🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the rights to host the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

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

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's shift 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. In recent days, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although 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 at times completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result possible.

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 conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together 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 doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

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

But, exceptionally, Turkey refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read 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 oil producers that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a conference obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. Germany 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 stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

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

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the best chance possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. This attempt is justified.