🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's protracted bid to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months 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 South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

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

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

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to together address the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been finalized 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 approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, 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 persuade them to step aside.

Turkey clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

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

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his government managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the fight against global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. 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," they note. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the best chance possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.