitor whether the parties comply with the existing ceasefire agreements. Moreover, the USA has also signaled that it may veto the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution required for a new transition mechanism that will use UNIFIL elements.
The most striking structural outcome of the Paris meeting is the "outreach" diplomacy that the G7 resorted to in order to overcome the crisis of legitimacy and effectiveness. The approach of rapprochement and producing concrete results, highlighted by France during its term presidency, is also based on this need. The inclusion of countries such as India, Brazil, South Korea, Egypt and Kenya in the leaders' summit held in Evian in June revealed that the G7 was seeking to establish more flexible partnerships with actors other than its own members. The Paris Foreign Ministers Meeting completed the security and foreign policy aspects of this approach.
The participation of the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Egypt and South Korea in this meeting, at the invitation of France, is an indirect recognition of the fact that the G7 does not have a monopoly on global governance. This contact, established with the rising middle-sized powers and regional actors of the Global South, aims to create concrete grounds for cooperation. The "G7+ Ports Network" initiative, launched simultaneously in Marseille, shows that traditional diplomacy is being tried to be reinforced with technical areas such as cross-border organized crime, drug trafficking and logistics security.
The most unique normative innovation that distinguishes the Paris meeting from previous ones is the integration of artificial intelligence technologies directly into the national security and foreign policy doctrine, rather than being a pure economic competition or digital regulation topic. The strong emphasis on artificial intelligence security in the G7 final declaration, following the "Paris Peace Call for Artificial Intelligence Security", which was announced by French President Emmanuel Macron on November 9 and signed by large companies working on this issue and representatives of many states, including G7 members such as Germany and Canada, reflects the reflex of the Western bloc to preserve its technological standard-setting power. This step is a diplomatic confirmation that the concept of "technological sovereignty" has reached equal weight with classical military power elements in the international system.
As a result, the importance of the G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting in Paris is not that it declares the establishment of a new international order, but that it shows through which security and power relations the current order is being reshaped. The polycentricity of the international system, the increasing influence of regional actors and the competition between great powers limit the G7's space of action. However, the meeting reveals that the group is trying to address security, economic and technology policies in a more integrated framework to adapt to changing conditions. Ultimately, it is possible to say that in the new global conjuncture where classical security threats and hybrid and technological risks are intertwined, the G7 is trying to position itself as an example of the effort to transform itself from being a mere "Western club" into a more inclusive crisis management platform.
