The main issue here seems to be what happens in the Peruvian side of the Amazon, which is quite large and is wide open to loggers on the pretext there are no natives (or whatever other idiotic claim they can make). In fact, the Peruvians have cynically denied the existence of this perticular tribe, so the picture is, largely, the ultimate evidence of their actual existence.

Obviously those things are contradictory sometimes but you can’t help that up to a point. Everything even eating is ethically contradictory and requires of some balance for the conscious person.

And, yes, it’s political: everything is. Specially everything that affects people. When this tribe has found itself being forced out of their lands in the Peruvian side of the border, it was political too.

But overall I understand that the Brazilians nowadays (not in the past) have a much better approach to the native issue and specially that of uncontacted tribes. I bet the Peruvians would, if anything, send missionaries. That’s strictly forbidden under Brazilian ethical regulations.

I think they did the right thing, or at least one of the possible right things to do. As mentioned the issue is media coverage: just sensationalist hype, no background story, no sense of proportion. It’s a shame, I think, that one has to reach out to the public media of an exotic authocratic principality (Al Jazeera) to get that info straight.

It’s a delicate balancing act, but these people don’t live in total isolation. Meirelles notes that they were painted red, which signifies their readiness for war in defence of their territory, so they obviously have the concept that other people exist.

And Meirelles has been tramping through the forest, and their territory, for a number of years. Though this is not direct contact, his presence is a contact of a kind, and will have some influence on them.

The problem is the way the media have treated the story: as a sensation. The ethical issue here, I think, is the way the media will report a story, choosing the sensational story – or at least the sensational headline – of the ‘lost tribe’ (with the implication of ‘look, wild savages!’), rather than reporting on the anthropological significance of these people, and the humanistic concerns of their continued existence.