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

Well. On one hand, the nation's long-running campaign to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

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

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

The result will be a significant disappointment to many people who had hoped hosting the climate carnival 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 Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. Recently, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to succeed. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This differed from the communication being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. While Bowen championed it, other senior members of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

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

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.

A Different Perspective

That's the negative take. However, another perspective to consider it.

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

Bowen set out on that day an novel agreement that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – 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 climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, 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. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The entire arrangement could fall over before it begins.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on climate change.

Turkey is generally viewed in the international community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey 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 venue had supported the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not just by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the heft to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turks with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations feared a summit hindered from the top if his administration led the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared climate conference at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has demonstrably had an impact in the fight against climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the federal administration over its contradictory stance for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in UN conferences see the minister as a force for good in the talks. He has been asked to lead negotiation streams at multiple summits he has participated in.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "chief negotiator", specialists from research centers and experienced analysts at environmental negotiations say it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader directing proceedings who can listen, forge agreement and deliver an significant result. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and Paris in 2015. The reverse happened in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "This position is critical at the conference except for making sure that people have food."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to prevent a restriction on NGO participation by the Turkish leadership?

Perhaps not much. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the best chance possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.