🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's protracted bid to organize the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege 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.

This won't occur. Rather, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had hoped hosting the climate carnival could help speed up the country's transition 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 opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

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

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. However, another perspective 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, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

The minister outlined on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to collectively address the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist 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 whole thing could fall over before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. 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.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has empirically had an impact in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", experts from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the best chance available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.