The summit of leaders of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization (ACTO) that was held in Bogota, the capital of Colombia, on August 25, 2025, once again revealed that environmental concerns are increasingly setting the global agenda.[i] The leaders of the eight member countries reaffirmed their commitment to protecting the Amazon rainforest, which is one of the world’s most important ecosystems. Nevertheless, serious disagreements arose, particularly regarding the future of hydrocarbons, and the summit’s final declaration was overshadowed by these contradictions.
Gustavo Petro, who hosted the summit, emphasized several important achievements. Among these were the establishment of a fund for tropical forests, the creation of a co-management mechanism for indigenous peoples within ACTO, and the establishment of an international police intelligence center in Manaus, Brazil. It was also agreed that the next summit would be held in Ecuador in 2027. These steps have been recorded as important developments for regional cooperation.
The limited progress contained in the Bogota Declaration has not been satisfying for environmental organizations and indigenous communities. In particular, calls for a ban on oil extraction were rejected due to the open resistance of Venezuela, Ecuador, and Peru, while Brazil’s ambiguous stance fueled further debate. As a result, the summit failed to produce any binding resolution beyond the rhetoric of a “fair, orderly, and equitable transition.”
At the summit, the most heated debates centered on the issue of oil extraction in the Amazon. Colombian President Petro advocated for a ban on hydrocarbons, which was rejected by Venezuela, Peru, and Ecuador. Brazil, however, took a contradictory stance, with Lula da Silva stating that his country needed oil to finance its energy transition. These diverse stances demonstrated how national interests play a decisive role in the environmental policies of Amazonian countries.
International environmental organizations have strongly criticized this stance and emphasized that the urgent climate crisis is being postponed for the sake of economic concerns. A coalition called “De-Fossilize the Amazon” has stated that governments are sacrificing environmental urgency. The summit, therefore, demonstrated how environmental awareness can be pushed into the background in the shadow of economic crises.
Security was another major topic at the summit. Lula da Silva announced that an Amazon police cooperation center would open in Manaus in September.[ii] This center will work in coordination with both the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Andean Community. Furthermore, a “gold traceability” mechanism has been adopted to prevent illegal gold mining. The establishment of a regional security commission has also been approved. These steps indicate the development of a common response to the increasing illegal activities in the Amazon.
One of the most concrete and progressive outcomes of the summit was the official inclusion of indigenous peoples in ACTO governance. Accordingly, one indigenous representative and one government representative from each country will participate in ACTO. One of the indigenous leaders, Ginny Catherine Alba, requested that the first session be held as soon as possible. This development was a symbolic achievement for indigenous communities that have historically been excluded. The exclusion of communities of African descent, however, has been criticized. This situation shows that the issue of inclusive representation remains unresolved.
Venezuela has considered the summit as a political platform against the West. Foreign Minister Yvan Gil stated in the final communiqué that they had secured condemnation of “unilateral sanctions”.[iii] This has been presented as a diplomatic success for the Caracas administration.
The Minister of Science and Technology, Gabriela Jimenez, emphasized that her country possesses one of the world’s largest wetlands. She also stated that the Amazon is of strategic importance not only for its water and mineral wealth but also as a vital reserve for future generations. She announced that satellite imaging technologies will be used to monitor photosynthesis processes and that this data will form the basis for reforestation projects.
Despite this, human rights organizations such as PROVEA have claimed that the Venezuelan delegation used the summit more as a propaganda tool.[iv] The Caracas administration has long dismissed these accusations. Thus, Venezuela’s role at the summit was shaped as much by political calculations as by environmental concerns.
Venezuela occupies a unique position as a country that owns between 5.6% and 6.1% of the vast Amazon rainforest.[v]This territory, covering approximately 470,000 km², is concentrated mainly in the states of Bolívar, Amazonas, and Delta Amacuro. The region is home to unique biological diversity, vast freshwater reserves, and strategic mineral deposits. Indigenous communities depend directly on these resources for their livelihoods. Thus, Caracas’ choices in its Amazon policy have had consequences not only domestically but also on a regional scale.
Nevertheless, this policy has often been marked by contradictions. On the one hand, Venezuela has made international commitments to protect the Amazon. On the other hand, it has been criticized for its military presence and mining activities. This duality has led to credibility issues in Venezuela’s environmental policy.
At the summit, all countries endorsed Brazil’s proposal for the Tropical Forest Forever Fund (TFFF). It was announced that this fund would be brought to the agenda at COP30 in Belém and would provide economic incentives for forest conservation. Thus, the aim was to go beyond the traditional carbon credit system. Lula has described this summit as the “truth COP.”
The disagreements over hydrocarbons constrained the Amazon countries’ capacity for collective action. Given the urgency of the global climate crisis, the Bogota Summit made some progress but will be recorded in history as a summit that postponed the most contentious issues.
The Amazon Summit in Bogota highlighted the tension between the environment and the economy, the rights of indigenous peoples and the interests of states, and global responsibility over national priorities. On the one hand, new funds, security mechanisms, and the representation of indigenous peoples were noted as significant advances. On the other hand, deep divisions over the future of hydrocarbons overshadowed the vision for protecting the Amazon.
Venezuela’s role at the summit has been a typical example of this dual structure. Caracas has emphasized its rhetoric against international sanctions while framing its environmental pledges within a political context. Whether the Amazon can be protected as the world’s largest “lung” depends on how these contradictions are resolved. Following the summit, it has become clear that the fate of the Amazon remains uncertain.
[i] Ruiz, Luis Alejandro, “Amazon Summit in Bogotá Ends with Partial Progress and Underlying Tensions”, Guacamaya, guacamayave.com/en/amazon-summit-in-bogota-ends-with-partial-progress-and-underlying-tensions/, (Accessed: 31.08.2025).
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Ibid.
[v] Ibid.
