🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, Australia's long-running campaign to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

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

This won't occur. Rather, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the climate carnival could help speed up the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

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

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder 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 Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result possible.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively address the climate crisis.

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

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it begins.

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

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This matters. While some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", 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 president holding the pen who can listen, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún 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 Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, civil society is essential at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

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