🔗 Share this article

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

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to host the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next fall.

This won't occur. Rather, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

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

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

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, 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 more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result available.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the environmental emergency.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. The details of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been thrown around in the past week, and not just by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to confront the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a conference hindered from the leadership if his administration managed the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.