Jawar’s Confepia as a Viable Compromise for Ethiopia’s Political Future
By Fayyis Oropia
I once heard Jawar Mohammed suggest English as the sole working language of the federation, while other languages would serve as official languages within their respective national regions—for example, Amharic in the Amhara Region and Oromic in Oromia. This would, in practice, transform Ethiopia into a form of Confepia—an English-speaking confederation.
Recently, three proponents of Confepia from the ATO (Amhara–Tegaru–Oromo) triangle—Tingirtu (Amhara), Alula (Tegaru), and Jawar (Oromo)—held an online discussion on Ethiopia’s current challenges and possible political future. In my view, neither the three Amhara-oriented goals (Amapia, Amarpia, and Amaria) nor the three Oromo-oriented visions (Oromia, Orompia, and Oropia) can serve as common political agendas for both the Amhara and Oromo nations, let alone for all the nations of Ethiopia.
Ethiopia currently faces several competing visions regarding its political and constitutional future. These can broadly be categorised into seven possible outcomes:
- Amapia – an Amharic-dominated geographical federation.
- Amarpia – an Amharic-dominated ethnic federation.
- Amaria – an independent Amhara state with Addis Ababa as its capital.
- Confepia – an English-speaking confederation or voluntary union of free nations.
- Oromia – an independent Oromia with Finfinné as its capital.
- Orompia – an Oromic-led ethnic federation.
- Oropia – an Oromic-led geographical federation.
Among these alternatives, Confepia, positioned as a middle-ground option, appears to offer the fairest and most inclusive compromise. Without such a consensus, Ethiopia is likely to move either toward continued Amharic dominance or toward an Oromic-led political order, each carrying its own risks of exclusion and instability.
Current Political Alignments
Recent political developments indicate that the ruling Prosperity Party (PP)—the successor to the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF)—continues to uphold ethnic federalism while promoting a democratic federal union that preserves the existing language-based federal structure. The endorsement of the Medemer (Ida’amuu / Synergy) project by prominent Oromo political figures suggests a convergence between the ruling party and segments of the opposition. Notably, this integrative vision draws inspiration from the earlier political philosophy of Ob. Lénco Lata.
In parallel, several Ethiofederalist parties advocating a more integrated Ethiopian identity merged in preparation for the 2020 elections. This initiative sought to consolidate political strength and, if ultimately Oromic-led, reflects an ideological orientation associated with Dr Haile Fida.
Meanwhile, confederalist forces have intensified efforts to coordinate their activities. Their central objective—national independence combined with the option of voluntary union, particularly in the case of Oromia—was articulated decades earlier by Baro Tumsa. Consequently, the Prosperity Party now faces increasing pressure from multiple opposition fronts.
The Emerging Three-Way Contest
Ethiofederalists are attempting to recreate the political momentum witnessed during the 2005 Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD/Qinijit). The critical question is whether confederalist groups can unite sufficiently to challenge both the incumbent Prosperity Party and the Ethiofederalist bloc.
Looking ahead, the anticipated 2026 elections may evolve into a three-way contest among:
- Amapianists/Amarpianists/Amarianists (pro-Amharic forces);
- Confederalists (advocating English as the common federal language); and
- Oropianists/Orompianists/Oromianists (pro-Oromic political movements).
Which of these political camps will ultimately prevail remains uncertain.
Confederalist organisations may yet establish a united front. At present, however, most Oromo political forces—and many Ethiopian political actors more broadly—appear to favour a democratic ethnofederal Orompia, temporarily setting aside both full independence and a purely geographical federation.
Ideological Currents and Historical Context
Earlier commentary published on Gadaa.com under the title “An Alliance of Necessity: Last-Ditch Effort to Save the Crumbling Empire” highlighted alleged attempts by elements of the former ruling elite to manipulate opposition politics by cultivating compliant alternatives. According to that analysis, such tactics reflected long-standing tensions between democratic movements and hegemonic forces seeking to preserve centralised control.
These dynamics illustrate the principal ideological divisions within Ethiopian politics:
- Ethiofederalists often reject the principle of national self-determination, viewing it as divisive ethnic politics. They generally advocate stronger national integration while supporting limited recognition of linguistic and cultural diversity.
- Hegemonists profess support for democracy and self-determination but prioritise political power and economic interests, suppressing dissent in the name of maintaining peace and stability.
- Ethnofederalists support a democratic federation of autonomous nations, balancing collective national rights with individual freedoms. However, they often hesitate to endorse referenda on full self-determination.
- Confederalists advocate a voluntary confederation of self-governing nations. In this view, their approach addresses historical grievances and seeks a long-term framework for peaceful coexistence across Ethiopia and, potentially, the wider Horn of Africa.
According to this perspective, alliances between unitarists and hegemonists seek to impede the Oromic-led democratic movement’s evolution—from ethnic federalism toward eventual confederation and expanded self-determination.
Political Evolution and Regional Inspiration
From this perspective, Ethiopia’s political evolution can be summarised as follows: dictatorial Ethio-fascism (Derg) → Dictatorial Ethno-fascism (TPLF era) → Democratic Federalism (current transition) → Future Democratic Confederation
This proposed trajectory parallels broader regional developments. The East African Community (EAC), for example, has made measurable progress toward economic integration and has articulated longer-term ambitions for deeper political integration. Its experience may provide useful lessons for future confederal arrangements in the Horn of Africa.
Toward a Compromise: Confepia
While critics argue that ethnofederalism has often been distorted in practice, many of Ethiopia’s nations continue to support meaningful federalism as a transitional stage, with confederation viewed by some as a longer-term aspiration. From this perspective, a return to highly centralised unitarism appears increasingly unlikely.
A democratic Ethiofederalism could remain viable if Oromo linguistic and cultural identity is fully respected and democratic norms are consistently upheld. Under such conditions, broader Oromo support might emerge across political camps. Ultimately, proponents of this view argue that Ethiopia could evolve toward Oropia—an Oromic-led geographical federation reflecting Oromo values within a pluralistic democratic framework.
Accordingly, the contemporary political debate is no longer simply between dictatorship and democracy, but among three competing democratic visions:
- Amapianists/Amarpianists/Amarianists;
Confederalists (Confepianists); and
Oropianists/Orompianists/Oromianists.
All three camps share responsibility for supporting a peaceful democratic transition. The central question remains: who will lead Ethiopia through this transformation and secure democratic legitimacy in future elections?
A sustainable compromise may ultimately lie in building consensus around a democratic confederal union—Confepia.
May Wàqà guide the path forward.
Galatôma.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2018/12/1 ... over-tplf/