The G7 foreign ministers meeting in Niagara, Canada, on November 11-12 turned out to be a significant event at a juncture when a pall of uncertainty had descended on the presidential dialogue between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. One may even sense the incipient signs of a new dawn breaking in the joint statement of the G7 FMs, which eschewed the customary vitriolic attacks on Russia.
The joint statement once again voiced the G7’s support for Ukraine in generalities “in defending its territorial integrity and right to exist, and its freedom, sovereignty, and independence” but didn’t go into specifics while seeking an immediate ceasefire in the war”;it restated that G7 is increasing the economic costs to Russia, and “exploring measures against countries and entities that are helping finance Russia’s war efforts” — words that didn’t carry conviction; it referred to “a wide range of financing options” potentially, including seizing Russian frozen reserves “in a coordinating way” although the way froward remains blocked; and it reaffirmed support for Ukraine’s energy security.
Conspicuously notable was the absence of any drum-beating or pledge of supply of advanced weaponry to Ukraine to hit deep inside Russia.
The G7 event coincided with the looming fall of Pokrovsk, a vital strategic hub militarily, coinciding with a massive $100 million corruption scam in the energy sector surfacing in Kiev involving some of Zelensky’s close associates, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz after a call with him demanding a crackdown on corruption. The regime in Kiev is facing an existential crisis militarily and internally.
The most curious thing about the G7 statement was that there was a deafening silence about the oil sanctions against Russia, which is supposedly the locomotive of the western strategy going forward. Interestingly, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had gone to the G7 after the White House meeting recently between Trump and the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban where the latter successfully sought a permanent waiver for his country from any secondary oil sanctions against Russia. [emphasis added.]
Coming out of the G7 summit, Rubio robustly defended the US waiver for Hungary at a press conference. On the whole, Rubio sounded unenthusiastic about the oil sanctions, saying more than once that Trump’s decision was actually in response to a European demand. He also distanced himself from the implementation of the decision to chase Russia’s so-called shadow fleet ferrying oil in the high seas calling it an ‘enforcement mechanism.’ He said, in principle, US agrees with the need to enforce the sanctions, but then, he passed the buck to the Europeans saying, “I do think there are things that the Europeans can do on shadow fleets since a lot of these are happening in areas much closer to them.”
By the way, Rubio also expressed his annoyance at the Europeans for criticising Trump’s recent moves to confront Venezuela. He said “I don’t think that the European Union gets to determine what international law is, and what they certainly don’t get to determine is how the United States defends its national security… I do find it interesting that all of these countries want us to send and supply, for example, nuclear-capable Tomahawk missiles to defend Europe, but when the United States positions aircraft carriers in our hemisphere where we live, somehow that’s a problem.”
Rubio reserved the main thrust of his signalling to Moscow for the concluding part of his press conference, where he messaged the White House’s readiness to put back on track the proposed summit between Trump and Putin in Budapest, which the US had once proposed and then called off.
This is how Rubio gingerly revived the idea: “Well, I mean, look, the last conversation [with his Russian counterpart] I think it might be – the way I would characterise it is I think there was agreement on both sides that the next time our presidents meet, there has to be a concrete result. We have to know going in that we have a real chance to get something positive coming out. And we’d love to see that happen. I mean, we’d love to see this war end, but we can’t just continue to have meetings for the sake of meetings. And I think both sides sort of view it that way, at least that’s what I took from our conversations. So my conversations with him have always been professional and productive.”
Bravo! One cannot but get an impression that it was a well planned question from the media and Rubio obliging with an answer.
At any rate, Rubio got the response he was expecting, with Moscow responding with alacrity. An unnamed diplomatic source told Tass, “The summit is definitely necessary, but it must be preceded by careful organisational and substantive preparation. However, this is only feasible if the US firmly adheres to the Anchorage agreements.”
That seems to be Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s voice. By the way, on November 11, while the G7 was meeting, Lavrov had already set the record straight on his controversial phone conversation with Rubio a month ago in a detailed statement where he gently returned matters to the track of the planned Budapest summit idea that was languishing in the air with Trump putting it to sudden death.
Lavrov said with a touch of humour that he had “a polite conversation [with Rubio] without any nervous episodes, by and large reaffirming progress based on the agreements reached in Anchorage, and went off the phone.”
Indeed, Lavrov ridiculed the mischief played by the FT, and stated, “If and when our US counterparts renew their proposal and appear ready to begin preparations for a high-level meeting that could produce meaningful results, Budapest would, of course, be our preferred location. All the more so as, during his meeting with Viktor Orban, Donald Trump confirmed that Budapest was a preferable venue for Washington as well.”
Well, the storm in the tea cup has blown over. Let us fasten seat belts for the journey to Budapest in a near future.
Orban said yesterday in a media interview when asked about Hungary’s contribution to resolving the Ukraine conflict, “I don’t want to go into the details. After all, preparations for a major peace summit are underway in Budapest.” Orban argued that Hungary was the only EU country to maintain communication channels and “constant contact” with Russia. “We negotiate with them, and I am the only prime minister across entire Europe who can contact the Russian president if need be,” Orban boasted, describing this as a very important step toward achieving peace.
The consistency and firmness of Russia’s stance combined with the legendary flexibility and reasonableness of its diplomacy to navigate dire straits is once again on display. But the heart of the matter is, as the former Nato secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg told Times newspaper last Saturday in an exclusive interview, the western alliance will not risk a war with Russia over the Ukraine issue. The recent disclosure about new futuristic weapon systems in Russia’s armoury against which the West has no defence must also have come as a reality check.
Trump too did the right thing by announcing publicly that “sometimes you’re better off letting them [Russia and Ukraine] fight for a while.” The fall of Pokrovsk is virtually bringing the war to an end.
READ MORE: The new Russian arsenal that can deter wars, The New Indian Express, November 14, 2025