🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, the nation's protracted campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the proposal to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. However, another perspective to look at it.

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

The minister outlined on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

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

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

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

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared 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 occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the role of a "chief negotiator", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president holding the pen who can understand, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort 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 conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the best chance available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.