🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

This won't occur. Rather, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's the negative take. But there is another way to look at it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to step aside.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Turkey refused to yield. The term "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations feared a conference obstructed from the top if his government managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their success.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the best chance available to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. This attempt is justified.