🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's long-running bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the rights to put on the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

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

There is little sign Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He hasn't attended one since taking office 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 look at it.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the multilateral work on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that provided the Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a conference obstructed from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. While some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and deliver an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the best chance possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. It's worth a try.