🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, Australia's protracted bid to organize the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to put on 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.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

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

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

The minister outlined on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. 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 approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that provided the Turks with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a summit hindered from the top if his government led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to observe, 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 federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

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

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and deliver an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society is essential at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

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