🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to host the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next November.

This won't occur. Instead, the conference known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just declared 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 senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office 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 one interpretation. But there is another way to consider it.

Considering the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – 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 discussions on how to collectively address the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. The details of the deal had not been finalized 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 looked like an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The term "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration managed the discussions. 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 UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

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

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. It's worth a try.