🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, the nation's protracted bid to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the privilege to host the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next November.

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

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's transition 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 procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the proposal to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment 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. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

DFAT, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

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

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

Bowen set out on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to collectively address the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The whole thing could fall over before it begins.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the international cooperation on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his government managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been asked to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. While some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the best chance possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.