🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's protracted bid to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown 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 transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures truly desired the bid to be approved. 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 message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

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

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

There is little sign Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

In the context the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. 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 collapse before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

But, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

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 influence to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turks with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his government led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration 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 lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the importance of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement 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 Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the best chance possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.