🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, Australia's protracted bid to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the rights to put on the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next November.

This won't occur. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate 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 joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures truly desired the bid to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

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

DFAT, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a priority. 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.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

The minister outlined on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on climate change.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

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

But, exceptionally, Turkey declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been thrown around in the past week, and not just by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the oil producers that offered the Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a conference obstructed from the leadership if his government managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration 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 discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions 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 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," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. This attempt is justified.