🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's long-running bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to host the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

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

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the climate carnival could help speed up the country's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures really wanted the bid to be approved. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

DFAT, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's the negative take. But there is another way to look at it.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in Brazil – and from an international perspective – the announcement on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to together combat the environmental emergency.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an island nation.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it begins.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what looked like an impending disaster for the international cooperation on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is supposed to work by consensus. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the competition those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been thrown around in the past week, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no major power with the heft to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a summit hindered from the top if his government led the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

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

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can understand, 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 conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. 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, the nation and the global community. It's worth a try.