🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's long-running bid to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to host the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

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

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

DFAT, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, 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. Turkey would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively 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

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement 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 climate change.

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a conference hindered from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared 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 broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance 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 asked to co-chair negotiation streams at multiple summits he has attended.

This matters. 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 pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown 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 summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.