🔗 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 more than three years for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, 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 Cop31 is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This differed from the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

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

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

But, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the heft to confront the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to the Russian leader. Some countries feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an underprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. International frameworks is flawed and often unsettling to observe, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the fight against global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see Bowen 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. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president holding the pen who can understand, build consensus and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. 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 Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. It's worth a try.