🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's long-running campaign 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 put on the world's biggest climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next November.

That's not happening. Rather, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, 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. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the government was walking away.

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

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

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

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

That's one interpretation. However, another perspective to consider it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on that day 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 take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

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

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it gets started.

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

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

But, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a conference hindered from the leadership if his government led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the fight against global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. While some have dismissed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a leader holding the pen 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 Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, civil society is essential at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific, Australia and the world. This attempt is justified.