🔗 Share this article

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

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to put on the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

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.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, 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. We'll never know, but some will wonder if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to consider it.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the announcement on this week may, perversely, 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. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to together combat the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been finalized 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 impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. 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 persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

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

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations feared a summit hindered from the top if his administration led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"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 the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. It's worth a try.