🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, the nation's protracted bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help speed up the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to consider it.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the best result available.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to collectively combat the environmental emergency.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could collapse before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the international cooperation on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been determined on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a conference obstructed from the top if his government led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement 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 the Danish city in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.