🔗 Share this article

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

The effort ran for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next November.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, 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 high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This differed from the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and at times completely against.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. But there is another way to look at it.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

The minister outlined on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the talks on how to together combat the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

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

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Turkey refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in the past week, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be read 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 confront the oil producers that provided the Turks with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office 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 watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at multiple summits he has participated in.

This matters. While some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", experts from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks say it is crucial to their positive outcome.

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

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the most promising opportunity available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.