Below, I transcript the answer that the ex-governor of Distrito Federal, Cristóvão Buarque, told to students of an American University (sorry if you find many mistakes, it isn't easy to translate from Portuguese to English):
"In fact, as a Brazilian, I simply would speak against internationalisation of Amazon. Even our governments do not caring of this patrimony with the due solicitude, it owns to us. Being a humanist, and feeling the risk of environmental degradation that Amazon has been suffering, I can imagine its internationalisation, as well as everything that is important to mankind.
If the Amazon, from an ethic and humanist perspective, should be internationalised, we also should internationalise all reserves of oil in the whole planet. The oil is so important to the welfare of mankind as the Amazon to our future. Nevertheless, the owners of those reserves, feel that they have the right of increasing or decreasing oil extraction as well as its price.
In the same way, the financial assets of world’s richest countries should be internationalised. If the Amazon is a reservoir for humanity, she cannot be burnt by an owner’s wishes or a country.
Buning the Amazon is so serious as unemployment provoked by arbitrary decision of global speculators. We cannot admit that financial reserves are used to burning whole countries in the thirst for money by those speculators.
Before internationalising Amazon, I would like to see all museums in the world undergoing an internationalisation. The Louvre should not own only to France. Each museum in the world is a guardian of the most beautiful pieces produced by human geniality.
We cannot allow that this patrimony, like the natural patrimony of Amazon, to be manipulated by an owner’s wishes or one country.
Sometime ago, a Japanese millionaire, decided he would be buried with a painting made by an important master of arts. Why did nobody have internationalised this painting before?
During this meeting, the United Nation is realizing the Millennium Forum Assembly, but, authorities of some countries had difficulties of taking part in this Forum due to the embarrassing they would face in the US customs. Than, I think that New York, being the headquarters of the UN should be internationalised. At least Manhattan should own to all mankind. As well as Paris, Venice, Rome, London, Rio de Janeiro, Brasília, Recife, each city, with its specific beauty, its history, should own to the whole globe.
If the US (or whichever*) want to internationalise the Amazon, for the risk of leave it on Brazilian hands, let’s internationalise all nuclear arsenals of the US (and of the rest of the world**). After all, they have shown they are capable of using those weapons against humanity, provoking destruction millions times more devastating that those regrettable forests fires that have been happening in Brazil.
"In those ongoing debates, the current candidates for the presidency of the US, have been defending the idea of internationalising the Amazon in exchange for our external debts. Let’s start using this money to ensure that each child in the world will have food and go to school.
Let’s internationalise all children, by taking care of all of them, without minding which country they come from; they deserve to be cared by the entire world. Still more than what Amazon deserves.
When the leaders of the world, cherish poor children of the world as a patrimony of humankind, they would not allow those children work when they should be studying, they would not allow they die when they should be enjoying theirs lives. Being a humanist, I accept the internationalisation of the globe...
However, whilst the world address to me by calling me a Brazilian, I will fight for the Amazon to be only ours!