🔗 Share this article

Well. On one hand, Australia's protracted bid to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to put on the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

This won't occur. Rather, the conference 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 major let down to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the proposal to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This differed from the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, 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 nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the environmental emergency.

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

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like 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. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

But, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turks with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his administration led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. The UN system is imperfect 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 creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is pivotal to their success.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún 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 except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the most promising opportunity available to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. It's worth a try.