The G7's Death Rattle: When Your Club Becomes a One-Man Show

The 50th anniversary G7 summit in Canada wasn't exactly the celebration organizers had in mind. Instead of marking half a century of Western cooperation, it highlighted just how irrelevant this old boys' club has become.

When Success Means "Trump Didn't Storm Out"

Bloomberg's Andreas Kluth really nailed it when he described how the summit's success was measured simply by "avoiding a rage quit by the American guest". Think about that for a moment – we're talking about the supposed premier forum of Western democracies, and their definition of victory is basically keeping one guy from having a tantrum and leaving early.

Bloomberg's brutal assessment says it all: the G7 has devolved into a dysfunctional family dinner where everyone's just hoping dad doesn't flip the table.

And yet, Trump did exactly that anyway, departing on June 16th citing "Middle East situation" as his excuse. The man literally couldn't even stick around for the full show. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney had to cancel the traditional final communiqué altogether – you know things are bad when you can't even agree on a piece of paper to wave around for the cameras.

The whole thing was so dysfunctional that a Canadian official reportedly described hosting the summit as "like preparing the red carpet for Godzilla". That's not exactly the diplomatic language you'd expect, but it perfectly captures the mood.

America First vs. Everyone Else

The fundamental problem here isn't just Trump's personality – though that certainly doesn't help. It's that American interests have diverged so dramatically from its supposed allies that they're basically operating in different universes.

Take the Middle East crisis. While French President Macron and others are pushing for Israel to dial down the escalation with Iran, Trump's over there cheerleading Israeli strikes as "excellent," showing how pleased he is with Israel for its “mission”. While Macron is working on UN conferences about the Two-State Solution, Trump's ambassador to Israel openly rejects the very concept.

On Ukraine, the gap between the US and G6 is even wider. Trump's promising to end the war "in one day" while European leaders are scrambling to figure out how to keep supporting Kyiv without American backing.

The personal dynamics didn't help either. Among those invited to the Summit, quite a number have had unpleasant experience with Trump. Ukrainian President Zelensky got into heated arguments with Trump right in front of White House media, and South African President Ramaphosa was ambushed by Trump, again, on live news cameras, with videos about alleged "racial genocide against whites". Not to say Trump’s open remarks about making Canada the 51^st state of the US, and taking over Greenland.

And if all that wasn't enough, Trump's "reciprocal tariff" war against every trading partner has a July 9th deadline looming – talk about adding economic warfare to diplomatic chaos. This isn't exactly new territory either; back in 2018, Trump pulled the same stunt, refusing to sign the G7 joint communiqué and publicly trashing then-Canadian PM Trudeau as "dishonest and weak". Once is a tantrum, twice is a pattern.

The Numbers Don't Lie: G7's Shrinking Relevance

Here's where things get really interesting – and this is something Western media tends to gloss over. The G7's economic clout has been hemorrhaging for decades. But this decline isn't just about numbers – it's about the fundamental collapse of what the G7 was supposed to represent.

When you can't even manage a joint statement anymore, maybe it's time to admit your club's lost its purpose. The empty chairs tell the real story of Western "unity."

Remember, this club was born back in the 1970s to deal with oil crisis and huge economic problems. At the initiative of West Germany and France, the leading industrialized democracies convened their first regular meeting to manage a troubled world.  It was meant to be Western countries coordinating their positions on major economic and strategic issues during genuine crises.

But that shared purpose? It's gone. As Bloomberg's analysis brutally puts it: "The underlying issue is that Trump doesn't share the values of the other six democracies and no longer has any checks on his whims. To the extent that the G-7 used to embody 'the West,' that common basis is gone." Those "Western values" the G7 once symbolized simply don't exist anymore when the biggest player is operating from a completely different playbook.

The conclusion is as stark as it gets: "That era is gone. So is the reason for having the G-7 at all." When your founding principles have evaporated, what exactly are you meeting about?

And the economic data backs this up perfectly. According to IMF data highlighted in the Nikkei analysis, the G6 (excluding the US) saw their combined share of global GDP crash from 35% in 2000 to just 18% in 2024. Japan's decline has been particularly brutal, dropping from 15% of global GDP in 2000 to a mere 4% in 2024. No wonder Trump's looking at these guys like yesterday's news.

Meanwhile, China's sitting pretty at 17% of global GDP in 2024 – almost matching the entire G6 combined. That's not just impressive; it's a complete reordering of global economic power that the G7 framework simply wasn't designed to handle.

The New Kids Are Taking Over

While the G7's been busy with its internal drama, the rest of the world hasn't been sitting idle. China and other emerging economies have been rising rapidly, with China becoming the "world's factory" and achieving high-speed growth that surpassed post-war Japan. In 2024, China's GDP accounted for 17% of the global total – almost matching the entire G6 combined.

Meanwhile, the BRICS mechanism led by China, Brazil, Russia, India, and South Africa continues to grow stronger. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, Iran, and Ethiopia all became official BRICS members at the beginning of last year, dramatically expanding the bloc's reach.

More than half the world's people and nearly half its economic output is now organized under a framework that explicitly positions itself as an alternative to Western-dominated institutions. While the G7 argues about communiqués, BRICS is quietly building the future.

Deep Throat

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

Trump wasted not one second after US forces grabbed Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. He made it clear that he was eyeing the country's oil riches. But here's the catch: America's biggest oil companies aren't biting. Industry analysts confirm what the companies won't say publicly—even if these firms wanted back in, Venezuela's crumbling infrastructure and chaos on the ground mean Trump's fantasy of quick oil profits is far from easy to come true.

Trump promises Big Oil will pour billions into Venezuela. The oil giants say they never got the memo. AP Photo

Minutes after the military operation wrapped, Trump stood at a press conference making promises. Major American oil companies would pour into Venezuela, he declared, investing billions to fix the country's shattered oil infrastructure "and start making money for the country". Meanwhile, he reiterated that the US embargo on all Venezuelan oil remains in full effect.

Those sanctions have crushed Venezuelan exports into paralysis. Documents from Venezuela's state oil company and sources close to the situation confirm storage tanks and floating facilities filled up fast over recent weeks. Multiple oil fields now face forced production cuts.

White House Courts Reluctant Executives

Reuters revealed the Trump administration plans meetings this week with executives from major US oil companies. The agenda: pushing these firms to restore and grow oil production in Venezuela following the military action. The White House sees this as a critical step toward getting American oil giants back into the country to tap the world's largest proven oil reserves.

But Trump's eagerness hasn't translated into corporate enthusiasm. Several major US oil companies are taking a wait-and-see approach, watching Venezuela closely. ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, and Chevron all denied any prior communication with the White House about Venezuela. This directly contradicts Trump's claim over the weekend that he had already met with "all" US oil firms both before and after Maduro's capture.

Venezuela sits on roughly 17% of the world's proven oil reserves—first place globally. Yet US sanctions and other pressures have gutted its production capacity. Current output runs around 1 million barrels daily, barely 0.8% of global crude production.

World's largest oil reserves, strangled by US sanctions. Trump's quick-profit scheme hits a hard reality. AP Photo

Only One Company Stays Put

Chevron remains the sole major US oil company still operating Venezuelan fields. The firm has worked in Venezuela for over a century, producing heavy crude that feeds refineries along the Gulf Coast and beyond. A company spokesperson said on the 3rd that the current priority centers on "ensuring employee safety, well-being, and asset integrity," adding they "will continue to operate in accordance with laws and regulations."

ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips previously invested in Venezuela. In the 1970s, the Venezuelan government nationalized the oil industry, reopened to foreign investment by century's end, then demanded in 2007 that Western companies developing oil fields form joint ventures with Venezuelan firms under Venezuelan control. ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips pulled out. Neither company has responded to Trump's latest remarks about US capital entering Venezuela.

One oil industry executive told Reuters that companies fear discussing potential Venezuelan business at White House-organized meetings due to antitrust concerns.

Benefits Flow to First Mover

Francisco Monaldi, director of the Latin America Energy Program at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy, expects Chevron would likely benefit first if Venezuela opens oil projects to the US. Other oil companies, he notes, will watch Venezuela's political situation closely and observe the operating environment and contract compliance before making moves.

Mark Christian, business director at an Oklahoma energy consulting firm, lays out the baseline: US companies will only return to Venezuela if they're certain of investment returns and receive at least minimal security guarantees. Lifting sanctions on Venezuela stands as a prerequisite for US companies re-entering that market.

Reality Check on Oil Profits

Even with sanctions lifted, the Trump administration won't find making money from invasion-acquired oil that easy.

 Industry insiders admit large-scale restoration of Venezuelan oil production demands years of time and billions in investment, while confronting major obstacles: dilapidated infrastructure, uncertain political prospects, legal risks, and long-term US policy uncertainty.

Peter McNally, global head of industry analysis at Third Bridge, said, "There are still many questions that need to be answered about the state of the Venezuelan oil industry, but it is clear that it will take tens of billions of dollars to turn that industry around." He then added that it could take at least a decade of Western oil majors committing to the country.

Ed Hirs, an energy expert at the University of Houston, pointed to a pattern: US military invasions of other countries in recent years haven't delivered substantial returns to American companies. The history of Iraq and Libya may repeat itself in Venezuela.