🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's long-running bid to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to host the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been questions that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations 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 the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to look at it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out 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 – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

But, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his government led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters 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. International frameworks is flawed and often unsettling to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been asked to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts from research centers and experienced analysts at climate talks assert it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president holding the pen who can listen, build consensus and deliver an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role 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 plays a vital role at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement looking like the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.