🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, Australia's long-running bid to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

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

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city 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 organizing the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel 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 process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

That's one interpretation. However, another perspective to look at it.

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

The minister outlined on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could collapse before it begins.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a summit hindered from the top if his administration managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution 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 UN conferences see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite 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

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the best chance available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.