🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's protracted campaign to organize the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to host the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed hosting the climate carnival could help speed up the country's transition from being a carbon-based 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 procedure that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, 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. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. However, another perspective to look at it.

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

Bowen set out on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together combat the climate crisis.

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

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade 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 nations responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

But, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a summit obstructed from the top if his administration led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

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

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and deliver an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the most promising opportunity available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the global community. It's worth a try.