🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, Australia's protracted campaign to organize the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to host the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

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

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid to succeed. 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 conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed UN climate conferences a important focus. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister 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.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the best result available.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse 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.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework 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 persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

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

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the oil producers that offered the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. 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 Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is flawed and often unsettling to observe, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can listen, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort 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 except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

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