🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to host the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to many people 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 joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and at times completely against.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – 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 developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together address the environmental emergency.

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

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. 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 multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

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

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation 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. Some countries feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his government managed the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president holding the pen who can listen, build consensus and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the best chance possible to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.