🔗 Share this article

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

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights 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.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference 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 the country's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus 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 the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the proposal to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

DFAT, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the best result available.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to together combat the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

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

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

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

However, uniquely, Turkey refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration managed 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 occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Despite reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks say it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president holding the pen who can understand, build consensus and deliver an ambitious outcome. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the best chance possible to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.