🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, Australia's long-running campaign to organize the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to put on the world's biggest climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next November.

This won't occur. Instead, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had hoped hosting the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

That's the negative take. However, another perspective to consider it.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the announcement on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the discussions 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 island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations 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 begins.

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

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been hellbent 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 bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

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

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action 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.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in international meetings 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 certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, civil society is essential at climate conferences. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the best chance available to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.