🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's protracted bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

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 South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is moving to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment 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 shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The process 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 be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated 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 senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and at times completely against.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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 global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. 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 multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

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

However, uniquely, Turkey refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered close to the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a summit obstructed from the leadership if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has empirically had an impact in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can listen, build consensus and deliver an significant result. This occurred in Berlin 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 Cop except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if at all, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.