By Gumaa Guddaa
Identity
Identity has a strong connection with individual sense of self. In psychology, the self is often used for the set of attribute that a person attaches to himself or herself most firmly, the attributes that a person finds it difficult or impossible to imagine himself or herself without. One’s nationality is a prime example of one’s identity. The primacy or importance of national identity is another quality that affects its contribution to the perception of the self.
Developing a sense of self is an essential part of every individual becoming a mature person. Each person's self-conception is also collective - identities extend to countries and ethnic communities, so that people feel injured when other persons sharing their identity are injured or killed. Sometimes people are even willing to sacrifice their individual lives to preserve their identity group(s). Palestinian suicide bombers are a well-publicized example. People who share the same collective identity think of themselves as having common interest and fate.
In the case of subjugated people, identity political formations typically aim to secure the political freedom of a specific constituency marginalized within its larger context rather than organizing solely around belief systems, programmatic manifestoes, or party affiliation. Members of that constituency assert or reclaim ways of understanding their distinctiveness that challenge dominant oppressive characterizations, with the goal of greater self-determination.
This essay examines Oromo identity politics in the context of the recent discourse by some suggesting that the Oromo need to make a paradigm shift vis-à-vis Oromia and Ethiopia.
Oromo National Identity
Before answering whether Oromo people can be Ethiopian it is necessary to examine the difference between being Oromo and being Ethiopian in the first instance. Oromo national identity refers to the identity of the Oromo people, the representation of their country Oromia as a whole, encompassing its culture, traditions, language, and politics contrary to the Ethiopian discourse that tends to present Oromo national identity as part of the multiple identities that the Oromo people enjoy with the greater Ethiopian identity.
The Ethiopian identity on the other hand means different things depending on if you are Abyssinian or not. For an Abyssinian the term Ethiopian means the same. For the rest, however, Ethiopian is filled with ambiguity and dissonance. This confusion emanates not only from difference in cultural and ethnic identity but also from politics. The political history of Ethiopia for the non-Abyssinians is nothing but exploitation, subjugation and cultural genocide. The current Ethiopian regime has raised the stake further from cultural genocide to real genocide that one Oromo social scientist dubbed it as ‘the final solution’.
Since no one has ever suggested that the so called Ethiopianess is biological, one has to look for its evidence in the spheres of political identity. Unfortunately, so far the political system in Ethiopia has not been one of inclusion. Simply put, the system the Abyssinians and their foreign supporters created is an extremely repressive regime. Ethiopia is a prison house if you happen to be non-Abyssinian. It would be impossible for anyone to develop affinity to this type of identity let alone loyalty and allegiance, except through dehumanization and self-denial, both very unhealthy for the people that tender the identity and the receiver.
Ethiopian is not a national identity. Ethiopia is a state, the worst man kind has ever seen. Ethiopia as a political entity is a forced marriage. If one allowed freedom, Ethiopia will cease to exist immediately. The same thing that happened in former Yugoslavia will manifest itself. Oromia will definitely be a fully independent country. Ogandenians might merge with Somalia. Abyssinia will revert back to its former size in the north. Others in the south will either merge with Oromia, Abyssinia or declare independence. This outcome would be so natural and offer the best chance for lasting peace and development.
Some allege that the Oromo people have no noticeable national identity that set them apart from Abyssinians as they have intermixed with others through intermarriages and culturally influenced each other. Let us examine the demerit of such a claim.
Findings from population genetic studies conform to data from linguistic, cultural and social history of distinct Oromo national identity. Population genetic studies show no evidence of significant intermarriage between Oromo and Amhara or primordial closeness at all. The Oromo are homogenous as a genetic group. The Oromo are genetically much more close to other Cushitic, including Afar, Agaw and Somali. The Oromo and Abyssinians are genetically distinct. They occupy distinct geographical areas of Oromia and Abyssinia respectively.
The Oromo people have a distinct national cultural identity of well established democratic system known as Gada. The Abyssinians who dominate the Ethiopian political system have never known democracy in their entire history, and they do not seem to be receptive to the idea of free and democratic society either. The Oromo use force as a last resort, whereas the Abyssinians are warlike.
For an Oromo to assume Abyssinian identity would not only mean a total change of identity so different that will be unrecognizable but simply unachievable. Those who advocate Ethiopianess to the Oromo are swimming against the tide. Moreover, today the Oromos are forcibly evicted from their ancestral land and their land is being given away to foreigners and the proceeds line up the Tigre ruling class pockets; millions of Oromos are dying of manmade famine – a green famine created to reduce the number of Oromos. It is under these circumstances that some are suggesting a paradigm shift from Oromia to Ethiopia in the guise of multiethnic democracy. In any case, what is multiethnic democracy? I am afraid no one can tell you what the model would look like.
The sense of national identity has already reached the national collective consciousness of the Oromo. A paradigm shift seems to be at least two decades behind the curve. The idea of struggle for independence has passed the point of no return for the Oromo. The Oromo society has changed beyond recognition. Children born in Oromia over the last two decades have grown up knowing very little about Ethiopia. Paradigm shift makes no sense to them. Charles Taylor argues that the modern identity is characterized by an emphasis on its inner voice and capacity for authenticity — that is, the ability to find a way of being that is somehow true to oneself (Taylor in Gutmann, ed. 1994).
As Sonia Kruks also puts it:
What makes identity politics a significant departure from earlier, pre-identarian forms of the politics of recognition is its demand for recognition on the basis of the very grounds on which recognition has previously been denied that groups demand recognition. The demand is not for inclusion within the fold of “universal humankind” on the basis of shared human attributes; nor is it for respect “in spite of” one's differences. Rather, what is demanded is respect for oneself as different (2001, 85).
Likewise the Oromo national question is not a request for respect for recognition as equal partner or acquiring Ethiopian identity but demand for liberation of Oromia. There are some who either pretend they do not understand the aim of Oromo national movement or attempt to misrepresent it as a demand for democratic governance.
Adversarial Identities
Certain conflict's intractability depends upon the identities of the adversary. Identities can mesh with each other in ways that are more or less destructive. Two groups with ethno-nationalist identities and with attachment to some of the same land are prone to engage in an intractable conflict. Moreover, a group with an ethno-nationalist identity and even a high sense of superiority may attempt to eliminate the other. The recent example of the tragic genocide attempt by the Hutu against the Tutsi in Rwanda is a grime reminder of what can happen. The Ethiopian Empire sits on a volcano. The eruption, when it happens, will certainly dwarf the Rwandan conflict. The author strongly believes that these conflicts are avoidable by allowing separation of adversarial identities. The Oromo and Ethiopian identities are adversarial and I have not come across, yet, any sociologist who argues otherwise. Hence, it is in the best interest of all concerned to disentangle the two mutually exclusive adversarial identities of Oromia and Ethiopia.
Above all, over the past four decades the Oromo nation, as a whole, has and is paying a heavy sacrifice in terms of human life in the fight for liberation. Thousands of freedom fighters have lost their lives, fighting against Hailesillase, Mengistu and Meles. Thousands more have been subjected to exile and destitution. Moreover, as we speak, Oromia is bleeding in terms of economic exploitation, eviction from land, underdevelopment, epidemic diseases and famine.
Meles Zenawi, in particular, is conducting genocide against the Oromo through systematic destruction of the livelihood of Oromos. He has reduced the entire Oromo country to hell on Earth perpetuating untold repression, killings and exploitation of the natural resource of the Oromo. It would appear that he has a sinister plan in mind.
Furthermore, the Oromo insist on using their own language but successive Ethiopian regimes insist that Amharic, the language of the minority, be the official language. Abyssinian heroes such as Tewodros, Yohanis, Menelik, Halesellasie, Mengistu, Zenawi etc are viewed as criminal mass murders by the Oromo since that is exactly what these warlords did to the Oromo. Qubee is anathema to Ge’ez for the Abyssinians, albeit they have started using it widely learning from the Oromo. The Ethiopian flag is seen not only as a national symbol but a religious icon for an Abyssinian but is a nasty reminder of Abyssinian chauvinism to the Oromo. The OLF is a symbol of, freedom, emancipation, unity and revered as an ideology by the Oromo; whereas it is a threat to an Abyssinian ideology.
The fallacy of the so called multi-ethnic democracy in Ethiopia is epitomized by the only African female political party leader in prison, Birtukan Midhegsa. She has sadly no public sympathy let alone followers. She is seen as an Oromo and attract nominal support from the ‘multi-nationalists’ and at the same time wholly forsaken by the 40 million strong Oromos for not leading an independent Oromo movement. Imagine if she went to prison for being one of the OLF leaders. She would have been our Aung San Suu Kyi. Her apparently ignored immense sacrifice remains a stark warning for the advocates of multi-ethnic democracy as a remedy for the Ethiopian empire.
Several books have been written on the differences between the Oromo and the Abyssinian nationalism but I have not seen any book or article on the similarities or common interest between them in favour of forging closer ties. It is preposterous to suggest a paradigm shift without exploring a common denominator between the two peoples. It is a suggestion that someone’s national identity is dispensable. In any case, it would be cost effective for the minority to make the shift rather than the majority. Why do they think that the majority has to conform? One would ask why not the Abyssinians adopting Oromo identity, if it is democracy. The unification between Oromo and the Abyssinians would only benefit the latter and it is logical for them to change in search of that advantage. Not the other way round. I challenge those who suggest a paradigm shift to come up with a single potential benefit for the Oromo nation from the marriage they recommend.
Whether and how identities contribute to intractable conflicts depends on their particular qualities. Of course, identities can and do change in ways that may help prevent, limit, and end intractable conflicts. These changes are brought about by the way the adversaries interact, and by the conduct of persons and groups who intervene or otherwise affect the primary adversaries. However, I have not seen any meaningful change of attitude within the Abyssinian culture that might suggest they can make a shift of any kind any time soon. They continue to cold-bloodedly attempt to destroy the Oromo identity, livelihood and existence. I do not sense change of heart from their allies, so far, in making the necessary intervention to stop the conflict either.
Harsh Political Treatment
The proponents of the notion that the Oromo must abandon their quest for an independent homeland of their own tend to evoke the example of the closer economic union in Europe. They tend to tell us that in the era of unity we should not move apart. The reality that their rhetoric seems to have conveniently ignored is the political reality on the ground that works against nurturing friendship and trust. Ethiopia is the most repressive regime in the entire universe. The reality is that the Oromo, due to the paranoia of the Abyssinian elite, are treated as potential threats. The current Ethiopian regime is ruling Oromia by means of state terrorism, no different from its predecessors. Oromia is an occupied territory and the people are demanding independence. According the International Crisis Group report the Zenawi regime has deployed 1 million spies in the state of Oromia alone to suffocate and terrorize the Oromo people (Africa Report No. 153; September 2009).
The current Ethiopian regime is busy passing death penalties and life long imprisonment against the Oromo almost exclusively. These innocent Oromo people suffer for no other reason than being Oromo – their identity. Arbitrary detentions, killings, rape and torture are common place. The majority of prisoners in the hell on earth Ethiopian prisons and jail houses speak ‘Afaan Oromoo’ as attested to by even some Abyssinians. You could say Oromia itself has become and open air prison. The Oromia Support Group (OSG), a UK based human rights group, has compiled credible reports of 4,185 extra-judicial killings and 944 reports of disappearance, since 1994 (http://oromo.org). The systematic attempt by the Tigrean dominated regime to reduce the number of the Oromo can only be correctly characterized as genocide (HERE). This is a product of adversarial identity politics in its naked form.
Now, those who call for a paradigm shift from Oromia to Ethiopia fail to acknowledge the fundamental reality on the ground of lack of favourable political environment that may foster any shift towards unification rather than polarization. History teaches us those who try to appease evil will only strengthen the hands of the evil. The proponents of the so called paradigm shift seem to think that they might save life by abandoning Oromoness. They need urgent critical appraisal of the premises of their change of heart. In the meanwhile, the rest of us should continue building the Oromo nation.
Conclusion
Identities can greatly contribute to conflict intractability. The history of conflict between Oromia and Ethiopia dates back to the 11th century. How adversaries think about who they are and who and what their enemies are profoundly influences the course of any conflict between them. The way the Oromos and the Abyssinians think of each other has irreparably changed and being maintained to date, by the support from the world powers to the Abyssinians since the end of the nineteenth century. Their sense of identity and conceptions of each other contribute to their conflict's destructive quality as well as to its long duration.
I do not think the conflict between Oromia and Ethiopia ends by paradigm shift by the Oromo. The author argues that the conflict is likely to have a lasting solution if the paradigm shift was made by the Ethiopians to stop claiming that the Oromo are Ethiopians and let them go. Those who call for the Oromo to convert to Ethiopia are not only condoning our loss of freedom but invite us to even loose our national identity and it must be resisted by Oromos by any means necessary. What saddens me most is that some of our own have jumped on the bandwagon of multi-ethnic democracy without bothering to clarify what it means, not to mention a well thought out strategic vision to achieve it. Clichés such as paradigm shift are barrier to clear thinking. Forget multi-ethnic democracy – as an Oromo, its survival against genocide that one must worry about.
Have your say!
Friday, August 20, 2010
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Dictator Zenawi's Ethiopia Ranked the 2nd Poorest Country in the World
| A new measure to evaluate poverty around the world |
BEIRUT - The U.N. has decided to switch from the Human Poverty Index they have been using for 13 years in their yearly Human Development Report to a new index developed by Oxford University. It is called the Multidimensional Poverty Index - or MPI.The former index, the Human Poverty Index is based on three factors: life expectancy, literacy, and standard of living.
The new index, the MPI takes this data into account, but also uses new measures « reflecting a range of deprivations that affect a person's life," including whether a household has decent toilets, clean drinking water reachable within less than 30 minutes on foot, electricity, proportions of school-aged children enrolled in schooling, and whether any member of a household is malnourished, say researchers from the Oxford University.
According to these standards, a household is considered « multidimensionally poor » if it's deprived of more than 30% of the ten indicators used by the MPI.
According to the MPI of the 25 poorest countries researchers surveyed, 24 are located in Africa. The ten poorest countries in the world are the
following:
1. Nigeria
2. Ethiopia
3. Mali
4. Burkina Faso
5. Burundi
6. Somalia
7. The Central African Republic
8. Liberia
9. Guinea
10. Sierra Leone.
Friday, August 6, 2010
The Suggested All-Inclusive-Alliance: Can it be Different and make a Difference? Fayyis Oromia
The Suggested All-Inclusive-Alliance: Can it be Different and make a Difference?
In the liberation struggle against the oppressive Abyssinian empire system, we passed through different phases and we did form till now different alliances against the tyrant rulers. The struggle was almost always done by two ideologically opposite political camps, i.e by the unionist liberators, who want to liberate oppressed nations in the empire and build where possible a union of autonomous nations and by the unitarist patriots, who do disregard the autonomy of nations but want to liberate individual citizens from any sort of oppression. In other words it was the struggle by those emphasizing group (national) liberty and by those stressing individual (citizens') freedom. Despite their similarity in socialist ideology, one of the major differences between Me'ison and Ihapa was their tendency towards being a unionist and a unitarist respectively. Me'ison being dominated and led by Oromo intellectuals was for self-determination of nations in a sense of having their own national autonomy within Ethiopian union, whereas Ihapa being dominated and led by Tigrean intellectuals was for self-determination of nations in a sense of excercising their culture within a unitary Ethiopia without national autonomy.
In a further political process, both Me'ison and Ihapa being brutally beaten by Derg opted to join their kins in OLF and TPLF respectively. Now Ihapa with its unitarist view took power in a form of TPLF and the unionist Me'ison in a form of OLF is still the challenging main opposition/rebel group against this Ihapa dominated regime. Simply put, the struggle between the unionist Me'ison and the unitarist Ihapa is still going on indirectly. After coming to power, the unitarist TPLF was compelled to accept and respect certain elements of the unionist OLF, so that it signed the 1991 charter, which formally accepted the right of all nations and nationalities in the empire to have their own self-rule (autonomy) within Ethiopia. But in practice Weyane chose to implement more unitarist elements of its own, neglecting that of the unionists. That is why Ethiopia is today de jure a union, but de facto a unitary state. Leaving the pre-1974-revolution history for the academicians/historians and just looking at the alliances forged by the polity in the empire since the revolution, we can notice the rise and fall of the following ten alliances:
- IMALEDIH: after the inability of Me'ison and Ihapa to forge an alliance against the military dictator, the first attempt of building the alliance was between the legally operating unionists at that time (Me'ison and Ici'at) with the contemporary unitarist forces (Seded, Wez-lig and Malerid). Later the two unionists were pushed out of the alliance and persecuted by the unitarists who had power, so that the two unionists left the alliance. Soon after they left the alliance, the two unionists were considered illegal, which was followed by the persecution of their activists who lastly joined OLF in a battle field against Derg.
- IHADEG: was the assymetrical alliance between the powerful TPLF and its subordinates (EPDM, later called ANDM and OPDO, being followed by the formation of SEPDM). Simply put this alliance of the four unequal parties is a mask for TPLF in order to get a legitimacy to rule over Ethiopia, instead of only "liberating" Tigrai. As long as Weyanes are in power, the other three PDOs will serve them as slaves. By the way, TPLF has never been a liberation front, but an economic front which tried to overcome the economical crisis in Tigrai and now it achieved to control almost all sectors in the empire and to help Tigrai be free from destitute life.
- COEDF: was an alliance formed in April 1991, at a meeting held in Washington, by the unitarist Ihapa, the unionist Me'ison and other two parties including some civic groups, human rights and community organizations and associations. This alliance couldn't take part in fostering the charter of the transitional Ethiopian government in 1991. It then lost its importance and was then disband and dismantled.
- CAFPDE: was an alliance set up in the aftermath of the opposition conference held in Finfinne in December 1993. The conference was headed by the unionist president of the unionist Hadiya National Democratic Organization and the alliance included the unitarist parties like the EDU. This alliance failed mainly for it didn't include major unionists from the Oromo nation.
- ULFO: was an exclusive alliance of only the Oromo unionist liberators in order to forge a strong Oromo liberation force against the fascist and hegemonist de facto unitarist Weyane regime, which still denys the true autonomy/self-rule of nations and nationalities in the empire. This alliance didn't dare to approach the unitarists and the current merger form of the alliance still abhor any sort of alliance with unitarists. That is why Weyane cadres nowadays poise as if they support ULFO (as if they prefer Oromian independence) and curse Amhara unitarists just to hinder a possible alliance of Oromo unionists with Amhara unitarist against their hegemonist regime.
- UEDF: an alliance composed of both unionists and unitarists, but excluded the main unionist liberation forces like OLF and ONLF, so that it was ineffective and couldn't live long. It was also weakened for the two major unitarist parties (AEUP and EDP) left the alliance within few months after its formation.
- CUD: an alliance of only the die-hard unitarist forces, who tried their best to reverse the move of nations and nationalities towards a genuine autonomy in a form of a true killil-federation. One of the reasons for the demise of UEDF was that the two main unitarist parties left the alliance with the contemporary unionists and formed their own alliance of pure unitarists in the form of CUD. But this move at last lead to the demise of CUD itself, because of the opposition it faced from almost all unionists in the empire.
- AFD: the first alliance, which included the seemingly diametrically opposite major unionist forces like OLF and main unitarist forces like CUD. It was the hitherto best alliance which made Weyane to tremble for the first time. That is why it was not surprising when we did observe that Weyane cadres made a campaign against AFD being camouflaged as the unitarist Amhara cursing the unionist Oromo, and vice versa, so that AFD couldn't survive this polarizing action.
- MEDREK: the still existing, but not yet effective alliance, which seems to be a continuation of the AFD in a legal form, also included the unionists like OFC and the unitarists like UDJ. Here also Weyane is trying to polarize the Oromo unionists against the Amhara unitarists. We will see how far this alliance can survive this divide and rule machination of the fascist regime. The current move of this alliance towards forming a front, instead of continuing as only a coaltion needs a meticulous scrutiny. Is it a front towards being a pure unionist or a pure unitarist? Time will tell. At least the rhetoric we heard during the conference this alliance had with its supporters in Washington DC before the 2010 election suggests that it is moving towards being pure unitarist. I hope OFC and other unionists have registered that rhetoric from some of the leaders. Otherwise the recent call made by this alliance for the preparation of the upcoming future "election" under Weyane is like "ye moony zefen/leqsoo melliso melaalso". This fixation on only election as a method of struggle is a program for the quick death of this alliance.
- TIBIBIR: the suggested future all-inclusive AFD-like alliance of both the unionists like OLF and the unitarists like G-7, who are now moving underground in the empire and who are active as rebels in battle field as well as in exile. In the last few weeks, we surprisingly did read different articles and heard in different media certain opinions which are trying to polarize the Oromo unionists and the Amhara unitarists. Weyane cadres are again busy acting like Amhara unitarist patriots and cry for unitary Ethiopia in order to curse Oromo unionists. On the vice versa they are hyperactive to camouflage as Oromo unionist liberators and sing about Oromian independence without a possibility for Ethiopian union to insult Amhara unitarists. Their main mission is to hinder any sort of a strong AFD-like alliance against their own fascist regime.
The question yet to be answered is: can both the camp of the unionist liberators and the camp of the unitarist patriots overcome this dividing move of Weyane and forge an all-inclusive-alliance? I think, it would be better if both camps first consolidate their respective bloc by building a coalition of unitarists as CUD was and by forging a unity of unionists like ULFO was, but including the unionists of other oppressed nations like ONLF. Then secondarily the two blocs can have an effective alliance against the fascists. What is necessary here is that the democratic unitarists need to distance themselves from the colonial position of both the Amhara dictators (who want to bring back the French style of colonization, i.e assimilation of the subjugated nations into being Amharinya speakers) and the Tigrai hegemonists (who want to keep their British type of colonization, allowing subjugated nations to dance their culture and use their language at lower level, but compell them live further under the domination of Tigrean elites).
At the time the democratic unitarist patriots like G-7 distance themselves from the past oriented nostalgic colonialist Amhara dictators and join the future oriented unionist liberators and start to fight against the myopic (only present oriented) fascist Tigrai regime, both camps of the opposition are not far from forging a common ground for the necessary stable alliance. With such stable alliance it is possible to resist the attempt of Weyane in using controversial personalities like obbo Leencoo and Professor Megalomatis, controversial issues like the right of nations up to secession and controversial topics like the right on the usage of Nile water in order to polarize the oposition camps of the democratic unionists and the democratic unitarists. The hitehrto and the current cry of Weyane cadres in paltalks and websites accusiong unionists as goosenya and cursing unitarists as nefxenya will then be a futile excercise. The common ground can only be to agree on the two-phase struggle against the Weyane: the liberation phase and the democratization phase.
Liberation from fascisim and tyranny is with no doubt a common ground for both unionists and unitarists, then establishing democratic institutions, promoting democratization process and living according to the public verdict are what the democrats in both the unionist liberators' camp and the unitarist patriots' camp should accept and respect. The future common political community in the region/empire will be at least a union of autonomous nations and at best a union of independent nations in the Ethiopian/Kas/the Horn/Kush/the Oromian Union. This suggests that they all should try to struggle for both the national autonomy of each nationality and the regional union to keep the territorial integrity of the Horn, despite the move of the unitarists against any sort of national autonomy. Coming to such agreement by the two opposition/rebel camps means taking away the worst instrument of Weyane, i.e taking away its notorious divide and rule method.
After agreeing on the common purpose or common ground, then taking appropriate route to the goal is what the new all-inclusive-allinace needs to have. I think "election" under Weyane is a road with dead end. Preaching about only non-violent methods and moralizing/cursing any sort of cooperation with Eritrea for example are not expected from the genuine opposition/rebel groups, but they are part and parcel of the "good" rhetorics from the Weyane cadres camouflaged as unitarist or unionist opposition. I personlly believe that a coordinated civil disobedinece, armed struggle and public uprising is the best route. It is only if the two oppositio/rebel camps have such a common purpose and a common route that the suggested all-inclusive-alliance can be different and can make a difference.
For all partakers of the alliance to accept the future public verdict during the democratization phase, they must be now bold enough to take risk of losing to their opponent in a true democratic way during the public decision. Only this boldness towards such risk can help the seemingly diametrically opposite democratic unionist liberators and democratic unitarist patriots to forge an alliance against the fascists. Particularly the democratic unitarists who tend to disregard the right of nations to self-determination should come to their sense and face the fact that without liberation or self-determination of the Oromo people from the hitherto domination, the realization of peace and prosperity they are longing for will never happen. Also they should by now have registered that any alliance of only the unitarists, excluding the major unionist forces like OLF, will never lead them to victory over the fascist regime.
On the other hand, unionist forces in general and Oromo unionist liberators in particular should be able to broaden their view and struggle for the liberation of all nations and nationalities in the region/empire from any sort of domination. Such view includes liberation of the two Habesha nations, despite the domination/colonization of other nations by their elites. Such move from the unionists will help the democratic unitarists (let's forget the dictatorial die-hard unitarists) to move towards forging the very necessary all-inclusive alliance. This is the only mechanism to help the apparently impossible alliance between the seemingly diametrically opposite unionists and unitarists be possible.
That is why I dare to say that the suggested all-inclusive-alliance based on such matured understanding from both the democratic unionists and the democratic unitarists will be different and will make a difference. So specially the Amhara democratic unitarist patriots and the Oromo democratic unionist liberators should try to help the impossible be possible and forge the all-inclusive-alliance to get rid of the Tigrean fascists, otherwise we should be ready to be ruled for the coming at least one century and see our Amharaland and Oromoland being sold by Tigrean hegemonists to foreign capitalists, so that we the two BIG nations will live under slavery and leave this slavery further to our coming generation. I hope we do have a reasonable mind to choose the first option of alliance against the fascists, which can lead us to liberation, not the second option of our subjugation for a century. To move in the direction of liberation together, let Waaqayyoo/Igzi'abiher give us knowledge, understanding and wisdom to help the suggested all-inclusive-alliance be different and make a difference!
Galatooma.
In the liberation struggle against the oppressive Abyssinian empire system, we passed through different phases and we did form till now different alliances against the tyrant rulers. The struggle was almost always done by two ideologically opposite political camps, i.e by the unionist liberators, who want to liberate oppressed nations in the empire and build where possible a union of autonomous nations and by the unitarist patriots, who do disregard the autonomy of nations but want to liberate individual citizens from any sort of oppression. In other words it was the struggle by those emphasizing group (national) liberty and by those stressing individual (citizens') freedom. Despite their similarity in socialist ideology, one of the major differences between Me'ison and Ihapa was their tendency towards being a unionist and a unitarist respectively. Me'ison being dominated and led by Oromo intellectuals was for self-determination of nations in a sense of having their own national autonomy within Ethiopian union, whereas Ihapa being dominated and led by Tigrean intellectuals was for self-determination of nations in a sense of excercising their culture within a unitary Ethiopia without national autonomy.
In a further political process, both Me'ison and Ihapa being brutally beaten by Derg opted to join their kins in OLF and TPLF respectively. Now Ihapa with its unitarist view took power in a form of TPLF and the unionist Me'ison in a form of OLF is still the challenging main opposition/rebel group against this Ihapa dominated regime. Simply put, the struggle between the unionist Me'ison and the unitarist Ihapa is still going on indirectly. After coming to power, the unitarist TPLF was compelled to accept and respect certain elements of the unionist OLF, so that it signed the 1991 charter, which formally accepted the right of all nations and nationalities in the empire to have their own self-rule (autonomy) within Ethiopia. But in practice Weyane chose to implement more unitarist elements of its own, neglecting that of the unionists. That is why Ethiopia is today de jure a union, but de facto a unitary state. Leaving the pre-1974-revolution history for the academicians/historians and just looking at the alliances forged by the polity in the empire since the revolution, we can notice the rise and fall of the following ten alliances:
- IMALEDIH: after the inability of Me'ison and Ihapa to forge an alliance against the military dictator, the first attempt of building the alliance was between the legally operating unionists at that time (Me'ison and Ici'at) with the contemporary unitarist forces (Seded, Wez-lig and Malerid). Later the two unionists were pushed out of the alliance and persecuted by the unitarists who had power, so that the two unionists left the alliance. Soon after they left the alliance, the two unionists were considered illegal, which was followed by the persecution of their activists who lastly joined OLF in a battle field against Derg.
- IHADEG: was the assymetrical alliance between the powerful TPLF and its subordinates (EPDM, later called ANDM and OPDO, being followed by the formation of SEPDM). Simply put this alliance of the four unequal parties is a mask for TPLF in order to get a legitimacy to rule over Ethiopia, instead of only "liberating" Tigrai. As long as Weyanes are in power, the other three PDOs will serve them as slaves. By the way, TPLF has never been a liberation front, but an economic front which tried to overcome the economical crisis in Tigrai and now it achieved to control almost all sectors in the empire and to help Tigrai be free from destitute life.
- COEDF: was an alliance formed in April 1991, at a meeting held in Washington, by the unitarist Ihapa, the unionist Me'ison and other two parties including some civic groups, human rights and community organizations and associations. This alliance couldn't take part in fostering the charter of the transitional Ethiopian government in 1991. It then lost its importance and was then disband and dismantled.
- CAFPDE: was an alliance set up in the aftermath of the opposition conference held in Finfinne in December 1993. The conference was headed by the unionist president of the unionist Hadiya National Democratic Organization and the alliance included the unitarist parties like the EDU. This alliance failed mainly for it didn't include major unionists from the Oromo nation.
- ULFO: was an exclusive alliance of only the Oromo unionist liberators in order to forge a strong Oromo liberation force against the fascist and hegemonist de facto unitarist Weyane regime, which still denys the true autonomy/self-rule of nations and nationalities in the empire. This alliance didn't dare to approach the unitarists and the current merger form of the alliance still abhor any sort of alliance with unitarists. That is why Weyane cadres nowadays poise as if they support ULFO (as if they prefer Oromian independence) and curse Amhara unitarists just to hinder a possible alliance of Oromo unionists with Amhara unitarist against their hegemonist regime.
- UEDF: an alliance composed of both unionists and unitarists, but excluded the main unionist liberation forces like OLF and ONLF, so that it was ineffective and couldn't live long. It was also weakened for the two major unitarist parties (AEUP and EDP) left the alliance within few months after its formation.
- CUD: an alliance of only the die-hard unitarist forces, who tried their best to reverse the move of nations and nationalities towards a genuine autonomy in a form of a true killil-federation. One of the reasons for the demise of UEDF was that the two main unitarist parties left the alliance with the contemporary unionists and formed their own alliance of pure unitarists in the form of CUD. But this move at last lead to the demise of CUD itself, because of the opposition it faced from almost all unionists in the empire.
- AFD: the first alliance, which included the seemingly diametrically opposite major unionist forces like OLF and main unitarist forces like CUD. It was the hitherto best alliance which made Weyane to tremble for the first time. That is why it was not surprising when we did observe that Weyane cadres made a campaign against AFD being camouflaged as the unitarist Amhara cursing the unionist Oromo, and vice versa, so that AFD couldn't survive this polarizing action.
- MEDREK: the still existing, but not yet effective alliance, which seems to be a continuation of the AFD in a legal form, also included the unionists like OFC and the unitarists like UDJ. Here also Weyane is trying to polarize the Oromo unionists against the Amhara unitarists. We will see how far this alliance can survive this divide and rule machination of the fascist regime. The current move of this alliance towards forming a front, instead of continuing as only a coaltion needs a meticulous scrutiny. Is it a front towards being a pure unionist or a pure unitarist? Time will tell. At least the rhetoric we heard during the conference this alliance had with its supporters in Washington DC before the 2010 election suggests that it is moving towards being pure unitarist. I hope OFC and other unionists have registered that rhetoric from some of the leaders. Otherwise the recent call made by this alliance for the preparation of the upcoming future "election" under Weyane is like "ye moony zefen/leqsoo melliso melaalso". This fixation on only election as a method of struggle is a program for the quick death of this alliance.
- TIBIBIR: the suggested future all-inclusive AFD-like alliance of both the unionists like OLF and the unitarists like G-7, who are now moving underground in the empire and who are active as rebels in battle field as well as in exile. In the last few weeks, we surprisingly did read different articles and heard in different media certain opinions which are trying to polarize the Oromo unionists and the Amhara unitarists. Weyane cadres are again busy acting like Amhara unitarist patriots and cry for unitary Ethiopia in order to curse Oromo unionists. On the vice versa they are hyperactive to camouflage as Oromo unionist liberators and sing about Oromian independence without a possibility for Ethiopian union to insult Amhara unitarists. Their main mission is to hinder any sort of a strong AFD-like alliance against their own fascist regime.
The question yet to be answered is: can both the camp of the unionist liberators and the camp of the unitarist patriots overcome this dividing move of Weyane and forge an all-inclusive-alliance? I think, it would be better if both camps first consolidate their respective bloc by building a coalition of unitarists as CUD was and by forging a unity of unionists like ULFO was, but including the unionists of other oppressed nations like ONLF. Then secondarily the two blocs can have an effective alliance against the fascists. What is necessary here is that the democratic unitarists need to distance themselves from the colonial position of both the Amhara dictators (who want to bring back the French style of colonization, i.e assimilation of the subjugated nations into being Amharinya speakers) and the Tigrai hegemonists (who want to keep their British type of colonization, allowing subjugated nations to dance their culture and use their language at lower level, but compell them live further under the domination of Tigrean elites).
At the time the democratic unitarist patriots like G-7 distance themselves from the past oriented nostalgic colonialist Amhara dictators and join the future oriented unionist liberators and start to fight against the myopic (only present oriented) fascist Tigrai regime, both camps of the opposition are not far from forging a common ground for the necessary stable alliance. With such stable alliance it is possible to resist the attempt of Weyane in using controversial personalities like obbo Leencoo and Professor Megalomatis, controversial issues like the right of nations up to secession and controversial topics like the right on the usage of Nile water in order to polarize the oposition camps of the democratic unionists and the democratic unitarists. The hitehrto and the current cry of Weyane cadres in paltalks and websites accusiong unionists as goosenya and cursing unitarists as nefxenya will then be a futile excercise. The common ground can only be to agree on the two-phase struggle against the Weyane: the liberation phase and the democratization phase.
Liberation from fascisim and tyranny is with no doubt a common ground for both unionists and unitarists, then establishing democratic institutions, promoting democratization process and living according to the public verdict are what the democrats in both the unionist liberators' camp and the unitarist patriots' camp should accept and respect. The future common political community in the region/empire will be at least a union of autonomous nations and at best a union of independent nations in the Ethiopian/Kas/the Horn/Kush/the Oromian Union. This suggests that they all should try to struggle for both the national autonomy of each nationality and the regional union to keep the territorial integrity of the Horn, despite the move of the unitarists against any sort of national autonomy. Coming to such agreement by the two opposition/rebel camps means taking away the worst instrument of Weyane, i.e taking away its notorious divide and rule method.
After agreeing on the common purpose or common ground, then taking appropriate route to the goal is what the new all-inclusive-allinace needs to have. I think "election" under Weyane is a road with dead end. Preaching about only non-violent methods and moralizing/cursing any sort of cooperation with Eritrea for example are not expected from the genuine opposition/rebel groups, but they are part and parcel of the "good" rhetorics from the Weyane cadres camouflaged as unitarist or unionist opposition. I personlly believe that a coordinated civil disobedinece, armed struggle and public uprising is the best route. It is only if the two oppositio/rebel camps have such a common purpose and a common route that the suggested all-inclusive-alliance can be different and can make a difference.
For all partakers of the alliance to accept the future public verdict during the democratization phase, they must be now bold enough to take risk of losing to their opponent in a true democratic way during the public decision. Only this boldness towards such risk can help the seemingly diametrically opposite democratic unionist liberators and democratic unitarist patriots to forge an alliance against the fascists. Particularly the democratic unitarists who tend to disregard the right of nations to self-determination should come to their sense and face the fact that without liberation or self-determination of the Oromo people from the hitherto domination, the realization of peace and prosperity they are longing for will never happen. Also they should by now have registered that any alliance of only the unitarists, excluding the major unionist forces like OLF, will never lead them to victory over the fascist regime.
On the other hand, unionist forces in general and Oromo unionist liberators in particular should be able to broaden their view and struggle for the liberation of all nations and nationalities in the region/empire from any sort of domination. Such view includes liberation of the two Habesha nations, despite the domination/colonization of other nations by their elites. Such move from the unionists will help the democratic unitarists (let's forget the dictatorial die-hard unitarists) to move towards forging the very necessary all-inclusive alliance. This is the only mechanism to help the apparently impossible alliance between the seemingly diametrically opposite unionists and unitarists be possible.
That is why I dare to say that the suggested all-inclusive-alliance based on such matured understanding from both the democratic unionists and the democratic unitarists will be different and will make a difference. So specially the Amhara democratic unitarist patriots and the Oromo democratic unionist liberators should try to help the impossible be possible and forge the all-inclusive-alliance to get rid of the Tigrean fascists, otherwise we should be ready to be ruled for the coming at least one century and see our Amharaland and Oromoland being sold by Tigrean hegemonists to foreign capitalists, so that we the two BIG nations will live under slavery and leave this slavery further to our coming generation. I hope we do have a reasonable mind to choose the first option of alliance against the fascists, which can lead us to liberation, not the second option of our subjugation for a century. To move in the direction of liberation together, let Waaqayyoo/Igzi'abiher give us knowledge, understanding and wisdom to help the suggested all-inclusive-alliance be different and make a difference!
Galatooma.
Monday, August 2, 2010
OLOLA DIIGGAAF MALEE KAN QABSOO BILISUMMAAF YEROO HIN QABNEEF UMMATNI OROMOO GURRA ERGISU HIN QABU
Gaafa: 29‐07‐2010
Date:
ADDA BILISUMMAA OROMOO
OROMO LIBERATION FRONT
Lakk.: No.: Ibsa/abo/2010
جبهة تحرير أ ورومو
رقم تاريخ
Jaalala QBO ABOn hogganamu ummata Oromoo biratti qabu gara fedhaa fi dantaa matayyaatti jijjiirratuuf yaaliin wal irraa hin citne waggaa kudhanii oliif adeemsifame ummata biratti fudhatama dhabuu irraa yakka dharaa ABO irratti tarrisuu itti fufuun kufaatii qaanfachiisaa irra gahe keessaa hin baasu.
Murni QC – ABO jedhamu dhiheenya kana waraana qabaatuu fi waraanni qaba jedhus WBO ABOn durfamuun duulli irratti banamee ajjeefamaa akka jiru ibsa oduu gandaa irraa adda hin taane facaasee jira. Murni QC‐ABO of moggaase kun dhaaba keessa ture ABO irraa eerga adda bahee waggaa kudhanii ol lakkoofsisee jira. Waggoota dabran kana keessattis hojii qabsoo irratti bobba’ee faaydaan argamsiisee ummata biratti beekamu homaatuu akka hin jirre ummatni keenya tolchee beeka. Murni QC‐ABO jedhee of waamu kun guyyaa maqaa kanaan gadi bahee eegalee kan irratti bobba’ee turee fi jiru hirmatnaa qabsoo ABOn ummata Oromoo hirirsuu irraa hinaaffaa fi jibbinsi itti buleen ABO gufachiisuu fi dadhabsiisuu irratti qofa akka bobba’ee jiru ummata Oromoo jalaa dhokataa miti.
Dhihoo kana ammoo humna gantootni akka Lichoo Bukuraa faa ABO irratti akka gufuu tahuuf bobbaasaa jiraniif golgaa fi abukaatoo tahee as bahuun kan nama gaddisiisuu tahuu qofa osoo hin taane qaamfachiisaa dha. Kan callisnuuf waan jennu dhabnee osoo hin taane qabsoof jecha callisuu waan filanneef tahuu garuu kanuma waliin ibsina.
Murni diina irratti bobba’uu irra ABO diina jalqabaa godhatee ololaa fi shira adda addaa QBO irratti raawwataa jiru, hamii fi dalagaa diiggaa lagatee QBO cimsuu irratti akka bobba’u ABOn gama isaatiin kan isaaf danda’amu hunda kan raawwatu tahuu amma illee irra deebiin yaadachiisaa; olola kijibaan maqaa ABO kaasuu irraa akka of qusatu hiree kanaan hubachiisna.
Gadaan Gadaa Bilisummaa ti!
Injifannoo Ummata Oromoof!
Adda Bilisummaa Oromoo
Adoolessa 29, 2010
Date:
ADDA BILISUMMAA OROMOO
OROMO LIBERATION FRONT
Lakk.: No.: Ibsa/abo/2010
جبهة تحرير أ ورومو
رقم تاريخ
P. O. Box 6973 Asmara, Eritrea | Telefax 291 1 110236 | E-mail abamilki@gemel.com.er
Jaalala QBO ABOn hogganamu ummata Oromoo biratti qabu gara fedhaa fi dantaa matayyaatti jijjiirratuuf yaaliin wal irraa hin citne waggaa kudhanii oliif adeemsifame ummata biratti fudhatama dhabuu irraa yakka dharaa ABO irratti tarrisuu itti fufuun kufaatii qaanfachiisaa irra gahe keessaa hin baasu.
Murni QC – ABO jedhamu dhiheenya kana waraana qabaatuu fi waraanni qaba jedhus WBO ABOn durfamuun duulli irratti banamee ajjeefamaa akka jiru ibsa oduu gandaa irraa adda hin taane facaasee jira. Murni QC‐ABO of moggaase kun dhaaba keessa ture ABO irraa eerga adda bahee waggaa kudhanii ol lakkoofsisee jira. Waggoota dabran kana keessattis hojii qabsoo irratti bobba’ee faaydaan argamsiisee ummata biratti beekamu homaatuu akka hin jirre ummatni keenya tolchee beeka. Murni QC‐ABO jedhee of waamu kun guyyaa maqaa kanaan gadi bahee eegalee kan irratti bobba’ee turee fi jiru hirmatnaa qabsoo ABOn ummata Oromoo hirirsuu irraa hinaaffaa fi jibbinsi itti buleen ABO gufachiisuu fi dadhabsiisuu irratti qofa akka bobba’ee jiru ummata Oromoo jalaa dhokataa miti.
Dhihoo kana ammoo humna gantootni akka Lichoo Bukuraa faa ABO irratti akka gufuu tahuuf bobbaasaa jiraniif golgaa fi abukaatoo tahee as bahuun kan nama gaddisiisuu tahuu qofa osoo hin taane qaamfachiisaa dha. Kan callisnuuf waan jennu dhabnee osoo hin taane qabsoof jecha callisuu waan filanneef tahuu garuu kanuma waliin ibsina.
Murni diina irratti bobba’uu irra ABO diina jalqabaa godhatee ololaa fi shira adda addaa QBO irratti raawwataa jiru, hamii fi dalagaa diiggaa lagatee QBO cimsuu irratti akka bobba’u ABOn gama isaatiin kan isaaf danda’amu hunda kan raawwatu tahuu amma illee irra deebiin yaadachiisaa; olola kijibaan maqaa ABO kaasuu irraa akka of qusatu hiree kanaan hubachiisna.
Gadaan Gadaa Bilisummaa ti!
Injifannoo Ummata Oromoof!
Adda Bilisummaa Oromoo
Adoolessa 29, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)