Australia's Failed Bid to Stage UN Climate Summit Appears Like a Mess – Yet It Could Actually Be the Best Result Achievable

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

The effort ran for more than three years for the rights to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

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

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's shift from being a carbon-based economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that led to failure 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. This led to stories 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, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

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

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – 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 developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together combat the environmental emergency.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could collapse 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.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to organize the summit. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turks with some cover.

President Erdoğan is seen as close to the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. Germany 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 UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

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

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has participated in.

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

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and achieve an significant result. This occurred in Berlin 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 people have food."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the most promising opportunity available to have a summit that may offer something for the Pacific, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.