🔗 Share this article

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

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to host the largest global climate summit 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 the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

DFAT, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. 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 this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

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, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific region, 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. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

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

But, exceptionally, Turkey declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a conference hindered from the leadership if his administration managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 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 needed. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at multiple summits he has attended.

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

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

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

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