🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's long-running bid to host the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to host the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Instead, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, 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 unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

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

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences a priority. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. However, another perspective to look at it.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to together combat the climate crisis.

There would also 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. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized 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 climate change.

Turkey is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a conference obstructed from the top if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president holding the pen who can listen, build consensus and deliver an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this arrangement looking like the most promising opportunity available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.