🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's protracted bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the proposal to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. But there is another way 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 best result available.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, 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", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to together combat 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 finalized at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse before it begins.

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

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. 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 encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

But, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to the Russian leader. Several nations feared a summit hindered from the top if his government managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the best chance available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.