🔗 Share this article

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

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to put on the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

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

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the climate carnival could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change 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 administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese 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 additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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 global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a summit hindered from the top if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams 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 academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. 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, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.