🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, Australia's protracted campaign to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

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 delegates to the city of Adelaide next November.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to be approved. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome available.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects 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 impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system 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 privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

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

However, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turks with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to the Russian leader. Some countries feared a conference hindered from the top if his administration led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked 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 "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society is essential at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the best chance available to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.