🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's long-running campaign to organize the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to host the world's biggest environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next November.

That's not happening. Rather, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

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 the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

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

Evidence suggests the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together combat the climate crisis.

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

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could fall over before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on climate change.

Turkey is generally viewed in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by Australians.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a summit hindered from the leadership if his administration led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair negotiation streams at multiple summits he has attended.

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

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, civil society is essential at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the most promising opportunity available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.