🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's protracted bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to host the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

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

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus 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. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

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

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and at times completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, 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 Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together combat the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, 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 finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

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

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted 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 some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a conference obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to lead negotiation streams at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened 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."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society plays a vital role at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.