🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to put on the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Rather, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's shift 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 procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the communication being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences a important focus. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

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 South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal 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 "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

However, it might represent 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 international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is supposed to work by consensus. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

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

But, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the oil producers that offered the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his government managed the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at multiple summits he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. 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. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, 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 Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the best chance available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.