🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's long-running bid to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to put on the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to many people who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

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

There is little sign the prime minister has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister 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 one interpretation. But there is another way to consider it.

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

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively combat 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. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid plainly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

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

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 dominant nation with the heft to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions 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 ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the best chance available to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.