🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next fall.

This won't occur. Instead, the conference known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint 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 proposal to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

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

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, 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 look at it.

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it begins.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

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

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the oil producers that offered the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered close to the Russian leader. Some countries feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair negotiation streams at multiple summits he has attended.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. We saw that 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 other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the best chance possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.