The Failed Bid to Stage UN Climate Summit Looks Like a Mess – But It Could Actually Be the Optimal Outcome Possible

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's protracted bid to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the privilege to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

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

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help speed up the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other senior figures truly desired the proposal to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. However, another perspective to consider it.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to together combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the deal had not been completed at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse 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.

Turkey is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. The system is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey clearly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to organize the summit. Approximately 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

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

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turks with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as close to the Russian leader. Some countries feared a conference hindered 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 Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the fight against global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. While some have dismissed the importance of a "president of negotiations", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at climate talks say it is crucial to their success.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and achieve an significant result. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the best chance possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the global community. This attempt is justified.