🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's protracted campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to put on the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and at times outright opposed.

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 more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. However, another perspective to consider it.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the deal 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 salvage something useful from what looked like an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his government led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a leader holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.