UNO … . What happened to autonomy? Politics and ethnicity on Nicaragua's Atlantic Coast

Current debates surrounding the ethnic mobilization of indigenous groups are explored with reference to Nicaragua's Atlantic Coast region. The Autonomy Project, promoted under the revolutionary government of the 1980s, inspired new forms of regional multi‐ethnic forms of mobilization and, in so doing, eschewed nationalistic claims associated with the resurgence of ethnicity elsewhere. The fate of the principle of ethnic autonomy is subsequently examined in the wake of the defeat of the Sandinistas in the elections held in 1990. Evidence suggests that domestic political conditions as well as international political and economic pressure have been crucial in undermining the autonomy process. This, in turn, has had important consequences for ethnic identity formation in the region, since a combination of pressure from international agencies, the United States government and multinational companies in conjunction with the UNO alliance have undermined educational and employment as well as political initiatives built around old and new ethnic groupings. Examples of bilingualism and initiatives to control and protect the region's resources are shown to have suffered directly as a result of the increased activity of multinationals, the privatization programmes of the Chomorro government and efforts to bypass local political structures. A local radio station, which also played a role in promoting multi‐ethnicity in the region, was similarly under threat. In conclusion, and drawing on wider debates, it is argued that Nicaragua's Atlantic Coast provides an important example of the interpenetration of local and global pressures in the development of ethnic politics. The analysis of changes on the Atlantic Coast during the period of the revolution and after the defeat of the Sandinistas in 1990 allows us to assess their impact on changing forms of cultural and ethnic identity in the region. The article argues that the scope for ethnic autonomy, including new and empowering forms of regional multi‐ethnic identity, is seen to be profoundly contingent on political circumstances which themselves cannot be considered independently of wider international and economic conditions.