🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's long-running campaign to host the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to host the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

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

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures 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 disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

The minister outlined on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. 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 "president of negotiations", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

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

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

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

But, exceptionally, Turkey declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in the past week, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, civil society is essential at environmental summits. How, if at all, 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 deal appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.