🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's protracted campaign to organize the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the bid to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the communication 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".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. However, another perspective to consider it.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night 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 – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the international cooperation on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement 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.

However, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

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 stare down the petroleum exporters that provided the Turks with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a conference obstructed from the leadership if his government led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to observe, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and deliver an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened 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 unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.