🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, Australia's protracted campaign to organize the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to host the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next November.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's shift from being a carbon-based 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 opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

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

DFAT, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and at times completely against.

There is little sign the prime minister has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

That's the negative take. But there is another way to consider it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to together combat the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

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

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

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

But, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy 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 heft to confront the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to the Russian leader. Several nations feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. Germany 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 happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at multiple summits he has participated in.

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

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop 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.