🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's long-running campaign to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the rights to host the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. However, another perspective to look at it.

Considering the climate discussions 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 novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the talks on how to collectively address the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. The details of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a conference obstructed from the top if his administration managed the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the best chance possible to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. It's worth a try.