🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's long-running bid to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to host the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He has missed 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.

An Alternative View

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

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

The minister outlined on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

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

Reasons for Doubt

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 collapse before it begins.

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

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

But, exceptionally, Turkey declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a conference obstructed from the top if his administration led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can listen, build consensus 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," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, civil society plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

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