🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, the nation's long-running campaign to organize the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to put on the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's shift 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 doubts that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures truly desired the bid to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This differed from the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

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

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

Evidence suggests Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

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

In the context 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.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. The details of the deal had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on climate change.

Turkey is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

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

International Dynamics

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

President Erdoğan is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a conference hindered from the leadership if his administration led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation 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.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president holding the pen who can understand, build consensus and deliver an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital 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

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the best chance possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.