The Failed Attempt to Host UN Climate Summit Appears Like a Mess – But It Could In Fact Be the Optimal Outcome Achievable

Ouch. On one hand, Australia's protracted bid to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help speed up the country's transition 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 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 really wanted the proposal 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 Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated 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 senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

Evidence suggests Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

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

The minister outlined 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, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations 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 preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could collapse before it begins.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on climate change.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

Turkey plainly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is considered close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a conference obstructed from the top if his administration led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared climate conference at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against 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 contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

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

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president holding the pen who can understand, build consensus and achieve an significant result. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. For example, civil society is essential at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.