🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's protracted bid to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to host the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next November.

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

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to many people who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's shift from being a carbon-based 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 procedure that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. While Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's the negative take. However, another perspective to look at it.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

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 global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

But, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the petroleum exporters that provided the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a conference obstructed from the top if his administration led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. We saw that 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 delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the best chance possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.