Analytical Studies > Analysis on the 2026 Evian Summit
G7 Summits > 2026 Evian Summit > Road to the 2026 Evian Summit

The G7 Evian Summit’s Strong Performance

John Kirton, G7 Research Group
June 18, 2026

At their Evian Summit on June 15-17, 2026, G7 leaders produced a strong performance, making important advances, encoded in their 182 public commitments, on the key security, economic, social and technology issues they addressed.

Key Achievements

On security, they strongly supported US president Donald Trump’s page-and-a-half, 14-point deal with Iran on the summit’s eve for an immediate ceasefire with Iran and the opening of the Strait of Hormuz. G7 leaders promised to help ensure the deal was kept by providing military and financial support. On Ukraine they promised much stronger military supplies for it and further sanctions on Russia, to hasten the day when Russia would agree to a ceasefire before more Russian troops, assets infrastructure and Ukrainian territory were lost. And in the Indo-Pacific region, they promised to keep the East and South China Seas and Taiwan Strait open, enforce United Nations sanctions against North Korea, and support the virtual Global Convergence for Growth Summit among G7 members and China, which took place a few days before the Evian Summit’s start.

On the economy and development, they also promised more financial support for struggling developing countries by mobilizing money from the private sector and the many multilateral and regional development banks that G7 members controlled.

On social issues, they acted swiftly and strongly against the new Ebola outbreak in Africa, including by mobilizing more of their own money, supporting the UN, and having the United States convene a G20 foreign ministers meeting to do more to stop this public health emergency. They and all their invited partners of India, Brazil, South Korea, Kenya and Egypt promised to accelerate their efforts against cancer. They further promised to act aggressively against drug smuggling and migrant smuggling.

On technology, after their final session held with the heads of major artificial intelligence firms, they promised to protect their children and youth from the AI-intensified harms and threats their social media and internet devices produce, by having all public and private players contribute to this cause.

Decision-Making Commitments

More specifically, as intended by the French host, they produced nine statements on specific subjects. All the 182 commitments contained in them were agreed to by all leaders, including Trump, and most were supported by all or some of their partners.

The G7 leaders’ documents were released in three batches. Among the first three documents, released on the afternoon of June 16, was the “Leaders’ Declaration: Mutually Beneficial International Partnerships,” addressing the subject of the French presidency’s second priority for the summit. It contained 33 commitments, all on the G7’s historically central subject of development. Almost half of these commitments – 15 – were ambitious ones.

Their second document, released at the same time, was the “Leaders Call on the Fight Against Cancer.” It contained 13 commitments, all on health. Four were ambitious ones. All 13 were supported by India, Brazil, South Korea, Kenya and Egypt.

The last of the first third documents released in the afternoon was the “Leaders for a Coordinated Response to the Bundibugyo Ebola Outbreak.” It contained 11 commitments, all on health. Five were ambitious ones. The 11 commitments were supported by India, South Korea, Kenya and Egypt. They and the G7 leaders responded here to the familiar shock of a new outbreak of a more difficult variant of the deadly Ebola virus in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which G7 leaders first addressed in 2015.

The next three documents arrived around midnight on June 16.

The fourth document was the “G7 Leaders’ Statement on Geopolitical Issues.” It dealt in turn with Ukraine in four paragraphs, the Middle East in seven paragraphs (on Iran, Lebanon and Gaza) and the Indo-Pacific region in three paragraphs (on the South and East China Seas and Taiwan Strait, North Korea and the Global Convergence for Growth Summit). This statement contained 22 commitments, with Ukraine having seven, the Middle East nine and the Indo-Pacific six.

The fifth document was the “Leaders’ Declaration on Tackling Migrant Smuggling .” Supported by South Korea and Kenya, its seven paragraphs contained eight commitments.

The sixth document in the second batch was the “Leaders’ Declaration on the Fight Against Drug Smuggling,” supported by Brazil and South Korea, and contained 16 paragraphs with 25 commitments.

The last three documents were published at the end of the summit on June 18.

The seventh document was the “Leaders’ Statement for a More Balanced, Durable and Resilient Growth.” Supported by South Korea, Kenya and Egypt, its 21 commitments contained 11 ambitious ones.

The eighth document was the “G7 Leaders’ Declaration on Securing Supply Chains for Critical Minerals.” Supported by Australia, it had 35 commitments, with 31 ambitious ones.

The ninth document was the “Leaders’ Call on A Safer Digital Space for Minors.” Supported by all five guest leaders, its 14 commitments included seven ambitious ones.

Evian’s nine communiqués were the same as the 2025 Kananaskis Summit, which produced eight statements plus a chair’s summary.

Evian’s 182 commitments were substantially more than the average of 151 commitments produced at each of the 51 previous G7 summits, substantially more than the 150 produced at Kananaskis, and many more than the 77 produced by Macron’s G7 Biarritz Summit in 2019. Evian’s 182 commitments were the 13th highest made at since the summit’s start in 1975.

The Evian documents 182 commitments were led by those on critical minerals with 35 and international partnerships with 33, followed by drug smuggling with 25, geopolitical issues with 22, economic growth with 21, and then minors’ digital safety with 14, cancer with 13, Ebola with 11 and migrant smuggling with 8.

Dimensions of Performance

This very significant performance is confirmed by the results on the other key dimensions of performance.

On the leaders’ domestic political management, measured by their attendance at the summit, all nine leaders attended, stayed for the full three days and participated in all the sessions among themselves, and those with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, with their partners and guests, and with the AI CEOs they invited to the final session on the last day.

As measured by the compliments they gave themselves in their communiqués, the nine documents contained eight compliments to four members, led by the US with four, followed by Canada with two, and France and the European Union one each. This compares to the average of 4.5 at each of the first 50 summits. At Evian, their partners and guests were given at least four compliments, with one each to the World Bank Group, Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), African Development Bank (AfDB) and African partners.

On public deliberation, measured by the words in their nine communiqués, there were 9,161 in total. They were led by the documents on critical minerals with 1,840, followed by those on international partnerships with 1,369, growth 1,299, the safety of minors 1,011, drug trafficking 999, Ebola 824, geopolitical issues 725, cancer 713 and migrant smuggling 381.

Evian’s 9,161 words in nine documents compares with the G7 summit average of 10,755 words in the average of five communiqués at each of the first 49 summits, and the 19,795 words in the only document issued at Apulia in 2024 and the 6,140 in the nine issued at Kananaskis in 2025.

On direction setting of principles and norms, measured by affirmations of the G7’s distinctive foundational principles of open democracy and individual liberty, Evian’s leaders produced 15, with open democracy receiving three and human rights 12. Evian’s total of 15 compares with the average of 33 at each of the first 49 summits and the 81 at Apulia in 2024.

On the development of global governance, as shown in the institutions referred to by the leaders, the nine documents made 61 mentions, with 23 mentions to those inside the G7 and 38 to those outside.

The 23 inside mentions referred to the Critical Minerals Production/Resilience Alliance, G7 finance ministers and central bankers, the G7 Platform for Critical Minerals Cooperation, G7 cyber experts, existing G7 groups, the Quantum Technologies Working Group, the G7 Academic Experts group, the G7 Infrastructure Investment Council, the Financial Action Task Force, relevant G7 ministers, G7 development finance institutes, the G7 Toolkit, the Japan Organization for Metals and Energy Security, the G7 Common Set of Principles, and G7 member governments.

The 38 outside references were to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the International Energy Agency with six each, the International Monetary Fund with four, the World Bank Group and the G20 or its foreign ministers with three each, multilateral development banks and the European Coalition against Drugs two each, and the International Maritime Organization, MIGA, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, AfDB, International Atomic Energy Agency, UN Security Council, Interpol, UN Office on Drugs and Crime, the UN Commission on Narcotics Drugs, the International Narcotics Control Board, European Ports Alliance and the Conference on Critical Minerals and Materials with one each.

[back to top]

—	This Information System is provided by the University of Toronto Libraries and the G7 Research Group at the University of Toronto.
	Please send comments to: g7@utoronto.ca This page was last updated June 18, 2026.