🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the world's biggest environmental conference 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 the UN climate meeting is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift 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 joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, 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. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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 announcement on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist 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 entire arrangement could collapse 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.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

But, uniquely, Turkey refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations feared a summit obstructed 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 climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has empirically had an impact in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

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

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. How, if at all, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the best chance available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the global community. It's worth a try.