WHO DOES THE AMAZON BELONG TO, ANYWAY?

We live in bad times. It seems like weather is going crazy. The world has been assaulted by unexpected and violent climatic phenomena. Towns wrecked by storms, crowds drowned by tsunamis, floods here, droughts there, global sea level rising dangerously and menacing the waterfront cities: our solid and friendly planet suddenly turned out to be a fragile and disorientated ship which has lost its way while devoured slowly by the rats and bugs living in its entrails.
Who’s to blame? There’s consensus among scientists that these climatic disturbances are caused by global warming. As for warming, most scientists defend that it is brought about by human activities, whereas a small minority argue it’s a natural phenomenon induced by solar variation for instance, considering that our planet has suffered warming and cooling many times before. Whoever is right, there’s a global warming going on. Radicalism aside, common sense suggests that humankind has a contribution to make in so far as the greenhouse effect is concerned. The sensitive matter of deforestation falls within the range of this contribution.
The Amazon encompasses the largest rainforest in the world, more than half of which located in Brazil. Unfortunately, extensive forests have never combined with human progress, as one can deduce from the study of European and American history. The tragic irony of Western people is that they became civilized destroying their forests and only got aware of the forests’ crucial importance after becoming civilized, that is, after destroying them.
A second irony refers to the status of Brazil. As a developing country, marginal in the Western world, its economic growth and consequently its people’s welfare depend in large measure on the spread of productive lands, which is proportionately inverse to forests’ preservation. It’s as if Brazil, though contemporary, were one century late, incapable of moving up because to move is to cause harm. Such peculiar predicament could only end up in deadlock. Voices soared all over the world, focusing on the Amazon. Two opposing stances were outstanding: a nationalist stance, pointing out Brazil’s sovereignty over Amazon, and an internationalist one, summed up by Al Gore’s words: “Contrary to what Brazilians think, the Amazon is not their property, it belongs to all of us”.
As for me, I think it’s foolish to support a kind of nationalistic hysteria, considering above all that successive Brazilian governments have always failed to stop deforestation. On the other hand, as a Brazilian, I get upset about complete internationalization of the Amazon. Consequently, I feel there’s a need to achieve a kind of accord which would safeguard both national ant international interests. World must recognize Brazil’s sovereignty and, at the same time, Brazil would allow international inspection and advisement. In fact, besides being a Brazilian citizen, I’m a world citizen.