The Unsuccessful Attempt to Host Cop31 Looks Like a Mess – But It Could Actually Be the Best Result Possible

Well. From one perspective, the nation's protracted campaign to organize the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to put on the largest global climate summit and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate Australia's transition from being a carbon-based economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an opaque mess. Recently, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials truly desired the bid to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although the minister supported it, other senior members of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been uninvolved and sometimes outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended 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. 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 this week may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually attend for – the talks on how to together combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. The details of the deal had not been finalized at the time of writing. The whole thing could collapse before it begins.

However, it might represent 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 determined on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid clearly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the Australian bid.

However, uniquely, Turkey refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been used frequently in the past week, 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 the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to confront the petroleum exporters that provided the Turkish government with some cover.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries feared a conference obstructed from the top if his administration managed the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Despite reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who attend international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has participated in.

This matters. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "president of negotiations", experts from academic institutions and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can listen, build consensus and achieve an significant result. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unresolved issues. For example, civil society is essential at environmental summits. How, if anything, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the most promising opportunity possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, the nation and the world. This attempt is justified.