🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia'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 privilege to host the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next fall.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the survival crisis 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 high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the announcement on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it begins.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a conference hindered from the top if his government managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", experts from research centers and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen 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, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.