Once again, Nicaragua finds itself in a nefarious cycle in which advocates of change must depend on external pressure to compensate for an inability of the country to find domestic solutions to its problems of governance. The only piece of good news seems to be that Mr. Ortega’s apparent strength rises from clay feet. As Somoza’s experience demonstrated, in a one-person regime that aspires to be a one-family dictatorship, the inevitable corruption and repression that it cultivates eventually make the regime unsustainable.

At the time of the groundbreaking in December 2014, the Chinese government said it was not involved with the project. This and Mr. Wang’s recent setbacks — he has reportedly lost about 80 percent of his $10 billion fortune — make some experts say the deal is probably dead.

Some question whether the canal would even be commercially viable. Few supertankers and massive container ships now afloat will not be able to pass through the expanded Panama Canal set to open soon. And few ports are big enough to welcome those megaships. In the short term, some experts say, the combination of the Panama and Nicaragua canals would lead to overcapacity and price wars.

That aspect has prompted protests from farmers, some of which have turned violent. Experts say Mr. Wang will have to pay only the assessed value, or about 5 percent of the market value, for any lands he takes. But many farmers would not be entitled to even that. In a country that is short of adequate roads and government offices, many do not have formal title to the fields they have cultivated for generations.

But the plan is much broader than just a canal. Mr. Wang’s vision includes new airports, new ports on both ends of the canal, new lakes in the mountains to make sure the canal has enough water, and new islands in Lake Nicaragua to dispose of excavated sediment and rock. Advertisement Continue reading the main story A 1,100-page study of the project, conducted by the British consulting firm ERM and issued five months ago, reinforced the notion of how much is at stake. It recommended further studies in many areas before going forward and noted that a wide range of mitigation efforts would be needed, like reforestation and job training.Some see hope in those efforts. Jeffrey McCrary, an American fish biologist who lives in Nicaragua and worked on the study, supports the project, saying Mr. Wang’s company will have to provide money to clean up environmental damage already caused by deforestation, poor land management, crop fumigation and general dumping into Lake Nicaragua.

milo Lara, a member of the Nicaragua Canal Commission, a group appointed by the government to oversee the project, said many critics of the project were political opportunists. Mr. Lara said the canal plan had been adjusted to deal with problem issues, like potential earthquakes, tsunamis and environmental concerns. And people who might be displaced by it, he said, could be moved to small cities with new schools and services they never had before.

In the meantime, speculating about the canal has become a national pastime, though polls show that Nicaraguans grow less inclined to believe that it will be built.“We used to talk about it every day,” said Carlos Fernando Chamorro, the editor of Confidencial, an investigative magazine. “Now we only talk about it every two days.”Some still hope it will lift this country out of poverty.But in Brito and the nearby city of Rivas, those who expect to be displaced are angry. Teresa de Jesus Henriquez Delgado, 31, is one of the residents who used a stencil to paint “Go Away Chinese!” on the outside of her house. Advertisement Continue reading the main story “I will resist with all of my strength when the bulldozers come to tear down my house,” she said. “I will fight until I die. I have to for my children. They can’t take this land from my family.”

Large parts of the reserve and remaining tropical forests are inhabited by indigenous groups like the Mayangna (Sumo) and Miskito Indians. These indigenous peoples subsist on the reserve’s natural resources, employing sustainable practices to conserve ecosystems. Farming is based on shifting agriculture, with the land cropped for a year and then allowed to revert to forest. Few families have cattle, although they do keep other animals such as pigs.

The Mayangna and Miskitu attempted to get the government to legally recognize their lands in the 1990s. After this attempt failed, thousands of colonists encroached on the communities’ forests—encroachments that continue to this day. Colonists’ livelihood strategy is very different from the indigenous Indians. They typically keep more cattle, removing forest cover to develop as much pasture as possible. They then sell the “improved” land to the next wave of colonists before moving deeper into the forest.

Indigenous Peoples Are Good Protectors of Forest

A comparison of forest cover loss within and outside of the Mayangna’s recognized territories reveals that their commitment to protect forests has been effective. Deforestation rates are 14 times higher in settler-occupied lands adjacent to the Mayangna territories. The story is not over, of course. Colonists continue to settle in community forests to this day, and government agencies continue to look the other way. But with legal recognition, Indigenous Peoples have more ownership over the forests they call home. By defending their homeland and legally establishing customary ownership of their forests, Nicaragua’s Indigenous Peoples can provide a strong bulwark against deforestation and climate change.

Indigenous communities all over Nicaragua’s Caribbean coast say they are under attack by settlers who have taken over their ancestral lands.

“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 farm since, which means they took it from me.”

One indigenous village was burned to the ground. At least 600 indigenous people have fled to neighboring Honduras, where they live in dirt and squalor, advocates say. The killings of at least 30 Miskitos have been documented; the settlers say at least 80 farmers have also been killed, but have been unable to provide a list of names.During a recent visit to Francia Sirpi, a remote community several hours’ drive from the coast, more than a dozen indigenous men showed off gunshot wounds they had received from attacks while fishing or hunting. One teenager lost a leg. In December, three communities were attacked in a single day, with two men killed. Three others were kidnapped that day and have not been seen since.

The bad blood goes back ages. The Miskitos, unlike other Indian peoples in the Americas, were never conquered by the Spanish. For a long while, the region was a British protectorate. Even now, the Miskitos call the descendants of people who came from Spain hundreds of years ago to colonize the Americas “Spaniards.”

But in practicality, people on both sides of the dispute say the government has allowed the settling and the violence to continue unabated, partly because several of the indigenous leaders implicated in the illegal land sales are Sandinista government officials.

The government formed a special commission under the prosecutor general’s office to tackle the issue. The prosecutor general, Hernán Estrada, referred questions about the matter to the Foreign Ministry, which did not respond to requests for comment. The National Police also did not respond.

Ms. Cunningham said the tension between Miskitos and the Sandinistas dates back to the early 1980s, when the Sandinistas, fresh from their revolutionary victory, ran the Miskitos out of their homes and burned down villages in a mass displacement.

The Nicaraguan Government has failed to properly consult Indigenous communities regarding the canal’s construction.

The Nicaraguan Constitution of 1987 recognizes the Indigenous cultures that reside on the land and their right to maintain their languages and cultures. Two additional laws, 28 and 445, grant autonomy and “the use, administration and management of traditional lands and their natural resources” to Indigenous people. Additionally, Nicaragua signed on to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People in 2008 and ratified ILO Convention 169 in 2010, a legally bind- ing document guaranteeing prior consultation before such projects.

The government is reportedly anticipating that 7,000 homes may be expropriated to make way for the 278-kilometer canal. However, an independent report by the Centro Humboldt states that the impact will be much greater. The report found that 282 settlements and 24,100 homes were identified within the direct area of influence, estimating that the number of people anticipated to be directly affected by construction at over 119,000. The canal’s construction will not only bring the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people, but also irreversible environmental damage. The loss of Indigenous communities will be accompanied by the loss of some of Nicaragua’s most precious and rich resources: its ecologically diverse lands and waters.

Meanwhile, the social impact assessment conducted by the Nicaraguan government, if being conducted at all, has lacked any transparency. While quick to boast the economic impact of the canal, officials have blatantly disregarded the needs and fears of community members from coast to coast. A coalition of 11 groups including affected In- digenous communities and environmental and legal organiza- tions submitted a petition to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights criticizing the rights violations inherent in the Canal Law.