🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's long-running campaign to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to put on the world's biggest climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next fall.

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

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, 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. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

DFAT, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences a important focus. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to together combat the environmental emergency.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on climate change.

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his administration managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to observe, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a leader holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the best chance possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. It's worth a try.