🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

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 tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

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

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to many people who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was walking away.

This differed from the communication being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

In the context the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

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

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

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a summit obstructed from the top if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have happened 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 observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair negotiation streams at multiple summits he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, civil society plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the best chance possible to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.