Mereja.Forum

"The political impasse even as the major parties agree on the essential issue, namely, on the need to include in their program the reality of a multiethnic Ethiopia. Yet, the underlining issue that causes the rift is anything but elusive, for the issue is not so much the acceptance or not of multiethnicism as the hegemonic aspiration of some of the contending parties. Since its very inception, the Ethiopian federal system has operated under one hegemonic party, the TPLF. The expectation of change following the collapse of the rule of the TPLF was the establishment of a true, democratic federal system. But neither the TPLF nor ethnonationalist elites were willing to work for the implementation of a federal system free of the patronage of a dominant party, even though the main reason that brought about the change was the refusal of the TPLF to give up its domineering position.

Despite this clear demonstration that federalism in the TPLF style does not work, ethnonationalist elites, especially among the Oromo elite, pursue the goal of taking up the position previously occupied by the TPLF. Hence their opposition to Abiy: they accuse him, in concert with the TPLF, of not defending the interests of the Oromo and, worst still, of contemplating to get rid of the federal system. In their eyes, on several grounds, including the fact that the Oromo youth spearheaded the uprising against the TPLF and paid the heaviest sacrifice, it is the turn of the Oromo elite to rule Ethiopia. And Abiy should act less as the prime minister of Ethiopia than as the representative of the Oromo elite, much like Meles prioritized the interests of the Tigrean elite.

This competition has two facets: the one involves Oromo ethnonationalist radicals, the other has to do with the TPLF’s desire to regain its previous position by fomenting widespread unrest and insecurity.

https://www.ethiopiaobserver.com/2019/1 ... s-article/

The sole political issue that is behind the insecurity problems, the clashes between ethnic groups, and the threat to the unity of the country is this competition for a hegemonic position. This competition has two facets: the one involves Oromo ethnonationalist radicals, the other has to do with the TPLF’s desire to regain its previous position by fomenting widespread unrest and insecurity. The only obstacle standing in the way of these projects is Abiy and his ideology of “medemer”

To all appearances, the understanding that any resumption of a hegemonic rule in the federal system will definitively break up the alliance between the Oromo and the Amhara (otherwise known as oromara)––which alliance constitutes the cornerstone of the unity of the country––seems to be at the root of Abiy’s vision. Ethnonationalists want Ethiopia only in their own terms so that its survival is never an absolute; medemer sees survival as the continuation of past history but amended by the implementation of a democratic and collaborative relationship between ethnic groups.

As was the case with the Woyanne narrative on the superiority of the Tigrean people, with today’s Oromo ethnonationalists, the imperative is to revive and implement the hegemonic design that was thwarted by Menilik, who was but a stooge of European colonialism. The disease eating the Ethiopian social fabric may, therefore, be summarized thus: the manner “victims” constructed the offender u-turned and became the mirror through which they see and value themselves. This volte-face feeds on the pursuit for hegemony that is tearing up the country, thereby blocking the democratic resolution of the serious and pending problems.

The irony about the rise of ethnonationalist ideology in Ethiopia is the transformation of victimhood into its opposite, that is, into a hegemonic mentality. Since the 60s, Oromo and Tigrean elites have described themselves, no doubt based on some true historical facts, as victims of Amhara domination. To support their struggle, they have produced narratives that deliberately disparaged and at times distorted Ethiopian history and social relations. Unfortunately, the concepts they have constructed to describe Amhara elite and domination boomeranged on them so that they began to see themselves through the same lens. They thus generated a culture that aspires to be as domineering as the Amhara they constructed. The consequence is that they could find no other way to regain their self-respect than through the installation of their own hegemonic rule.'

Says professor Mesay Kebede

The cardinal question...what do they want? Very interesting observation !