🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's long-running bid to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to host the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the proposal to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and sometimes outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

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

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer 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 matters that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to together address the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

But, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has empirically had an impact in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the best chance available to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. It's worth a try.