🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the privilege to host the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

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

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, 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 Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the government was walking away.

This differed from the communication being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

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

However, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted 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 Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the leadership if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings 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 participated in.

This matters. Although some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. 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. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. It's worth a try.