🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's long-running bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to host the world's biggest climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

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

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the climate carnival could help speed up the country's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the communication being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

Evidence suggests Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

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

The minister outlined on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and Australia – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the multilateral work on climate change.

Turkey is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Turkey refused to yield. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness 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 heft to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a conference obstructed from the leadership if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "chief negotiator", experts from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. This occurred in Berlin 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 Cop except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. 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 global community. It's worth a try.