🔗 Share this article

Well. 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 privilege to host the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the city of Adelaide next November.

That's not happening. Rather, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel 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 process that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that the prime minister and other senior figures really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to reports in the Australian and international media saying the administration was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed 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.

An Alternative View

That's the negative take. However, another perspective to consider it.

In the context the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling 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 lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey 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 backed the Australian bid.

However, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "disruption" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the oil producers that provided the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his government managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was needed. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital 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 other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

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