🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's protracted bid to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to put on the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate 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 joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to look at it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, 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. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on climate change.

Turkey is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for expanding carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend 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 participated in.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the most promising opportunity possible to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.