🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's protracted bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the rights to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, 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 opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the communication being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

DFAT, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered international climate meetings 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.

An Alternative View

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

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

The minister outlined 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 effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, 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. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized 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 looked like an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to step aside.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

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

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a conference hindered from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a force for good in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this arrangement looking like 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.