🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's protracted bid to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

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

This won't occur. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift 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 questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures truly desired the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

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

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. 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 announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to together combat 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

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could collapse before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection 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 oil producers that offered the Turks with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a conference obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence 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 importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the best chance available to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. This attempt is justified.