Australia's Failed Bid to Host Cop31 Appears Chaotic – Yet It May Actually Be the Best Result Possible

Well. From one perspective, the nation's long-running bid to organize the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

It campaigned for more than three years for the rights to host the world's biggest environmental conference and green trade fair, which would have brought tens of thousands of people to the South Australian capital next fall.

That's not happening. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Mixed Messages

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to many people who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been joint hosts.

The process that led to failure has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to be approved. The prime minister's language were ambiguous at best. It translated to reports in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the Cop30 talks in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. While the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes outright opposed.

There is little sign the prime minister has considered international climate meetings a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but some will wonder if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

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

In the context the Cop30 talks this week in South America – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the best result available.

The minister outlined on that day an unprecedented deal that he was working on with his colleague from Turkey, Murat Kurum. The Turkish government would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and Australia – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to collectively address the environmental emergency.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. The two nations do not have a close relationship. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the time of writing. 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 multilateral work on climate change.

Turkey is generally viewed in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Typically, that means if there are several nations in the race those with less support either withdraw gracefully, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

The Turkish bid plainly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had backed the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no major power with the influence to stare down the oil producers that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is considered aligned with the Russian leader. Some countries worried about a summit obstructed from the top if his administration managed the discussions. And the Germans did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have happened under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

A Creative Solution

A resolution was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often unsettling to observe, but multilateral action has demonstrably made a difference in the fight against climate change. The Turkey-Australia arrangement is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing fossil fuel exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to co-chair discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This is significant. Although certain critics have downplayed the role of a "chief negotiator", specialists from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been determined by a president directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in Copenhagen in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society plays a vital role at climate conferences. What, if at all, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal appearing as 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.