🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's long-running bid to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to host the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is moving to the resort city of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight 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 senior figures truly desired the proposal to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to consider it.

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the announcement on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome available.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to together address the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is generally viewed in the international community as having been determined 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 competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, 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 seen as close to the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his government led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has empirically had an impact in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair negotiation streams at multiple summits he has participated in.

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

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the most promising opportunity available to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.