🔗 Share this article

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

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to host the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Rather, the conference known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

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

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the decision on this week may, perversely, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, 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 environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over 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.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework 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 deal is privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

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

President Erdoğan is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a summit obstructed from the leadership if his government managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

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