🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, the nation's long-running bid to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to host the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

This won't occur. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering 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 Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

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

Evidence suggests Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

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

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

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 moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

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

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid plainly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 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 "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turks with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries feared a summit obstructed from the top if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at climate talks assert it is crucial to their success.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city 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. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. This attempt is justified.