The Unsuccessful Bid to Stage UN Climate Summit Looks Chaotic – But It May Actually Be the Best Result Achievable

Well. On one hand, the nation's protracted bid to organize the UN climate conference next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

That's not happening. Rather, the summit known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help accelerate 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 joint 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 bid to be approved. His statements sent mixed messages at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the administration was walking away.

This differed from the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to consider it.

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

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and primary coordinator, and Australia – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the environmental emergency.

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

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. The entire arrangement could fall over before it begins.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the international cooperation on climate change.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to encourage them to step aside.

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

But, exceptionally, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in the past week, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the heft to confront the oil producers that offered the Turks with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries feared a summit hindered from the leadership if his government managed the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to observe, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for expanding carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see Bowen as a force for good in the talks. He has been asked to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from research centers and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and deliver an significant result. We saw that in Berlin in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

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