🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's long-running bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates 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 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 speed up the country's transition 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 led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being relayed 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".

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

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed 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.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually attend for – the talks on how to together combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it begins.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey 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 consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the Australian bid.

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

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a conference obstructed from the leadership if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This matters. While some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and deliver 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," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.