🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's protracted campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to host the largest global environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates 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 Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had believed hosting the climate carnival could help accelerate the country's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, 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 really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the local and global press 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, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members 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 at times outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the announcement on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together combat the environmental emergency.

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

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could fall over before it begins.

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

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework 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 quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Turkey declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent 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 aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a conference obstructed from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was necessary. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who participate in international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at climate talks say it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, 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 offer something for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.