Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an abelian category. Given a commutative square $$ \require{AMScd} \begin{CD} A@>f>>B\\ @VVV@VVV\\ A'@>>{f'}>B' \end{CD} $$ in $\mathcal{A}$, we get an induced morphism between kernels $\operatorname{Ker}f\to\operatorname{Ker}f'$, namely, the unique one that makes the diagram $$ \require{AMScd} \begin{CD} \operatorname{Ker} f@>>>A\\ @VVV@VVV\\ \operatorname{Ker}f'@>>{}>A' \end{CD} $$ commutative. I was trying to prove the following
Lemma. Let $$ \require{AMScd} \begin{CD} A\times_CB@>{p}>>A\\ @V{q}VV@VV{f}V\\ B@>>{g}>C \end{CD} $$ be a cartesian square in $\mathcal{A}$. If $h:D\twoheadrightarrow A\times_CB$ is a surjection, then the induced morphism between kernels from the commutative square $$ \require{AMScd} \begin{CD} D@>>>A\\ @VVV@VV{f}V\\ B@>>{g}>C \end{CD} $$ is also surjective.
For me “surjective morphism” in an abelian category means an epimorphism or a morphism with zero cokernel (these two conditions are equivalent).
The proof is easily done in $\mathcal{A}=R\operatorname{-Mod}$ the category of left $R$-modules: if $b\in B$ is such that $g(b)=0$, then $(0,b)\in A\times_CB$, and there is $d\in D$ such that $h(d)=(0,b)$. Thus $d\in\operatorname{Ker}(D\to A)$. Also, in particular $d$ maps to $b$ in $B$. How one would do the proof in general? Is it okay to invoke Mitchell's embedding theorem or is it an overkill because there is an easier way? I don't exactly know how to translate the preceding element-wise diagram-chasing to a morphism-wise chasing using universal properties.
Edit: Okay this is what I've come up with so far. Using the universal property of the fibre product, there exists a morphism $\operatorname{Ker}g\to A\times_C B$ such that in the diagram
the composite $\operatorname{Ker}g\to A\times_CB\xrightarrow{q} B$ equals $\operatorname{Ker}g\to B$ and the composite $\operatorname{Ker}g\to A\times_CB\xrightarrow{p}A$ vanishes. Moreover, the morphism $\operatorname{Ker}g\to A\times_CB$ has to injective since after post-composition with $q$ we get an injective morphism $\operatorname{Ker}g\to B$. Also we have that the top left triangle of the diagram commutes, since equality of the two sides of the triangle can be verified after post-composition with $p$ and $q$.
But now I don't know how to continue. I haven't used the surjectivity of $h$ yet, and I don't know how to use it exactly.
For those who may ask why am I interested on this result: I'm trying to understand the proof of 05T7 of the Stacks Project. The proof is done by induction, and the verification of the induction hypothesis $IH_{n-1}$, which “the reader easily checks,” require to verify that an induced morphism between kernels is surjective. The above lemma abstracts the situation from the proof.
I know that there are posts here on MSE that address the same result I've linked from the Stacks Project, like this one. However, this last post uses other strategy, and I was interested on understanding the one from the SP.

