🔗 Share this article

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

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to host the world's biggest environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the conference known as Cop31 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 believed hosting the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, 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 Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually attend for – the talks on how to together combat the climate crisis.

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

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over 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 hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

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 offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his government led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has empirically had an impact in the fight against global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts 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 president directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

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