🔗 Share this article

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

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to host the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next fall.

That's not happening. Rather, the conference known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's transition 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 unclear situation. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

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

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like 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 creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Turkey refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not just by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered close to the Russian leader. Some countries feared a conference hindered from the top if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the fight against global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

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

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and deliver an ambitious outcome. This occurred 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," he says. "This position is critical at the conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.