🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, Australia's protracted campaign 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 world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

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

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help speed up the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed 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.

A Different Perspective

That's the negative take. However, another perspective to consider it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome available.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, 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 countries actually attend for – the talks on how to collectively address the climate crisis.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to confront the oil producers that provided the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to the Russian leader. Some countries feared a conference obstructed from the top if his government led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably 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.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a leader holding the pen who can listen, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, civil society plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the best chance possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.