🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, the nation's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought tens of thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's shift from being a carbon-based 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 high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

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

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered UN climate conferences a priority. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

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

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, host and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

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

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to encourage them to step aside.

Turkey clearly 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 supported the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a summit hindered from the top if his government managed the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. The UN system is flawed and often unsettling to observe, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Despite reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

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

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the Cop except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

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

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this arrangement looking like the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific region, Australia and the global community. It's worth a try.