🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, the nation's protracted bid to organize the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Rather, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, 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.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to together address the climate crisis.

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

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 completed at the time of writing. The whole thing 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 generally viewed in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not just by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the oil producers that offered the Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations feared a conference obstructed from the leadership if his government managed the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. International frameworks is flawed and often unsettling to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", experts from research centers and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and achieve an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

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