🔗 Share this article

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

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is moving to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures truly desired the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed UN climate conferences a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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 announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal 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 the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively 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 scepticism. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

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

But, exceptionally, Turkey refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not just by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the oil producers that offered the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún 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

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.