🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's long-running bid to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to host the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next November.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the government was walking away.

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

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

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

There is little sign Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences a important focus. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's one interpretation. However, another perspective to consider it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, host 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 nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the environmental emergency.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could fall over before it begins.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on climate change.

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been thrown around in the past week, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a conference obstructed from the top if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", specialists 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 leader directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and deliver an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations 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?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the best chance possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. It's worth a try.