🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures 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 contrasted with the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

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

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister 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. However, another perspective to consider it.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to collectively address the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

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 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 approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

But, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "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 the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the oil producers that provided the Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations feared a conference hindered from the top if his government led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the most promising opportunity possible to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.