🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's long-running bid to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to host the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to many people who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was walking away.

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 stated the country was "in it to win it".

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

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

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

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

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively 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 close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse before it begins.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is imperfect 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 most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. Although some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and deliver an ambitious outcome. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

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 region, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.