🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next fall.

This won't occur. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to many people who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus 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 opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed 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 a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has considered 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 secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to look at 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 most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively address the climate crisis.

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

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse before it begins.

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

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

But, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations feared a conference hindered from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, 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 multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the role of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, civil society plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the best chance possible to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. It's worth a try.