If anything, these type of articles come at a suspicious time so close to the signing of the Mercosur trade deal, because yes the forest is burning but according to Nasa not more and not less than in other years.
Which is bad and should be stopped, but why are we talking about it so much now? It reeks of political manipulation.
I don't like that at all but well if it forces some sort of immediate action and concession from Brasil it's better than nothing, but it does not tackle the underlying issues.
If people want to do something about it, the most important thing is to stop eating the main end product of the Amazonia burning which is meat.
Not necessarily only from Brasil, because they export the crops for cattle feed globally. I'm talking about meat in general.
As for the cattle and Soy export - you're right in that they are major contributors. But again - that was true last year as well. Also, it is up to Brazil to shape its economy so that no more land is cleared. Farming can be intensified (not sure how much, for Soy, but it definitely can); and beef production should just be indirectly capped through prevention of clearing. In fact, one might argue that there should be a re-forestation effort, but I'm not sure enough about that to make the argument proper.
And - what about the importance of those exports, you might ask? Brazil's economy should evolve - if even through protectionist measures of some sort - so as to be somewhat more self-reliant in terms of production. Japan did it, China did it, so can Brazil. Also, let's look at its imports:
What it can and should do is, therefore:* Transition to renewable energy.
* Develop and expand industry, particularly of land and sea vehicles, machinery.
* Transition from plastic to renewable/recyclable materials which can be produced locally.
Of course this is not easy to do, but it's definitely possible.