🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's protracted campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to put on 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 November.

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

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

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

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

DFAT, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and sometimes 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 more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome available.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

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

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

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

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a conference hindered from the top if his government managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to observe, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Despite reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop 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 Cancún in 2010 and Paris 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 delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

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