On March 26–27, 2026, the G7 Foreign Ministers’ Summit was held at the Abbaye des Vaux-de-Cernay in France under the country’s G7 presidency. Ukraine was invited to participate alongside the member states.

Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha described the two-day meeting as one of the most substantive in recent memory—not only because of dedicated sessions on Ukraine, but also due to a series of concrete outcomes.

Among them were U.S. assurances that weapons supplied under the PURL program will not be redirected to other theaters, as well as confirmation that another influential country will join the Special Tribunal. In an interview with Ukrinform’s correspondent in France, Sybiha also addressed coordination of sanctions pressure on Russia, the security implications of developments in the Middle East, and Ukraine’s evolving role in the region.

THE UNITED STATES IS CURRENTLY THE ONLY FORCE THAT CAN COMPEL RUSSIA TO MAKE PEACE

Q: What are your impressions immediately after such a high-level meeting with such a broad range of participants?

A: I consider this summit highly successful for Ukraine. Compared to previous meetings I’ve attended in this format, it was among the most substantive, particularly in terms of its multilateral dimension. We had two panels entirely dedicated to Ukraine, as well as numerous bilateral meetings on the sidelines.

Q: Let’s turn to those bilateral meetings. On the second day, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio joined the summit. Can we say that Ukraine and its partners succeeded in convincing him that pressure on Russia should be increased rather than eased? Did he ultimately agree that the regimes in Moscow and Tehran are effectively cooperating and that pressure should be applied to both?

A:  I would not frame this as two separate tracks. What I can say with confidence is that around the negotiating table there was a shared understanding of the need to achieve a just and lasting peace. Everyone recognizes how complex this path is and what coordinated steps are required.

There may be differences in emphasis or prioritization, but there is no doubt that pressure must be sustained. Russia remains the sole obstacle to the successful conclusion of peace efforts led by the United States. I would like to acknowledge and thank the United States for these efforts.

At present, the United States is the only country—the only force—capable of compelling Russia toward peace. We must proceed from these geopolitical realities. The discussion therefore focused on concrete steps that can be taken within the G7 framework—among the world’s most influential nations—to accelerate the peace process.

UKRAINE EMERGES AS A KEY SECURITY ACTOR IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Q: The summit also addressed the security situation in the Middle East…

A: Yes, alongside Ukraine, the situation in the Middle East was a key topic. Foreign ministers from India, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, and Brazil were invited to participate. Discussions focused in part on the security implications of rising energy prices, which directly affect many countries, including Ukraine.

It is crucial for us to prevent Russia from exploiting these developments to weaken sanctions or capitalize on higher oil prices.

There is a shared understanding of this risk, which is why discussions centered on mitigating negative consequences and unblocking the Strait of Hormuz. Ukraine’s voice was clearly heard in this context. We have already demonstrated our agency and our strategic importance in addressing security challenges in the Middle East.

Incidentally, one of the key and most prominent topics was President Zelensky’s visit to the Middle East and the agreements he concluded with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar.

This generated exceptionally positive feedback. Ukraine is increasingly seen as a contributor to both global and regional security. There is a growing understanding that security in Europe and the Middle East is interconnected. Our objective is to position Ukraine effectively in this region, build long-term partnerships, and leverage these developments to strengthen our defense capabilities.

Q: So can we say that Ukraine’s efforts and its attempt to support countries in the region were highly appreciated at the summit?

A: In diplomatic terms, there are different ways to express this, but I would use the highest possible level of assessment. This was noted by everyone. In nearly every intervention by delegation leaders, there was a positive evaluation and reference to the President’s ongoing visit.

ALLIES READY TO PUSH BACK HARDER ON DIVISIVE POSITIONS IN EUROPE

Q: In recent days, the Head of State has said that Europe—not only the United States—is not exerting sufficient pressure on Russia. In your view, is Europe ready to increase that pressure?

A: I believe Europe’s position remains firm. It is based on the need to apply pressure capable of achieving the primary objective: depriving Russia’s war machine of the ability to continue its brutal aggression.

That said, the 20th sanctions package is currently blocked by Hungary, unfortunately. That is the reality. We openly discussed the fact that one country, by abusing its status as an EU and NATO member, has effectively held the entire European Union and its sanctions policy hostage. This is unacceptable.

I heard very firm assessments from our partners. More broadly, I sensed a shift—a new level of readiness to respond to such openly divisive policies. I believe we should expect developments on this track.

We are aware that elections in Hungary are scheduled for April 12, and we hope this will lead to the unblocking of the sanctions package. This would also unlock the €90 billion loan for Ukraine. I raised this issue in my discussions with partners, emphasizing the importance of ensuring Ukraine’s macro-financial stability—specifically, the timely disbursement of the first tranche, as agreed by President Zelensky and European leaders.

We also discussed Ukraine’s path to EU membership, including the need to establish clear timelines.

TRANSATLANTIC UNITY KEY TO SUSTAINED PRESSURE ON RUSSIA

Q: What is the readiness of G7 countries outside the EU to increase sanctions pressure?

A: We can point to concrete steps. I had a very productive meeting with Canada’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Anita Anand. Canada remains one of Ukraine’s key partners—it co-leads the coalition for the return of deported children and provides highly effective defense assistance.

During the G7 meeting, Canada announced another robust sanctions package. I consistently emphasize the importance of maintaining coordinated transatlantic pressure to avoid gaps between sanctions regimes.

I also raised with Canada the issue of restricting Russian athletes. Following a decision by the World Curling Federation to allow their participation, I requested that, regardless of that decision, entry for these athletes be restricted.

Q: The fight against Russia’s shadow fleet has now been elevated beyond standard sanctions packages. Given the situation around the Strait of Hormuz, how can progress be made?

A: We discussed banning the provision of maritime services to tankers associated with Russia’s shadow fleet. This issue will remain firmly on the agenda. While the situation in the Strait of Hormuz and rising energy prices are factors—and partners acknowledge this—they do not diminish the need to apply this instrument of pressure.

Strengthening sanctions should also extend to Russian port infrastructure—specifically, ports that facilitate the illegal transport of oil by shadow fleet tankers or the export of grain stolen from Ukraine. These issues are under active discussion and will, sooner or later, be implemented.

At the same time, individual countries can already take effective measures at the national level. However, EU legal frameworks must also be taken into account, so actions are coordinated accordingly. A comprehensive approach is required, and efforts are underway to identify the most effective ways to use these tools to increase the cost of Russia’s continued aggression.

Q: You also raised the issue of banning entry for Russians involved in the so-called “special military operation” into European countries. Baltic partners have previously proposed similar measures…

A: Yes, not only military personnel, but also their family members and individuals involved in war crimes. And this applies not only to entry into EU countries, but also to Japan, Canada, Australia—in other words, across the broader transatlantic space.

I very much hope this initiative will gain traction. Russians signing military contracts must clearly understand that they are simultaneously forfeiting their right to enter this space. Such decisions can be taken at the national level. Estonia has already set a precedent—we have provided them with lists of participants in the so-called “special military operation,” or combatants.

We intend to scale up this process, as these individuals pose a direct security threat to the countries concerned. This includes sabotage and hybrid operations carried out by Russians on the territory of other states. This is a tangible and significant risk. And again, this is not only about the European Union, but about the entire transatlantic space.

DONOR CAMPAIGN KICKS OFF FOR CHERNOBYL SHELTER REPAIRS

Q: One of the concrete decisions adopted in France was global support for reconstructing the sarcophagus over the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. The French minister also announced the creation of a special fund…

A: As is known, the shelter was damaged by a Russian drone, and the estimated cost of repairs currently stands at around €500 million. This year marks a somber milestone—the 40th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster. France, as G7 chair, proposed addressing this issue ahead of a donor conference to be held in Ukraine in April.

We are therefore talking about raising €500 million to restore the sarcophagus. Nuclear safety is never confined to one country—it is a matter of global concern. During the meeting, several countries made concrete commitments toward the future fund. The project will be implemented jointly with the EBRD.

While I will not cite exact figures at this stage, confirmed commitments already amount to several tens of millions of euros. In other words, the process of mobilizing donor funding is already underway.

PURL FUNDING POOL EXPANDS WITH NEW COUNTRY

Q: Ahead of the summit, there were reports suggesting that, due to the war in the Middle East, U.S. weapons intended for Ukraine might be redirected there…

A: We received very firm assurances from the American side regarding PURL. I want to emphasize what was stated during our meeting, in the presence of other foreign ministers. At the level of Secretary of State Rubio, it was confirmed that no funds or equipment allocated to Ukraine under this program have been redirected elsewhere. Nor are there any such plans at present.

Moreover, we received assurances that the program will be further strengthened, including through contributions from an additional country. I am not in a position to name it yet, but this confirms that the program is operational and will continue to expand. It remains a key instrument for strengthening our strategic air defense.

Q: That is indeed very positive news. It is important to see concrete actions alongside political statements…

A: Another tangible outcome is confirmation from yet another country—again, not yet publicly named—that it will join the agreement on establishing the Special Tribunal for the crime of aggression.

As you know, foreign ministers will gather on the 31st for the Bucha Summit. We are working to ensure not only broad participation, but also the ratification of the implementation agreement. This will bring another significant state on board.

DRONE WARFARE CAPABILITIES BECOME UKRAINE’S GEOPOLITICAL LEVERAGE

Q: What are your overall impressions following the summit in France?

A: The key takeaway is that Ukraine remains firmly at the center of the international agenda, despite developments in other regions. I felt this clearly in my capacity as minister. This is the shared position of EU member states and of the French presidency.

And this is also the result of Ukraine’s proactive stance in the Middle East. We have offered our partners in the Gulf not merely expressions of solidarity, but specific security solutions. This is recognized and valued—it delivers results.

It is not only about the war itself, but about Ukraine’s broader role in shaping the security architecture and political agenda from Europe to the Middle East.

There is now a clear understanding of Ukraine’s importance and role. Our agency is becoming more pronounced and increasingly substantiated. I may be speaking in diplomatic terms, but there is real progress behind these words.

We possess unique military capabilities, and they constitute a geopolitical asset. Our drones and counter-drone systems are, in effect, Ukraine’s “oil”—a strategic resource. It must be translated into concrete national gains: strengthening our armed forces, bolstering our economy, and ultimately bringing a sustainable peace closer.

WAR CRIMINALS DON’T DESERVE A PLATFORM UNDER THE GUISE OF FREE SPEECH

Q: During your visit and the G7 summit in France, Russia conducted what appears to have been a media operation. One of the country’s major TV channels gave airtime to Foreign Minister Lavrov during a prime-time broadcast, which he used to disseminate Russian propaganda. This prompted a strong response from French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, who publicly refuted Lavrov’s claims point by point at the closing news briefing. How do you assess this situation?

A: I am aware that this triggered significant public backlash in France. We took note of the incident, and I discussed it directly with Jean-Noël. It is important that he responded.

We believe it is fundamentally wrong to provide a platform to war criminals—Lavrov among them—enabling them to spread propaganda and manipulate public opinion on a large scale. This is not about freedom of speech; it is about enabling the dissemination of disinformation.

At the same time, I am confident that the state was not involved in this decision. I have received explanations as to how it occurred, and the matter is currently being reviewed.

FRANCE UPHOLDS UKRAINE’S STATEHOOD LEGACY

Q: Over these two days, aside from the summit near Paris, did you have time for other engagements? France has a very vibrant Ukrainian community that seeks more contact with government representatives…

A: First of all, I would note that Ukraine’s presence in France is expanding. I have launched the operational work of the Consulate General in Lyon by formally presenting the credentials to the Consul General. I expect to visit in June to officially inaugurate it, but in practical terms, it is already functioning.

I also met with members of the Ukrainian community. We discussed joint initiatives, and I expressed my gratitude for their efforts to preserve Ukrainian identity and culture—something of critical importance.

France has long been a key center for preserving Ukraine’s state-building tradition. I visited the burial site of Oleksandr Shulhyn, the first Foreign Minister of the Ukrainian People’s Republic, in Sarcelles near Paris. A significant number of archival materials related to him and his contemporaries are still held in France, though many are in poor condition. I have asked the community—and I am ready to personally support this effort—to help preserve this heritage.

Upon assuming office at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, I established a hall dedicated to Shulhyn to highlight Ukraine’s longstanding state-building tradition, which extends well beyond contemporary history. I now welcome newly appointed attachés in this hall, and deputy ministers receive credentials from foreign ambassadors there as well—so that they can see that Ukraine had a functioning state, institutions, and diplomatic leadership over a century ago.

In this way, I paid tribute to Shulhyn and to other distinguished Ukrainian state-builders.

Lidiia Taran led this conversation. France