🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's protracted bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

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 November.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's shift from being a fossil fuel 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 procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being relayed 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 Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

That's the negative take. But there is another way to consider it.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could collapse before it begins.

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

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by consensus. Typically, 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.

The Turkish bid plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a summit hindered from the leadership if his government managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. International frameworks is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and achieve an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris 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 people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, civil society plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.