🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's protracted campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the world's biggest climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

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

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed 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 secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

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

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been completed 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 appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that provided the Turks with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a summit hindered from the leadership if his government managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations 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. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the best chance available to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.