> I hope the international community can start looking how we can preserve those forests and all the species that they have.

I fear the "international community" is more likely to be the one eager to exploit those forests.

Your best bet is with the indigenous people, assuming they haven't been already genocided or mestizoized.

Ideally for the double whammy of also buying the carbon rights for the reforestation that will surely ensue a decade or two later.

So as I feared the unwritten sentence for this headline is "so we can fuck them up, too".

> war indirectly has protected those places but ironically there are people deforesting those places now

There has been a dozen or so national parks in the Amazon that have been wholly abandoned due to FARC threats. War hasn't helped at all.

> I hope the international community can start looking how we can preserve those forests and all the species that they have.

Silly gringo question: can foreigners buy the land and lock it up as preserve or something similar?

Why emphasize “gringo”? Colombia is nearly 90% European-descent or Mestizo.

The term "gringo" is not offensive in Colombia. It's an extremely casual term that just means non-Latino, usually specifically for North Americans.

> and you can go and visit nowadays

And that is how conservation is defeated.

The international community? Why should "the international community" meddle in the affairs of the Colombian government?

Those forests belong to the Colombian people, and they indirectly decide what happens to them through the electoral system.

It’s a global treasure and the Colombian people are largely powerless against their government so they rely on international support.

where does "global treasure" begin and "sovereign autonomy" end? who decides?