In many of the world's rainforests, the struggle for law and order is taking place and nature is disappearing.
Last week I wrote about the major progress Colombia has achieved in 2023. In other words, we reduced the deforestation rate by 49% in one year. But this week we learned that this trend reversed significantly in the first quarter of this year. Preliminary figures suggest tree loss could be consolation Colombia's Environment Minister Susana Muhamad told reporters on Monday that there has been a 40% decline since the beginning of the year.
Why did things change so quickly? This is largely because a single armed group controls most of Colombia's rainforest.
Muhammad explained that the figures were partly behind the conflict with Estado Mayor Central, a group believed to run a large cocaine operation, among other illegal activities. “In this case, nature is put at the center of the conflict,” she said. EMC had largely banned deforestation and appears to have allowed it again in recent months, according to experts.
A 2023 UN report referred to this entanglement between drug trafficking and environmental crime as ‘narco-deforestation’. Perhaps nowhere is this phenomenon more evident than in Colombia. Colombia is the stage of the decades-long global war on drugs and one of the most biodiverse places on Earth, where the Andes Mountains meet the vast Amazon rainforest.
But what is happening in Colombia shows that many developing countries are facing growing difficulties. Vast, pristine forests are essential to curbing climate change and biodiversity loss and are also prized by groups seeking to hide illegal activities beneath thick tree canopies.
Today I want to explain why experts in the field say there is no way to protect important forests like the Amazon without tackling the growing power of armed groups.
Colombia case
Armed groups in Colombia have long banned logging in the forest. Experts say the main reason is to protect the illegal drug operations run by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) in the forest.
FARC's role in protecting forests became clear after signing a peace agreement with the Colombian government in 2016. The Colombian government disarmed the group and converted it into a political party called Comunes. When FARC disbanded, the local power vacuum caused deforestation rates to soar as cattle ranchers, illegal miners, and dissident groups cleared forests.
But once the dust settled, Estado Mayor Central, an anti-regime group controlled by former FARC commander Ivan Mordisco, consolidated power in much of Colombia's rainforest. FARC's old tactics of limiting logging seemed to have returned, and deforestation rates began to fall again. Until recently.
Muhammad noted that El Niño may have made the Amazon more vulnerable to wildfires this year. I called Rodrigo Botero, director of a Colombian environmental nonprofit called the Foundation for Conservation and Sustainable Development, to find out what else has changed. He said the area could see new roads opened and ranches expanded. Government agents are unable to stop the group, estimated to have more than 3,000 troops, because it controls access to most forests.
It's not entirely clear why EMC started allowing logging again. Botero said he was concerned that EMC could try to use deforestation rates as leverage to get more favorable treatment from the government.
First, they showed the government the benefits it could bring by banning deforestation, he explained. And Botero added that it was as if they were saying to the government: “If you can't trust us, see what we can do.”
It is also a global problem
There is no evidence that EMC has been successful in its attempts to use Amazon as a political tool. The government said it was actively working to arrest Mordisco.
Politics aside, what the Colombian case has made clear to me is that controlling armed groups is now a fundamental part of conservation policy.
Bram Ebus, a consultant and investigative journalist with the International Crisis Group, has been documenting for years how drug traffickers and rebel groups such as EMC are expanding their influence in South American rainforests through a project called Amazon Underworld.
He said illicit trade controlled by powerful criminal groups was no longer limited to drugs or minerals and was still a major source of income. There are also growing concerns that criminal networks are using a variety of businesses to launder their illicit profits, such as illegal logging, wildlife trafficking, ranching and land grabbing.
Researchers, journalists and government officials have long documented how mining has financed conflicts in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Nature was collateral damage. For example, conflict-related illegal mining operations have been extremely detrimental to the biodiversity of the Congo River Basin rainforest.
Colombia continues to negotiate for peace, and its Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development said it would continue to investigate violations and work to curb deforestation, although it did not comment on whether the Amazon was being used as a political tool. (EMC could not be reached for comment.) But in many cases it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between purely criminal groups and politically motivated groups. That's bad news for nature and anyone who dares to defend it.
Many countries do not have the resources to protect their forests, let alone fight against armed groups. Brazil, one of the developing countries spending the most on forest protection, currently has so few officers that each worker patrols an area the size of Denmark on average, according to the Association of Conservation Officers. They are now going on strike to protest against poor working conditions.
Meanwhile, criminal and rebel groups continued to expand their power.
“The key goal of every group involved in the conflict is to expand, get more troops, get more funding and gain more territorial control,” Ebus said. “The current environment is a hostage to war.”
Eliminate ‘forever chemicals’
What happen: For the first time, the federal government is requiring municipal water systems to remove six synthetic chemicals linked to cancer and other health problems present in the tap water of hundreds of millions of Americans, my colleague Lisa Friedman reports.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will begin requiring water suppliers to reduce perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, collectively known as PFAS, to near-zero levels. Found in everything from dental floss to firefighting foam to children's toys, these compounds are called “forever chemicals” because they can accumulate in the body and environment without fully breaking down. The new effort will cost at least $1.5 billion annually.
Where PFAS are found: The chemical is so common that it can be found in the blood of almost everyone in the United States. A recent study that tested 45,000 water samples from around the world found that levels of PFAS were considered hazardous to human health in about 31% of samples that were not near a clear source of contamination, my colleague Delger Erdenesanaa wrote this week.
According to the EPA, exposure to PFAS has been linked to metabolic disorders, decreased fertility in women, developmental delays in children, and an increased risk of some prostate, kidney, and testicular cancers (Lisa has a helpful article on other things you need to know about PFAS) I wrote a description). .)
EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan told Lisa that the new regulations are “life-changing.” “We’re finally one step closer to completely turning off the taps to chemicals for good.”
So what can you do to prevent PFAS? The EPA maintains a list of cleaning products that are safe from these chemicals. And the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit group, has been tracking companies that say they are removing these substances from their products. — Manuela Andreoni