🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, Australia's protracted campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

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

Letdown and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

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

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

DFAT, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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 this week may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. 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 "president of negotiations", managing nearly 200 countries 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 island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

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

But, exceptionally, Turkey refused to yield. The term "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to confront the oil producers that offered the Turks with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a summit hindered from the top if his government led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was needed. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in international meetings see the minister as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement looking like the best chance available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.