My Proposal to Dr. Abiy: Fostering Intra-Ethnic Democracy and Inter-Ethnic Authoritarianism
By Fayyis Oromia*
Dr. Abiy Ahmed initially garnered the support of Ethiopia’s three major ethnic groups: the Amhara, Tigrayans (Tegaru), and Oromo. The Amhara elites believed they could use him to perpetuate the dominance of Amharic culture and politics, similar to their past control during President Mengistu Haile Mariam’s regime. Thus far, they have largely succeeded. The Tigrayan elites, on the other hand, saw him as a puppet to further their interests, as they did with his predecessor, Hailemariam Desalegn. However, their calculations failed, leaving them sidelined. Oromo nationalists, expecting Dr. Abiy, as an Oromo, to address their national concerns, were likewise disappointed when he chose to placate the Amhara elite and suppress genuine Oromo nationalism.
As the Amhara elite seeks to challenge his authority, Dr. Abiy seems to be returning to his Oromo roots—a shift that, while belated, should be welcomed. I propose that Dr. Abiy strengthen intra-ethnic democracy within the Oromo community while embracing inter-ethnic authoritarianism to safeguard against the manipulative tactics of the Abyssinian elites. He must not naively allow these forces a path back to power in Finfinné (Addis Ababa), as their primary objective is to irreversibly undermine Oromummaa (Oromo identity). Their active resistance to Oromummaa serves as a clear indication of this intent.
The Nature of Ethiopian Politics
Ethiopian politics is deeply shaped by the rivalry between ethnic groups and the internal ideological divisions within these groups. The main contenders for power in Finfinné have traditionally been the Amhara, Tigrayans, and Oromo. In practice, there is no functioning democratic mechanism for the peaceful transfer of power between ethnic factions. Historically, force or authoritarian control has been the only means through which such transitions have occurred. This has been evident in the regimes of the Amhara-led Derg and the Tigrayan-dominated Woyane, both of which employed brutal measures to rule over the Oromo and other ethnic groups.
Now, under Oromo leadership through the Prosperity Party, we must avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. Oromo elites in power must not be naïve enough to allow the return of Amhara domination through electoral means. In this context, authoritarianism is not only necessary but strategic—a way to consolidate Oromo political power for the foreseeable future. While the Tigrayan elites are currently sidelined with little prospect of regaining central power, the Amhara elites remain politically active and must be carefully monitored. Therefore, inter-ethnic authoritarianism is essential to ensure the continuation of Oromo leadership.
At the same time, intra-ethnic democracy should be encouraged within national regional states such as Amhara, Tigray, and Oromia. For example, within Oromia, all Oromo political organizations should be allowed to compete freely. The suppression of popular Oromo parties, such as the OLF and OFC, by the OPP is counterproductive. Silencing these voices through intra-ethnic authoritarianism weakens Oromo unity and undermines the ability of Oromo leadership to assert itself in Finfinné. This is precisely what the Amhara elite aims to achieve by exploiting internal divisions within the Oromo community. We must be wise enough not to fall into this trap. Therefore, I advocate for a dual strategy of intra-ethnic democracy and inter-ethnic authoritarianism.
Why Democracy Has Failed in Ethiopia
As long as the triangular conflict between the Amhara, Tigrayans, and Oromo persists, meaningful democracy remains out of reach for Ethiopia. Prior to 1991, Amhara dominance made democracy a futile concept. From 1991 to 2018, Tigrayan hegemony reduced democracy to a mere façade. Now, for Oromo elites to advocate for democracy without securing Oromo leadership would be akin to paving the way for the return of one of these historically authoritarian ethnic groups.
Given their minority status, Tigrayan elites are unlikely to exploit democratization for the purpose of regaining power. However, Amhara elites—armed with their numerical strength and deep-rooted political networks—pose a substantial threat. Their desperation is evident, with many proclaiming “Now or never!” Is Dr. Abiy—or the Oromo leaders in the Prosperity Party—willing to grant them this opportunity?
In my view, inter-ethnic democracy should be delayed until we ensure the political neutralization of the Amhara elites. One viable strategy would be to empower the Agaw people in the northern regions, thus making them the second-largest political force after the Oromo. This would dilute Amhara influence and help establish a more stable power balance.
Historical Context and the Unique Oromo Experience
Ethiopia, often described as a 3,000-year-old civilization, remains one of the least democratic and most underdeveloped nations in the world. While many factors are cited for this, including climate, colonialism, and authoritarianism, the central issue lies in the systemic suppression of the Oromo people—the largest and historically most marginalized ethnic group in the country. In most multiethnic states, the majority group either assumes leadership or the state collapses. Ethiopia is unique in that its majority group—the Oromo—has long been politically subjugated by minority ruling elites.
Most modern historians, with the notable exception of a few Habesha nationalists, agree that the Oromo are indigenous to the region south of Egypt and have lived there for over 5,000 years. The invasions by Semitic groups from the Middle East, the fall of Meroë, and European colonial interventions contributed to the fragmentation of the Oromo people and the rise of Amharic dominance.
Over time, various Cushitic groups, including the Beja, Agaw, Afar, Somali, Sidama, and Kambata, evolved from the original Oromo stock. Some became more “Semitized” and Christianized, while others embraced Islam. The Oromo people, however, preserved their language (Oromic) and their indigenous belief system, Wàqeffannà, despite external pressures. Even today, elements of this belief system persist in the religious practices of Christian and Muslim Oromo communities—an example being the celebration of Irréchà, which Emperor Haile Selassie, himself of Oromo descent, once participated in, though some dismissed it as superstition.
The real challenge lies with the identity crisis of the Habesha elites, who, having been Christianized and “Semitized,” deny their roots and actively oppress the Oromo. These elites have historically relied on Western support to maintain their grip on power, subjugating the Oromo in the process. Their fear of Oromo leadership is precisely what has prevented genuine democratization and development in Ethiopia.
The Way Forward
True democracy and development will remain elusive as long as Oromo rights and leadership are undermined. Some Oromo nationalists mistakenly criticize their peers for focusing on democratizing Ethiopia rather than securing the independence of Oromia. However, democratizing Ethiopia can indeed be a path to Oromia’s self-determination. The Habesha elites understand this threat, which is why they have historically resisted the democratization process.
The only viable path to Oromo liberation has been through a combination of armed resistance and popular uprising. There can be no illusion about this. Genuine democracy and development in Ethiopia will never materialize as long as Oromia remains under the control of exploitative Habesha elites.
Now that the Oromo seem to have secured political power, we have a historic opportunity to drive democratization and development. My advice to the Habesha elites is this: rather than lamenting the lack of democracy, they should support Oromo leadership and values. They must accept Oromic as a national language, recognize Wàqeffannà as a legitimate indigenous belief, and elevate Irréchà to the status of a national holiday. Ultimately, the Oromo people alone have the right to determine the nature of their sovereignty—whether that be through an independent Oromia or an integrated Oropia (an Oromic-led geo-federation) via a democratic referendum.
True democracy and development are far more likely to emerge from a voluntary union of equal nations than from forced unity without consent. The Woyane’s claim of a “voluntary union of nations and nationalities” was never grounded in reality. Habesha elites must abandon this self-deception and allow the Oromo to decide their future.
If a democratic and inclusive union—Orompia, an Oromic-led ethnic federation—can be realized, the Oromo will embrace it. However, national independence remains preferable to continued oppression. For now, the vast majority of Oromo leaders appear to favor leadership within a unified, Oromic-led Ethiopia. To ensure the longevity of this leadership, we must practice intra-ethnic democracy and inter-ethnic authoritarianism.
Galatôma!
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/03/1 ... tatorship/