🔗 Share this article

Ouch. On one hand, the nation's long-running campaign to organize the UN climate conference 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 green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next November.

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

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the bid to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, 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 be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. 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 get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

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

The minister outlined on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively address the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the deal had not been finalized at the time of writing. The whole thing could fall over before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

But, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences 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. While some have dismissed the role of a "chief negotiator", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is crucial to their success.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

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