🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, Australia's protracted bid to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to host the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Instead, the conference known as Cop31 is headed to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

DFAT, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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 Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – 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 collectively address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it begins.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on climate change.

Turkey is generally viewed in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, 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 dominant nation with the heft to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a summit 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 climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts from research centers and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. How, if anything, 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 deal looking like the best chance possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.