🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, Australia's protracted campaign to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to host the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

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

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the climate carnival could help accelerate Australia's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the proposal to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This differed from the communication being conveyed 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 not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since taking office 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 Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually attend for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds 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 collapse before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the international cooperation on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the global 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 competition those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid plainly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent 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 seen as close to the Russian leader. Several nations feared a conference obstructed from the leadership 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 Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at climate talks say it is crucial to their success.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, civil society plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.