Opinion C Raja Mohan writes on Modi and the G7 summit: Engaging with a divided West

Indian elites have long viewed the West as a monolith. But a longer historical perspective reveals that contestation among Western powers was a central theme, especially in the centuries preceding India’s independence. As European powers built capitalist economies at home, they competed fiercely abroad for colonies, resources and markets. These inter-imperialist rivalries were key drivers of global politics.

The emergence of the Soviet Union during World War I complicated equations but did not end intra-Western rivalry, which remained dominant through World War II. Only in the aftermath of the War did the East-West dichotomy become the primary lens through which global politics was viewed. Despite Cold War unity against communism, intra-Western differences persisted — though largely tactical in nature. The collapse of the Soviet Union did not immediately disrupt Western coherence. A sense of triumphalism, anchored in the apparent victory of capitalism and liberal democracy, held the alliance together. But fault lines soon emerged.

In the mid-1990s, France was already warning against the dangers of America’s unrestrained “hyperpower”, a concern that resonated even among US allies. Before Beijing, Moscow or even Delhi began advocating a multipolar world, it was Paris that championed the concept. France also reached out to India to help shape that order. While Delhi engaged with Russia and China in promoting multipolarity, it also drew closer to the West to build economic and technological capacity. This duality defined India’s multi-alignment strategy. It is worth recalling that France and Germany openly opposed the US at the UN Security Council over the planned invasion of Iraq in 2003. Today, divisions over the Middle East run deeper. Europe is increasingly critical of Israeli policies, while the US remains staunchly supportive.

The 2018 G7 summit in Canada, held during Trump’s first term, was marked by tension after he imposed steel and aluminium tariffs on European allies. A now-iconic image captured Chancellor Angela Merkel and other leaders confronting a defiant Trump. He left early, later accusing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of dishonesty regarding summit discussions. While the Biden administration sought to restore Western unity, Trump’s return to power signals a renewed shift toward American unilateralism. His focus is on promoting American interests, often at the expense of presumed collective Western goals. His MAGA coalition targets not only European economic policies but also their social norms. Trump’s anti-woke campaign has morphed into a broader critique of European liberalism, and his support for far-right parties across Europe marks a new level of political intervention.

The Trump administration has imposed sweeping tariffs, including a 10 per cent duty on nearly all G7 partners, with threats of further escalation — especially targeting Canada. These moves have provoked alarm among European leaders and the Canadian government, who see them as a direct challenge to the rules-based international trading system long championed by the G7. US-Canada ties have been especially strained. Trump’s inflammatory comments — questioning Canadian sovereignty and making casual references to annexation — have deepened tensions. Prime Minister Mark Carney, presiding over his first summit, is working to rally fellow G7 leaders to counterbalance Washington’s assertiveness, particularly on trade and defence.

Russia’s war in Ukraine is another major source of discord. While the G7 continues to back Ukraine and impose sanctions on Moscow, uncertainty over the depth of US commitment is growing. European leaders are anxious about Trump’s unpredictability and the potential erosion of transatlantic solidarity. This anxiety is magnified by recent developments in the Middle East — especially following Israel’s strike on Iran. The regional crisis has heightened the summit’s urgency but also exposed divergent positions on oil, security, and diplomacy.

Defence spending has become a new flashpoint. Trump’s demand that G7 partners raise military budgets to 5 per cent of GDP — well above NATO’s 2 per cent guideline — has met resistance. Most members cite domestic constraints and question the need for such an aggressive ramp-up.

Disputes also linger over climate change and digital policy. Trump’s scepticism about ambitious climate targets and global digital regulation frameworks has hampered consensus, despite European pressure for forward movement.

Acknowledging these divisions, Carney has abandoned the tradition of a joint communiqué, opting instead for a summary note that reflects the absence of consensus. The 2025 summit thus serves as a powerful reminder of the difficulties facing multilateralism in an era of renewed nationalism.

Against this backdrop, the Khalistani protests and Trump’s occasional remarks about Kashmir pale into insignificance. Carney’s invitation to Modi underscores India’s growing importance as a partner for the G7. Modi would do well to ignore the distractions, work toward repairing ties with Canada, and re-engage with Trump. More importantly, he must assess the internal contradictions of the West, minimise their fallout for Indian interests, deepen bilateral partnerships with G7 members, and position India as a key stakeholder in shaping the global architecture that will inevitably emerge from the current turbulence.

The writer is distinguished fellow at the Council on Strategic and Defence Research, New Delhi, and contributing editor on international affairs for The Indian Express