🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's protracted bid to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to host the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the proposal to succeed. 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 relayed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

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, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework 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 encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement 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, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only 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 stare down the oil producers that provided the Turks with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a conference hindered from the top if his administration managed the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the best chance possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.