🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, Australia's long-running bid to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to host the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint 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 really wanted the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This differed from the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

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

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

There is little sign Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the best result possible.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to together address the climate crisis.

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

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by Australians.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. While some have dismissed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction 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 conference that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.