[Jeyan]: Does the G7 still matter? That was one of the big questions hanging over this year's summit in France. Now, Prime Minister Mark Carney was asked whether this gathering could help shape a new world order, and he made a point of mentioning all the leaders who'd be there, not just the ones from the G7.

[Mark Carney]: And it's a recognition that the G7, if it ever did run the world, no longer runs the world or pretends to.

[Jeyan]: So what did this year's summit reveal about how global power is shifting and what role this country will play? We break down the top G7 takeaways for Canada. Then July 1st is getting closer and closer. That's the deadline to renew or review the Canada US Mexico agreement. We look at President Donald Trump's threats to pull out and what they mean for trade negotiations. Welcome to The Rundown. Prime Minister Mark Carney has been in France this week for the G7 summit, meeting with foreign leaders and trying to chart a new path for Canada in uncertain times. Arif Lalani is a former Canadian ambassador to several countries in the Middle East. Adam Chapnick is a professor of defence studies at the Royal Military College of Canada, and Shannon Gormley is a foreign affairs columnist. Thank you so much for joining us in our studios. Welcome back to both of you. Adam. Great to see you, Adam, come to you first. What was the biggest takeaway for you from the G7 summit?

[Adam Chapnick]: For me, I think what matters at these summits are not as much the meetings among the G7, but who people are meeting with on the side. And what I found fascinating this time is that Mr. Carney took more side level meetings with G7 countries than he did with G7 countries. While he was there, he saw the Koreans, the Indians, UAE, Ukraine and a couple of G7 countries. But it goes to show that part of the point of these meetings are not just the G7, it's access to other people who are in the international community who matter to Canada.

[Jeyan]: Shannon, for you.

[Shannon Gormley]: I was I was actually pretty struck by how the most prosperous countries in the world right now have to turn themselves into pretzels to try to manage the behaviour of a toddler who happens to be in charge of the United States of America. And so tonight, Trump is going to have a FET at Versailles because they're so worried about managing his ego. Okay. And and so that's one element of it. But I was also really struck by the fact that most of the leaders in the G7 right now are quite beleaguered. And so there is a real opportunity right now for Carney and for Canada's leadership to take a more central role. So if you look at the UK right now, Starmer is concerned that by the time he returns home, they will have changed the locks. On number ten. Mertz is in trouble because they've they've lost their bid for a temporary Security Council seat. And on top of that, France Macron is in his last term. So he's a lame duck. And so that's something that I think people are looking for leadership and and Carney had a vacuum to fill.

[Jeyan]: All right Arif biggest takeaways here.

[Arif Lalani]: Well look I would just observe, you know you're in trouble when Italy seems to be the most stable government in Europe. Right. So I agree with your point. You know, I think the takeaway for me was the G7 is a very powerful club, but it's no longer the governing board of the world. Why do you say that? Well, it used to be that the G7 set the policy for the world, and today that's not the case. The G7 is searching for relevancy. Right. And the relevancy is by inviting others. So to Adam's point, you know, the G7 doesn't matter if India isn't invited, if the Gulf states aren't invited and if others aren't invited. So I think now the G7 is just a very important club, but it doesn't set the table. There are many competing groupings like BRICs plus Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, and new members, the G20, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. So the G7 is now just one amongst many.

[Jeyan]: Shannon, what are your thoughts on that? You know, when we're talking about, you know, for example, India not a member. China, second largest economy here, when we really look at Asian representation in the G7, it's really just Japan. Are there some missing pieces in terms of its relevancy?

[Shannon Gormley]: Well, I don't think there's anything wrong with the most prosperous democracies in the world coming together and trying to make deals and coordinate their their actions. But at the same time, it's very clear, particularly with Trump, who's accelerated this, is that all countries, all like minded democracies, need to start looking elsewhere for trade deals and even for security agreements. Now, the extent to which we can do that without harming our own national security interests is, is an open question. That's something to be managed.

[Jeyan]: Adam, any opportunities that you felt Canada failed to capitalize on?

[Adam Chapnick]: I don't think so. But I also would say that I'm not sure that we can figure that out right now. Part of the G7, to me is not a place where things get finalized. It's a place where relationships are built, where Mr. Carney can accelerate trade with India. But you don't sign a trade deal with India while you're there, so it's hard to know without being in the room for those sidebar conversations how well they went and therefore if any, opportunities were missed. But it seems to me that the Prime Minister stayed busy, which is the point. If you're going to be there, you meet with as many people as you can that can help Canada's interests in the grand scheme. So it's hard with with what we know so far to say that opportunities were really missed.

[Jeyan]: Arif.

[Arif Lalani]: I don't think there were any opportunities missed. I think the Prime Minister is executing the best foreign policy that's that's available to him. And I'd add he's doing it without having these endless policy reviews and deliberations. He's actually leading by execution, which I think is a good thing. So I don't think so. I think it was a no drama G7, which with President Trump is itself an achievement. He didn't leave early. He showed up. So I think for President Macron also, he sort of escapes the the the summit without having any major drama.

[Jeyan]: Shannon, on the point that Adam made about Mark Carney's leadership right before the G7 summit, Mark Carney advocated for a third path for middle power nations, arguing that countries like Canada should build more pragmatic coalitions rather than simply competing for favour of major powers. Is that the sensible path forward?

[Shannon Gormley]: I think to I think it's the best path available to us right now, given the unpredictable, mendacious behaviour of our biggest trading partner. And to a certain extent, we we can't. We can only detach ourselves from the United States to a small degree. But he's he's still trying to do it to whatever extent that we can. Now, whether or not we're striking the right balance in the. The relationships that we're pursuing on a trade level with with other countries, I'm not I'm not always so sure about that. I mean, for instance, he used his time with India at the G7 to invite India for a visit. And just three years ago, a Sikh person was murdered on Canadian soil. Just six months ago, I believe it was the head of the Federation of Canadian Sikhs. He was threatened and his wife and children were threatened. And so balancing Canada's very real need right now to have to forge more trade relationships, we need to be able to do that in a way that doesn't come at the expense of national security. And I'm not sure that we are striking that balance.

[Jeyan]: Adam.

[Adam Chapnick]: I think we have to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. India is just too big of an economy to ignore, particularly when the Indians are desperate for more trading partners and therefore are going to be much more malleable in what they will accept and not accept compared to other times in our history. They're also desperate for stable, reliable trading partners, and we were one of the few available. So yes, we have to be cautious. Yes, CSIS has to be paying close attention. But we can't ignore India right now.

[Shannon Gormley]: I just want to quickly interject there. I agree with everything you said. At the same time, I think that we've also announced that we're going to be exploring more intelligence sharing with India. So that's so cooperating and cooperating on the security front. And so that's where we have to be, I think really careful in balancing those two things.

[Jeyan]: All right. I want to change gears a little bit. Another topic of discussion. Iran. Arif, criticism from some quarters of Canada that the country could have played a bigger role in the peace talks there. Agree, disagree.

[Arif Lalani]: I don't think there was a bigger role to be played. And I think one of the strengths of the Prime Minister at the moment is not to overplay Canada's hand. I mean, what would Canada have done? I think there's a role for Canada now, if there is really a memorandum of understanding that holds to Friday and beyond, is for us to use some of our naval and high tech assets to help secure the the strait. But if it was me, I would be staying out of this huge strategic miscalculation by the United States and Israel. I mean, it's been a complete disaster for the world.

[Jeyan]: Adam.

[Adam Chapnick]: I think that we have a tendency in Canada historically to look for places to lead, to insert ourselves. And I think we shouldn't be doing that. We're at our best if we are asked to intervene and then we say yes and do a good job looking, you know, me, me, me, please is not that's not helpful. That that's actually you're in it for yourself. So we weren't asked to do more for Iran on Iran and we didn't do more. And that makes perfect sense to me. Being humble is not a bad thing in world affairs.

[Arif Lalani]: So can I just also add it's also wasn't in our interest, right. So so I think also the days of when Canada looks to play a good role, or I think we need to be driven by what was in our interest and it wasn't in our interest to try and seek a greater role.

[Jeyan]: Whose interest was it.

[Arif Lalani]: For Canada to seek a greater role, do you mean? I don't think it was in anyone's interest for Canada to play a greater role. I think it was in our interest to provide good, honest counsel to the Americans behind the scenes in terms of how to navigate out of this, which in my mind would include. Bringing the Chinese in more to guarantee whatever is is going to be agreed. And I suspect Canada was providing that advice behind the scenes.

[Jeyan]: Shannon.

[Shannon Gormley]: I don't know why Canada would want to have a role in a mess that it wanted to have nothing to do with. So this was a mess of Trump's own creation. It was entirely unnecessary. It was executed badly, but there probably wasn't a way it could have been executed. Well. I think most of the world just wanted it over with. I'm glad it was over with, but I don't know that Canada could have done much. Aside from what we've just said to provide counsel.

[Arif Lalani]: Yeah, and look, the Prime Minister, you know, had a couple of missteps on this issue. He came out early and supported the attacks by Israel and the United States, and then tried to backtrack and then tried to explain. So I think for him, politically, the best thing was to keep his head down.

[Jeyan]: All right. I want to talk about Ukraine. Trump was on record saying that the war in Ukraine has no impact on the U.S. other than saying that we sell weapons and that they are thousands of miles away. Was this an opportunity for Canada to reassert its support for Ukraine?

[Adam Chapnick]: I think we did reassert our support. I think we've increased the number of folks that were sanctioning. We've increased the amount of money that's going to support Ukraine. We had another meeting with President Zelensky that, by all accounts, seems to have gone very well. So I think we did we did that. And I think sometimes the the president says things that one has to accept with a grain of salt. In that very moment, he might not have been doing much more with Ukraine, but an hour later he might have been. And we have to just accept that and move on.

[Jeyan]: To Canada. Rise to the occasion there.

[Shannon Gormley]: I mean, I want to be careful about congratulating any country other than Ukraine right now, because the fact is, is that this war is being fought by people who who have proven that they know what they're doing. And if they had more weapons, if they had the right kind of weapons, it may have been over by now in in the Ukrainians favour, Canada has Carney in particular, has congratulated Canada for giving more aid than we in fact have given. But this is certainly a step in the right direction.

[Jeyan]: Riff, you're nodding your head there.

[Arif Lalani]: Well, I agree with Shannon. I think the Ukrainians themselves deserve a lot of credit. I mean, a year ago, people were counting them out and they've managed to to keep fighting, to keep disciplined and to start to turn the tide, even while, you know, with a hand tied behind their backs in terms of the assistance not being received by the U.S. and, and Europeans. So I think now is the time to do more for Ukraine and to pressure the Americans to not cut the rug out from under the Ukrainians in terms of their own relationship with Russia.

[Jeyan]: With that being said, Adam, I think I know what you're going to say to this, but what are some areas that you think Canada can take a lead globally?

[Adam Chapnick]: Well, I, I don't think we should be looking to take a lead. I think that we should be prepared to do a disproportionate amount when directly asked, because our allies believe that we have something additional to give that they don't have. And when that ask, if that ask or when that ask comes, we should be up and about ready to ready to go. But I don't think that we've mentioned our interests. Leadership is not a national interest. Leadership may be a means to a national interest, but it is not in and of itself. Just leading doesn't necessarily put us in a better place. So I think we become obsessed in this country with leadership in foreign policy, when really we need to be obsessed with outcomes in foreign policy.

[Jeyan]: Reef.

[Arif Lalani]: I think we just need to be a strong country which which we're trying to to be. So I think the leadership here that Canada does have is frankly, to be an adult at the table. This is a system where our natural leadership points. The Americans and others are not in a position to do that. So I think Prime Minister Carney brings, you know, real kind of experience to the table. And I think the other thing that Canada can do is, is speak up for what's right and back it up. And he has so far been able to do that on Ukraine, on on Gaza, on, on the Middle East in general, on AI on, on teens and social media. I mean, I think people are looking for countries who are addressing complex problems with some maturity and some thoughtfulness. And I think we now have a prime minister who's in that camp.

[Jeyan]: Jen.

[Shannon Gormley]: I think to a large extent, the the we're going to lead by example. If we're going to lead by at all at all. I think that, as our friend Arif just said, people want an adult at the table right now, and other countries do watch that. And so when when Canada's prime minister, who's on a high right now, not just domestically but internationally, when he is refraining from scapegoating the media, when he observes democratic norms that can be infectious. And so we don't want to overstate the extent to which that can be infectious. But just as authoritarian systems rely on other authoritarians to project strength in their system, so democracies.

[Jeyan]: Adam Carney left the G7 without a formal meeting with the president. President Trump Carney had said that he had spoken with Trump 7 or 8 times over the past 36 hours, and shouldn't really read into the fact that he didn't have a formal meeting. How should Canada navigate an unpredictable USA? I think that's the kindest way I think I can put it. But how do we navigate this?

[Adam Chapnick]: Well, I think one thing you don't do is going begging publicly for a meeting. So if there's no meeting to be had, that that should just be fine. As the as the Prime Minister seemed to indicate that it was, I think that we have to Recognize that it is in America's interest to collaborate with Canada and with Mexico. We all benefit. We all grow. We all prosper. When that happens, the Americans will realize that more of them at some times than another. And when the Americans are in a position where they're realizing that more often than not, we have to be able to jump and get things done quickly when they aren't in the mood to discuss that, we have to just keep going. I continue to prepare and be ready when it happens. The numbers are very clear. All of our economies will grow more quickly if we work together.

[Jeyan]: I should mention that US Trade Minister Canada U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc did meet with counterparts in the U.S. What are your thoughts there?

[Arif Lalani]: I think leaders meet either to launch a process or to close a process, and there was nothing here to launch or nothing to close. So I think it really wasn't an issue that they met or didn't meet. I think the officials are carrying on the discussions. And frankly, I think with President Trump, a meeting with President Trump is usually sort of the last resort, not the first resort, because it's very unpredictable.

[Jeyan]: All right. I think all eyes are on July 1st and sort of ticking towards that deadline. How do we deal with an unpredictable counterpart in the States?

[Shannon Gormley]: Well, I don't know this for a fact, but I doubt very much that Carney wanted to meet with with Trump. I think right now doing anything to not rock the apple cart is what is what we're trying to do. And so as many meetings as can be done that that not sideline him, but that don't peek cause a peek or a fit from him. That's probably in our interest.

[Jeyan]: Shannon Arif, Adam, thank you so much for this. Really appreciate it.

[Shannon Gormley]: Thank you.

[Arif Lalani]: Thank you.

[Adam Chapnick]: Thank you.♪

[Jeyan]: U.S. President Donald Trump has made it pretty clear he's no fan of the Canada US Mexico agreement.

[Donald Trump]: Well, I'm not looking to renew it. Hey, we don't need anything that Canada has.

[Jeyan]: Now, he said that last week with a critical deadline looming. So what does that mean for the future of this trade deal? Drew Fagan is a professor at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto, and he joins me in studio. How are you doing, sir? Hey, Jeyan. All right.

[Drew Fagan]: We're not going to have an answer by July 1st by any means. I'm not even sure we'll have an answer one way or the other in the fall or even into 2027. July 1st is really an assessment point more than a deadline. Basically, it means the three parties come together and check where they're at, and then

[Jeyan]: With that being said, what should Canada's strategy be?

[Drew Fagan]: Well, so one, don't overreact. All the senior officials know that. Don't take the bait. And and that's a logical thing to do because we've been doing that for a long, long time. And CUSMA is as big a stakes get with regard to Canada-U.S. relations. Then there's the issue of some degree of national u

[Jeyan]: We've seen with Premier Doug Ford singing a different tune. Is that what that's signalling towards?

[Drew Fagan]: Absolutely. He's a bit of an unknowable, but I think lately he's become a little bit more disciplined and a little bit more of the team. He played an interesting role early as kind of this Captain Canada thing. That was in part during the period between Trudeau and Carney, and he became the voice. N

[Jeyan]: Well, let's talk about that. What's the best case scenario for Canada here? Is it, for example, the existing tariffs being removed or is there more on the table here.

[Drew Fagan]: So the existing tariffs the Trump administration insists will not be removed. The first point is they only exist on a small percentage of Canadian exports to the United States, 10 to 15%. So they haven't been devastating. And the Trump administration, however problematic they are up until now, has r

[Jeyan]: Well, let's talk about those. What are some of the compromises that Canada might have.

[Drew Fagan]: To make? Well, you've already seen one with regard to online streaming and the issue of culture and the degree to which Canada views culture as something of national sovereignty, and the United States views it as entertainment, that's been an issue going back to the original free trade agreements. S

[Jeyan]: Worst case scenario here, I don't want to want to, you know, be the negative one here. But if a deal is not reached, how does what's the impact here on Canada's economy?

[Drew Fagan]: So the issue of whether a deal is reached is not going to be answered. I don't think, for some time. In some ways, what's perfect for the Trump administration is to keep the agreement in place and change it piece by piece, over an extended period of time into 27, possibly even past that. We want som

[Jeyan]: All right. You mentioned critical minerals. You mentioned energy. I'm thinking Ontario. So help me understand a little bit if a deal isn't reached or if it does go year by year where they get a little bit through negotiations, how does this affect Ontario?

[Drew Fagan]: Well, the first point I want to make is with regard to Ontario or the Canadian economy generally, we're less integrated, if you like, less dependent anyway on the US market than we were, say, 25 years ago, significantly so, we express concern that 7,075% of our trade is with the United States. That

[Jeyan]: Well, as you mentioned, it looks like this is not going to go away anytime soon, which means that we will probably have to bring you back in to talk about it years down the line as well. Drew, I really appreciate it. Always. Thank you so much for your insights.

[Drew Fagan]: Pleasure.

[Jeyan]: I'm Jeyan. Thanks for watching