🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, the nation's protracted bid to host the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to put on the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to many people who had believed hosting 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 survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed 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 get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

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

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together combat the environmental emergency.

There would also 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 strong partnership. The details of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

However, it might represent 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 international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

But, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his administration managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, 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 made a difference in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. While some have dismissed the importance of a "chief negotiator", experts from research centers and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president 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. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society is essential at climate conferences. How, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. 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, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.