Australia's Failed Attempt to Host Cop31 Appears Like a Mess – But It Could In Fact Be the Best Result Achievable

Well. From one perspective, the nation's protracted campaign to organize the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to host the world's biggest environmental conference 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 Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had hoped hosting the environmental gathering could help accelerate the country's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to succeed. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. It translated to stories in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This differed from the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the environment minister, the climate minister, had just declared the country was "fully committed to success".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the administration have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for global environmental talks, has been uninvolved and at times outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has considered UN climate conferences a important focus. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister 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.

Considering the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his Turkish counterpart, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing almost all nations on the stuff that the nations actually attend for – the discussions on how to together address the environmental emergency.

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

Grounds for Scepticism

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia 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.

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 widely seen in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the international climate negotiations. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 nations responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the southern pitch.

However, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

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

The Turkish president is considered close to Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a conference hindered from the leadership if his government led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A path through was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the battle with global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who attend UN conferences see Bowen as a force for good in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at each of the four conferences he has attended.

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

"Every successful Cop has been determined by a president holding the pen who can understand, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in Berlin in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," they note. "This position is critical at the Cop other than making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

Multiple unanswered questions. For example, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a crackdown on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

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