🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's long-running bid to organize the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to host the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is headed 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 numerous individuals who had believed hosting the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the proposal to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was walking away.

This differed from the communication being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

DFAT, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences 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 get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey 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. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

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

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and achieve 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 the Danish city in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as the best chance possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, Australia and the global community. It's worth a try.