The Unsuccessful Bid to Stage Cop31 Looks Chaotic – Yet It Could Actually Be the Best Result Achievable

Ouch. From one perspective, the nation's long-running campaign to host the UN climate conference next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to host the largest global climate summit and green trade fair, which would have attracted many thousands of people to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the conference known as Cop31 is headed to the tourist destination of the Turkish coastal city, 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 speed up Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing Pacific island nations, who would have been co-hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been doubts that the prime minister and other high-ranking officials really wanted the bid to succeed. His statements sent mixed messages at best. This led to stories in the Australian and international media saying the administration was withdrawing.

This differed from the message 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 a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to care.

DFAT, traditionally responsible for international climate negotiations, has been disengaged and at times outright opposed.

Evidence suggests the prime minister has viewed 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 more could have been done to get the bid over the line.

An Alternative View

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to look at it.

Considering the climate discussions this week in South America – and from an international perspective – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome available.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. Turkey would be the conference leader, organizer and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the countries actually attend for – the discussions on how to together combat the environmental emergency.

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

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been finalized at the time of writing. 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 approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been determined on creating disruption in the UN climate process. This framework is supposed to work by consensus. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the competition those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had less support than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had supported the Australian bid.

But, uniquely, Ankara refused to yield. The word "bastardry" has been thrown around in recent days, and not only by Australians.

International Dynamics

Ankara's stubbornness 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 stare down the petroleum exporters that provided the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the deadlock wasn't broken.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but global cooperation has empirically made a difference in the fight against global heating. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a creative idea 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 participate in international meetings see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been asked to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", experts from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations assert it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a leader holding the pen who can understand, forge agreement and deliver an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital 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 delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. For example, 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 host government?

Possibly little. However, this doesn't prevent this arrangement looking like the most promising opportunity possible to have a conference that may offer something for the Pacific region, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.