🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's protracted bid to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next fall.

This won't occur. Instead, the conference known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being relayed 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 high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

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

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would 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 deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse 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.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

But, uniquely, Turkey refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a conference hindered from the leadership if his government led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president holding the pen who can listen, 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," he says. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the best chance possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.