🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, Australia's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next fall.

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

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's shift 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 process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to together combat the climate crisis.

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

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the deal had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Turkey refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a summit obstructed from the top if his administration managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and deliver an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society is essential at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

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