🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's protracted bid 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 host the world's biggest environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel 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 process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the proposal to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This differed from the communication being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support 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 international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to look at it.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined 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", managing almost all nations on the matters 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 preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

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

But, uniquely, Turkey refused to yield. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turks with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a conference hindered from the top if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

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

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed 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 understand, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, civil society plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. It's worth a try.