🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, the nation's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to put on the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

This won't occur. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with 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 a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister 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 the negative take. But there is another way to look at it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result available.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the countries actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

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

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

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

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared 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 climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact 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 federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

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

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. How, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.