🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

DFAT, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would 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. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what looked like an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his administration led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", experts from research centers and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the best chance possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.