🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's long-running bid to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have brought 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 headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel 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 process 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 be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, 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.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the decision on this week may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it begins.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been determined on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal 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, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

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

President Erdoğan is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his government managed the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"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 Cancún 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 other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if at all, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

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