The Unsuccessful Attempt to Stage Cop31 Appears Chaotic – Yet It Could Actually Be the Best Result Possible

Ouch. From one perspective, Australia's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to put on the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have brought many thousands of delegates to the city of Adelaide next fall.

This won't occur. Rather, the conference known as Cop31 is moving to the tourist destination of Antalya, on the Turkish Mediterranean.

Letdown and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had believed organizing the climate carnival could help speed up Australia's transition from being a fossil fuel economy to a clean energy leader, and bring global attention to the existential plight 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 doubts that Anthony Albanese and other senior figures truly desired the bid to be approved. The prime minister's language sent mixed messages at best. It translated to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being relayed at the climate negotiations in the Brazilian city, where the Australian climate change minister, the climate minister, had just stated the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for Australia's Cop31 bid. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the government have only sometimes appeared to care.

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

Evidence suggests Albanese has viewed UN climate conferences a priority. He hasn't attended one since taking office in 2022. We'll never know, but many may question if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

An Alternative View

That's one interpretation. However, another perspective to consider it.

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on Wednesday night may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his Turkish counterpart, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – the climate minister – would take on the position as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the stuff that the countries actually turn up for – the talks on how to collectively combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a increased emphasis on the Pacific, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for scepticism. Turkey and Australia 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.

However, it might represent a way to recover value from what appeared to be an approaching car crash for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the global community as having been determined 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 less support either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is privately arranged to encourage 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 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

But, uniquely, Ankara declined to withdraw. The term "bastardry" has been used frequently in recent days, and not only by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Turkey's obstinacy can be read as a reflection of the divided international landscape. With the US absent under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turks with certain protection.

President Erdoğan is considered close to the Russian leader. Several nations feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration managed the negotiations. And the Germans did not want to have to host an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in the German city, which is what would have occurred under international regulations if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. The UN system is imperfect and often unsettling to watch, but multilateral action has empirically had an impact in the battle with global heating. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its contradictory stance for expanding fossil fuel exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a force for good in the talks. He has been requested to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This matters. While certain critics have downplayed the importance of a "president of negotiations", experts from research centers and veteran observers at climate talks assert 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 ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and Paris in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Unanswered Questions

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, civil society is essential at environmental summits. What, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on civil society by the Turkish leadership?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal appearing as the best chance possible to have a summit that may provide benefits for the Pacific, the nation and the world. It's worth a try.