KANANASKIS, BRATISLAVA. G7 leaders call for a reduction in tensions in the Middle East and a ceasefire in Gaza, but not a ceasefire between Israel and Iran.

The communiqué from the summit of the world's seven most developed nations in the Canadian town of Kananaskis omitted a call for a ceasefire between the two countries because US President Donald Trump indicated that he would not sign it in that form.

Trump left the summit a day earlier than expected, avoiding a debate on support for Ukraine and a meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Trump, somewhat mysteriously, mentioned Iran as the reason for his early departure.

"I have to go back for obvious reasons," he said according to the BBC, saying that"big things" were about to happen and urging Iranians to leave Tehran. This sparked speculation that the United States might want to join a war against Iran, but US officials denied this.

Curiously, Trump also distanced himself from the idea that he was talking about a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. This was suggested by French President Emmanuel Macron, who said that"if the United States achieves a ceasefire, it would be very good."

Trump strongly criticized Macron on his social network Truth Social, writing that he was just seeking attention.

"Wrong! I have no idea why I'm going to Washington now, but it certainly has nothing to do with the ceasefire. It's bigger. Whether intentionally or not, Emmanuel is always wrong," the US president wrote about the Frenchman.

Meanwhile, experts are considering whether it is possible that Washington would actually join an Israeli attack on Tehran.

Ukraine in Iran's shadow

As a result of the early departure, which Trump apparently explained to his allies and did not cause outrage, Volodymyr Zelensky's visit remained overshadowed by the Iran-Israel conflict.

Trump left the summit on Monday, while Zelensky was scheduled to arrive on Tuesday. The Wall Street Journal reported that Zelensky wanted to persuade allies to tighten sanctions against Russia, something Trump is reluctant to do.

This is particularly true of Russian oil prices, which the European Union would like to cap at $45 per barrel, as Russia also uses its mineral revenues to support its war industry. The current ceiling for Russian oil set by sanctions is $60.

Trump said Monday that he did not like tougher sanctions."When I sanction a country," he said,"it costs the United States a lot of money. Sanctions are not easy."

In the United States, a proposal by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, which proposes imposing 500 percent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil, is still hanging in the air, but Trump has already said that it would be a"very harsh law" that will not pass without his approval.

Diplomacy or bombs

The possibility of the United States joining Israeli attacks against Iran and its nuclear program remained open after the G7 summit.

The BBC claims that the American president has three options - either he gives in to pressure from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and escalates the situation in Iran, maintaining a middle ground position, or he gives in to isolationists in his MAGA movement and gives up on Iran.

The station notes in its analysis that Trump and Netanyahu share the same goal - preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. However, Trump would still like to achieve it through negotiations while Netanyahu has taken power, the station writes. It also considers the possibility that Trump is willing to escalate the situation to the point of rupture in order to pressure a deal.

In addition to Israel, which sees an opportunity to deal a definitive blow to the Iranian nuclear program and perhaps the entire regime, Trump is also being pressured into a forceful solution by"hawks" from among the Republicans.

Israel has indicated that it would have no problem with eliminating Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, but Trump has so far opposed it.

The second option is that the US will not engage in attacks against Iran, but only in defending Israel from Iranian missiles, which it has been doing for a long time. According to the BBC, some of Trump's advisers believe that America should avoid an escalation that would ultimately pose a greater threat to Israel.

Although America, and its Republican wing in particular, is a long-time ally of Israel, there are isolationist voices in Trump's MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement for whom"America First" would mean taking a hands-off approach to conflicts in the Middle East.

The BBC also quotes a text by the otherwise pro-Trump commentator Tucker Carlson, who suggested that the US should leave Israel, as Netanyahu threatens to drag them into war.

Without America, they won't destroy the program.

If Israel is determined to permanently destroy Iran's nuclear program, it may not be able to do so without American help. Although it has dealt a serious blow in recent days, the New York Times writes that it would also have to strike a uranium enrichment facility near the Iranian village of Fordo.

Fragmentary information about it comes from secret documents that Israeli agents managed to steal from Iran, CNN wrote. According to the station, the device is hidden approximately 80 to 90 meters underground and is not reachable by Israeli ammunition.

According to the NYT, the United States has a suitable bomb, which would have to deploy invisible B-2 strategic bombers into the war and drop thirteen-ton bombs on the facility (one would not be enough) the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, which is built specifically to destroy underground structures.

According to CNN, several experts believe that after the Israeli attacks, Iran's nuclear program has been concentrated in Fordow, where Iran is trying to obtain as much fissile material as possible to build a nuclear weapon.

If the US were to decide to do this, it would enter the war that Trump wanted to avoid in his election campaigns.

If not, it is possible that Israeli efforts to destroy Iran's nuclear program will end in failure.

"Ford has always been a key facility. If this ends with Ford still operating, then that is not a strategic success," the NYT quotes Brett McGurk, a Middle East expert who has advised four US presidents.

War in Ukraine