Australia's Failed Attempt to Host Cop31 Looks Like a Mess – Yet It Could Actually Be the Optimal Outcome Achievable

Well. On one hand, the nation's long-running bid to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

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

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a major let down to numerous individuals who had believed hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

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

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign Albanese has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended one since taking office 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. But there is another way to look at it.

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the decision on this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "chief negotiator", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

There would also be a greater focus on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. The two nations 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 begins.

However, it might represent a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an approaching car crash for the international cooperation on global warming.

The Turkish government is generally viewed in the global community as having been determined on causing havoc in the international climate negotiations. This framework is supposed to work by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with less support either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is privately arranged to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. Approximately 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by local commentators.

International Dynamics

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the fracturing geopolitical climate. Without US participation under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turks with some cover.

The Turkish president is seen as close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations worried about a conference hindered from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an underprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't broken.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is most crucial.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, climate activists who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to co-chair negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. While some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can listen, forge agreement 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 conference other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to stop a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this arrangement appearing as the best chance possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the global community. It's worth a try.