🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's protracted campaign to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to many people who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change 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 high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

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

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. However, another perspective to consider it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would 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. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on climate change.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the heft to confront the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a conference hindered from the leadership if his government led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often unsettling to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably 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.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

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

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement looking like the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.