🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's long-running bid to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the rights to put on the world's biggest 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. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the communication 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".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. However, another perspective to look at it.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to together address the climate crisis.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

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 entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement 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 refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the oil producers that offered the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a conference hindered from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to observe, but global cooperation has empirically had an impact in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "chief negotiator", experts from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and achieve an significant result. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. How, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the best chance possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. This attempt is justified.