🔗 Share this article

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months 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 city of Adelaide next November.

This won't occur. Instead, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

This contrasted with 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 "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although 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 disengaged and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

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

In the context the climate discussions this week in South America – 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 unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the matters that the nations actually attend for – the talks on how to together combat the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the deal had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could fall over before it begins.

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

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Some countries feared a conference hindered from the top if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. The UN system is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who attend UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair negotiation streams at multiple summits he has participated in.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement 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.