🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, Australia's long-running bid to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to host the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next fall.

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

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to consider it.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the announcement 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 conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to together address the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. The two nations 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.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey 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 consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in the past week, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a conference obstructed from the leadership if his government managed the discussions. Germany 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 resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for expanding carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to lead negotiation streams at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their success.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and deliver 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," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the best chance available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.