🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, the nation's protracted 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 largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

DFAT, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. But there is another way to consider it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on this week may, perversely, have been the best result available.

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 conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively address the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what looked like an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

But, exceptionally, Turkey refused to yield. The term "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a conference obstructed from the top if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an underprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has empirically had an impact in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their success.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement 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.