🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's protracted bid to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to host the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering 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 joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid 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 climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has viewed 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. However, another perspective to consider it.

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

Bowen set out on Wednesday 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 Australia – the climate minister – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, 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. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent 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 competition those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to confront the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in international meetings see the minister as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. While some have dismissed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president holding the pen who can understand, build consensus 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 the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

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

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.