🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's protracted campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the privilege to host the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate Australia's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the existential plight 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 Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

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 finalized at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

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

Turkey is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

But, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not just by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations assert it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been determined 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 Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the best chance available to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.