🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, Australia's protracted bid to host the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next fall.

This won't occur. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

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

There is little sign Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been finalized at the time of writing. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on climate change.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the leadership if his government managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.