🔗 Share this article

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

The effort ran for over 36 months for the privilege to host the world's biggest environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next November.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, 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 opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to be approved. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the government was walking away.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

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

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

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. But there is another way to consider it.

Considering the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together combat the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse before it begins.

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

Turkey is generally viewed in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is supposed to work by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for nominating next year's host had backed the Australian bid.

But, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turks with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Some countries feared a conference obstructed from the leadership if his government managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was needed. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has empirically had an impact in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who attend UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the best chance available to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the world. This attempt is justified.