Let’s Be Transformed Like Dr. Nagàso Gidàdà – From Oromianist Through Orompianist to Oropianist!
By Fayyis Oromia*
Years ago, I read with mixed feelings that Dr. Nagàso Gidàdà, the former president of Ethiopia, had joined the opposition party UDJ. Was this move constructive or destructive to the national liberation movement of his own people—the Oromo? Was his political journey a step forward, a step backward, or simply a lateral shift—from the vision of an independent Oromia (as he once supported in OLF), to a federal Orompia (Oromummà-led ethnic federalism, as pursued in OPDO), and eventually toward an integrative Oropia (Oromummà-led geo-federal Ethiopia), as seemingly embraced in UDJ?
To answer these questions, we need to examine the inherent tension between the interests of the Oromo nation and the broader interests of Ethiopia—a state composed of many nations, historically dominated by two Abyssinian groups over the last 150 years. In short, we must explore the complementarity and contradiction between the Oromian liberation movement and the Oropian democratization movement.
A Political Joke—and a Political Reality
As a student, I once sat on a bus admiring a city with a friend. We spotted one of our elderly teachers walking down the street. He had a bald head extending far back and a thick beard. My witty friend looked at him and asked, “Is he walking forward or backward?”—since his appearance made it hard to tell. We laughed, and the joke became an inside reference for things that look one way but move in another.
Years later, when I heard that Nagàso had joined the “multi-national” UDJ instead of the Oromo-centered OFC, I remembered that joke—and laughed again. Was this a forward or backward political move?
Looking at his career trajectory:
He began as an OLF activist, advocating for Oromia’s independence.
Then he joined OPDO, supporting ethnic federalism (a federal Orompia).
Later, he appeared to support self-determination through referendum.
Finally, he joined a party that rejected ethnic federalism and instead promoted a geo-federal Ethiopia—an “Oropia” that subtly threatens to erase Oromia.
Was this a progression or regression for an Oromo intellectual who wrote his dissertation on Oromo history and advocated for Oromo rights for over four decades?
Democratization or Distraction?
The Oromo liberation movement is gaining strength—gradually but consistently. This has unsettled several actors:
Habesha elites, especially Amhara unitarists.
Western allies, who historically supported the empire’s centralizing forces.
Some smaller nations’ elites, who mistakenly fear Oromo domination in a post-liberation order.
These groups deploy various tactics to delay or derail the movement. One of the most potent strategies is the illusion of Amarpian (Amaranet-dominated ethnic ferderalism) democratization.
They understand that genuine democracy in Oropia would empower the Oromo majority. That’s why they pay lip service to democracy while actively resisting its implementation.
Handshakes That Hurt
We remember the Meles-Hailu handshake—the alliance of 21st-century Nefxenyas from TPLF and EPRP. Then, we saw Siye Abraha and Gizachew Shiferraw shake hands—unsurprising, given their imperial mindsets.
But when Nagàso Gidàdà shook hands with Gizachew, it triggered mixed emotions: disappointment, confusion, and a touch of bitter amusement. Like the bald-and-bearded teacher, we were unsure whether this was a step forward, backward, or just a political misstep.
Imperial Narratives in New Clothes
The empire’s defenders—both conservatives and “modernists”—push various narratives to undermine Oromo self-determination:
“All Ethiopians are Oromo” – diluting the identity, eventhough true.
“Oromos can rule through democracy” – attempting co-optation.
“Ethiopia is already Oromia” – a confusing for not yet true.
“Oromo people need food, not freedom” – used by TPLF and OPDO to pacify.
“OLF betrayed Oromia” – a divisive smear by fake radicals.
No Amhara party has seriously embraced ethnic federalism as a viable middle ground between unitarist Amharanism and Oromo independence. So-called “multi-national” parties are often just Amhara-dominated organizations using token diversity to mask a centralist agenda.
Tokenism and the Language of Power
Look at their favored figures:
Birtukan Mideksa – Oromo by blood, but aligned with Amhara-centric politics.
Hailu Araya – Tigrayan by birth, Habesha in ideology.
Berhanu Nega, Muluneh Iyuel – non-Amhara ethnically, but unitarists at heart.
Their shared political DNA is Amharanet.
Language exposes ideology. These parties reject the term “peoples” and insist on “the Ethiopian people”—a unitarist phrase that erases national diversity. Even Oromo intellectuals like Merera Gudina and Nagàso Gidàdà once used the plural term, only to be pushed by media and elite pressure to adopt the singular form.
The Oromo Roadmap: Three Stages of Struggle
There is now an emerging Oromo consensus:
Defend current cultural autonomy and resist dismantling of Oromia.
Advance toward full Oromia autonomy under genuine federalism (as OFC advocates).
Decide our fate through a referendum—leading to one of three sovereign futures:
Independent Oromia
Federal Orompia (Ethnic Federation)
Integrative Oropia (Geo-Federation by Free Choice)
Two Visions of Democracy
Abyssinian elites use democracy as a Trojan horse—to dissolve Oromia via geo-federalism and create a centralized, Amharic-speaking state.
Oromo elites embrace genuine democracy—not as the end goal, but as the means to liberation.
Habesha elites preach democracy but fear it. Oromo elites pursue democracy and welcome its outcome—even if it results in union, as long as it is voluntary.
Nagàso’s Final Shift: Regression or Transformation?
Was Dr. Nagàso’s handshake a betrayal or a transformation?
If UDJ had genuinely embraced democratization and respected Oromo self-determination, then geo-federalism might have become a legitimate Oropian outcome. In that case, his political journey could be viewed as a lateral transformation—not a retreat.
Perhaps he is the only major Oromo leader to evolve through three generations of political thought:
OLF-era Oromianist – full independence.
OFC-era Orompianist – federal Orompia.
UDJ-era Oropianist – geo-federated Ethiopia, led by Oromummà.
Final Word: The People Decide
What all parties must understand is this:
The Oromo people cannot be fooled.
Our goal is clear: Self-determination.
And we are open to all its outcomes (Oromia, Orompia or Oropia)—so long as they are freely chosen by the Oromo nation.
May Wàqà guide our steps.
Galatòma!
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/05/0 ... ropianist/