🔗 Share this article

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

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to put on the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention 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 opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the bid to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated 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 Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

DFAT, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed 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 look at it.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to together combat the environmental emergency.

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

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

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

But, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations assert it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.