🔗 Share this article

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

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

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

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would 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 scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could collapse before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to step aside.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

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

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Despite reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This matters. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.