🔗 Share this article

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

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to host the world's biggest environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next November.

This won't occur. Instead, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight 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 Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal 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 walking away.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed 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 a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese 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.

A Different Perspective

That's the negative take. But there is another way to consider it.

Considering the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the best result available.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was developing 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 assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

Turkey is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turks with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a conference obstructed from the top if his administration led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to observe, but global cooperation has empirically 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 federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, civil society plays a vital role at environmental summits. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.