The “Benefits” of Autonomy for Indigenous Peoples

According to the Fundación para la Autonomía y el Desarrollo de la Costa Atlántica de Nicaragua (FADCANIC):

“The juridical status of autonomy enjoyed by the inhabitants of the Atlantic Coast is the culmination of a long quest for peace, national unity and reconciliation among coastal families and communities. It is the means by which an intense period marked by armed conflict, political confrontation, and historical differences came to an end.” [1]

With this final project, I aim to answer the question: How true is this conclusion?

Historical Context:

According to the 1995 VII National Population Census, the autonomous regions are the second most populated region in Nicaragua, constituting 10.7% of the country’s total population [2]. But how did they become what they are today? When analyzing the current state of Nicaragua’s autonomous regions, it is vital to keep the historical context in mind.

For over two centuries (from 1650-1860) the Caribbean Coast of Nicaragua, which is today home to the RAAN and the RAAS, was subjected to different forms of foreign control. While the Pacific Coast was pillaged by the Spanish, the Atlantic region fell to the control of the British. As I noted in About Nicaragua, the influx of British forces on the coastal region proved divisive (and destructive) for the indigenous groups that resided there. As the Miskito allied themselves with the British, becoming vital trading partners and obtaining firearms, the Mayagna and Rama peoples were put at risk of total cultural decimation.

During the mid-1800s, British control began to wane. In 1860 the people of the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua reclaimed the region, ruling autonomously for three decades. During the 1890s, however, the United States began to take interest in the plentiful natural resources within the territory (such as gold and hardwood). In 1894, after a brief period of self-governance, the Nicaraguan national government (inspired and aided by the United States) invaded the region, forcing integration. The Atlantic Coast was officially under the rule of the Nicaraguan central government, which exploited its natural resources and pressured the indigenous peoples to assimilate into the dominant Pacific groups.

As an independent nation, much of Nicaragua’s history was characterized by the conflict between the liberal elite of Leon and the conservative elite of Granada. After years of civil war and American occupation (in which the American William Walker and Nicaraguan Jose Santos Zelaya were major players), the United States left Nicaragua under the control of Anastasio Somoza Garcia, armed with the newly established formed Guardia Nacional.In total, the Somoza family dictatorship ruled in Nicaragua from 1936 until 1979, establishing a dictatorship that repressed political dissension. During that time, the regime grew increasingly wealthy, accepting payments from the United States in return for unbounded/unregulated access to natural resources–ignoring completely the voices of the indigenous peoples who rightfully owned these resources. (During the 1940s and 1950s, for example, the US owned Nicaraguan Long Leaf Pine Company paid the Somoza family millions of dollars, in exchange for certain benefits, such as not having to reforest clear cut areas [3].)

Then, in 1972, a deadly earthquake hit Managua, killing over 10,000 people and leaving hundreds more homeless. As aid flooded the state, citizens began to rebel against the corrupt, extractive nature of the Somoza dictatorship.This resentment led to the birth of the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN), the democratic socialist part of Nicaragua inspired by the legacy of Augusto Cesar Sandino, which garnered support from both Cuba and the Soviet Union. Tensions culminated into a full out civil war in 1978, as the US-backed Somoza regime (together with the National Guard) committed to eradicating the Sandinista guerilla warriors. Meanwhile, Nicaraguans from the Pacific Coast continued to flood the Caribbean Coast, infringing on indigenous land and escalating already heightened tensions.

In July of 1979, the Somoza family escaped to Miami, leaving the FSLN, headed by Daniel Ortega, in charge. Initially, the Carter Administration decided to work with the Sandinistas, sending aid into the state. However, when President Reagan assumed office (and evidence arose that the Sandinistas were using US aid to arm rebels in El Salvador) he halted the provision of aid, instead authorizing CIA support of a rebel force. Dubbed the “contras,” this rebel force worked to oppose the Sandinista government, disrupting social reform projects with extreme brutality. Tired of having the Sandinista agenda imposed upon them (which dictated the “proper” way of living and organizing communities), the indigenous peoples of the Caribbean Coast (primarily the Miskito and Creoles) joined the contras in rebellion.

The Conta War came to a close in the early 1980s, as the rebel forces lost traction in Nicaragua, relinquishing the state to Sandinista control. At the end of the conflict, a total of 30,000 people were left dead, a majority of which came from the Atlantic Coast. Many indigenous peoples, however, refused to give up the fight and continued to rebel against Sandinista control. In an effort to appease the remaining resistance, President Daniel Ortega offered the Atlantic Coast autonomy, passing a Constitutional Amendment.

Today:

In theory, Ortega’s move to establish autonomy for indigenous peoples–recognizing the importance of protecting their distinct cultures–was revolutionary for its time. However, in practice, the Constitutional Amendment was incredibly harmful, as it did little more than validate the government’s effort to financially abandon the region.

From both an economic perspective and an HDCA approach, the autonomous regions are incredibly underdeveloped. They remain “markedly isolated in regards to the rest of the country, due to a historical lag evidenced today in limited social and productive investments, scant transports and communications infrastructure, poor articulation of the regional productive structure, citizen insecurity, low coverage of basic services, and a still fragile institutional framework”  [4]. Illiteracy in the region ranged from 43-55%, three-quarters of the population lives in situations of poverty to extreme poverty, and as much as 80% of an average salary is spent on food.

Indeed, this governmental negligence has moved beyond simple economic hardship; recently, it has allowed for increased violence in the autonomous regions. “Colonists” from the Pacific Coast have begun to seize indigenous land via violent means, going completely unchallenged by the Sandinista government. As one indigenous woman notes:

“They are trying to get us out of here,” said Vina Ernesto Efrain, 44, who saw her nephew gunned down the day a group of heavily armed men showed up in her village. “I haven’t been to my far since, which means they took it from me.” [5]

So what are the “benefits” of autonomy for indigenous peoples?

In reality, the FADCANIC’s conclusion that autonomy was “the means by which an intense period marked by armed conflict, political confrontation, and historical differences came to an end,” is far from the truth. As we can see, the “benefits” of autonomy are few and far between for indigenous peoples; while the Miskito, Mayagna, and Rama peoples may enjoy a semblance of cultural protection, they continue to suffer from both economic disadvantages and violent abuse due to extreme governmental negligence.

To close, I have included an excerpt from the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 2008 Report:

“The Committee expresses its concern at the existence of racial prejudice against indigenous people, especially in the Atlantic Autonomous Regions and in particular against indigenous and Afro-descendant women. The Committee also regrets the many problems affecting indigenous peoples, including serious shortcomings in the health and education services; and the lack of an institutional presence in their territories; and the absence of a consultation process to seek communities’ free, prior and informed consent to the exploitation of natural resources in their territories.” [4]

Final Project Group: Billy K, Matt Z, Julia V

See our PowerPoint Presentation here.

Featured Image: Rosita Nicaragua at Sunrise by Adam Cohn