Australia's Unsuccessful Bid to Stage UN Climate Summit Looks Like a Mess – But It May Actually Be the Optimal Outcome Achievable

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's long-running bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the privilege to put on the world's biggest climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is moving to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's shift from being a carbon-based 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 process that resulted in defeat has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication 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 a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. While the minister supported it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

DFAT, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and sometimes completely against.

Evidence suggests Albanese has considered international climate meetings a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder 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 look at it.

Considering the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the announcement on this week may, ironically, have been the best result possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and primary coordinator, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling almost all nations on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together combat the climate crisis.

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

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 completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could fall over before it gets started.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what looked like an impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for nominating next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not just by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the oil producers that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Some countries worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his government led the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend international meetings 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 attended.

This is significant. While some have dismissed the importance of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at climate talks say it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the best chance available to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the global community. This attempt is justified.