Fierce debate over the location of the next climate summit, fight with fossil fuel lobbyists – diplomatic battles in the background of the COP

The COP30 negotiations are in full swing in Belém, while negotiations are underway on the location of the next climate summit. The right to host is not just a question of organization, but of geopolitical gain: it signals which country is able to take the center stage of climate policy attention and to what extent it can mobilize its diplomatic networks. However, the selection of the COP31 venue has been stalled for months, which clearly shows that the climate policy field today is at least as much about diplomatic power-play as it is about climate protection.

Australia and Turkey: high stakes, tough game

The domestic economy means international visibility, prestige and economic advantage at the same time. The COP, which attracts tens of thousands of participants, brings resources and attention that allow the host country to shape its image, build political connections and gain lobbying power in the energy transition. This is why the COP is becoming a kind of global “advertising platform”, which many states treat as a strategic investment. However, the gap between climate goals and the domestic economy is growing: the stronger the prestige value, the harder it is to keep the climate protection content in focus.

Australia and Turkey are competing for COP31. Australia is bidding with Pacific island nations, stressing that the climate summit must be held where the impacts are already life-threatening. At the same time, its economic structure is heavily dependent on coal and LNG exports, so domestic economics is also a diplomatic position-building exercise. Turkey, on the other hand, is making logistical and geopolitical arguments, citing its central location and growing regional role. Both countries have gone all in, and the stalemate also threatens the credibility of UN climate diplomacy.

Lobbyists in the background

The political game is further strengthened by the fact that more fossil fuel lobbyists are appearing at the COPs than ever before. According to research reported by the Guardian, more than 5,300 lobbyists have participated in climate negotiations in recent years, representing 180 oil, gas and coal companies. In 2024, more fossil fuel lobbyists were present at the Baku COP than the delegates from the ten most vulnerable countries combined. This influence is not just a presence: it shapes the negotiating environment, dampening emissions reduction commitments and weakening progress on climate finance.

The diplomatic battle over the hosting position, combined with the presence of the fossil fuel lobby, often means that real climate action content is pushed to the background. Attention is diverted to prestige, geopolitical bargaining and economic interests, while global emissions continue to rise. This undermines the authority of climate summits in the long term and suggests that the COP is a place for decision-making guided by the logic of power rather than science.

What could be done?

According to an article by Zsanett Gréta Papp published in Másfélfoc, the image of the COP would be greatly improved if the process became more transparent: access for fossil lobbyists should be restricted, full disclosure of financing should be made mandatory, and professional considerations should be taken into account when selecting the host. The real engine of climate policy is participation from the bottom up: that of those who experience the effects of climate change every day and who know that the 1.5°C target is not a slogan, but a condition for survival.