🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's protracted bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to host the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next November.

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

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's transition 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 unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations 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 a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

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

Evidence suggests the prime minister has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

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 international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result available.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the talks on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. 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 recover value from what looked like an impending disaster for the international cooperation on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

But, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a summit obstructed from the leadership if his government managed the discussions. And the Germans 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.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement 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.