🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to put on the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next fall.

This won't occur. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed hosting the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change 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 the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the decision 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 Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

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

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Turkey refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation 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 Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries 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 the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see the minister as a force for good in the talks. He has been asked to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. It's worth a try.