🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

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

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the best result available.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what looked like an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

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

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a conference hindered from the leadership if his government led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has empirically had an impact in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

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

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader holding the pen who can listen, build consensus and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, civil society plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the best chance available to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.