🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's protracted campaign to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to put on the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is moving to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint 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 really wanted the proposal to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This differed from the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only occasionally appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister 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. But there is another way to look at it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

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

But, uniquely, Turkey refused to yield. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turks 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 government managed the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Despite understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to lead negotiation streams at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is crucial to their success.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity available to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.