I was a student in college when he was negotiating in London at the time of the fall of the Dergue.
What has changed qualitatively in his political outlook and activism in Ethiopian politics between that time and in this interview?
To his credit, he is more patient than I would be about talking to Jawar's political grievance. I remember hearing the latter roar on the internet stating: ጀላን ህንሶሮሩ, or something to that effect. I thought that was an allegation lobbed against the former's group. It definitely reminded me of the question that I asked when I heard another allegation: ህን ጀልሱ። Upon hearing that, I had to ask: ጀልሱ ሞ ሶሮርሱቱ እረ ሰልጳዸ?
I dislike explaining away one's own weakness by blaming others.
Jawar was bold if only his boldness didn't sway from one end to an opposite end in a short time, from destabilizing Ethiopia to democratizing it.
Perhaps, it is that swaying that had him say that he was prepared to die for his people and, upon hearing it, made me ask introvertedly what it means to die for one's people when one's people are presumably those in power. I found that expression meaningless.
I fail to understand why Obbo Lencho is not bold in his vision of democratizing Ethiopia as his best political vision for Ethiopia and if this had been it from the outset, it could have potentially led to a more successful result. It may be natural to be defensive about praises and blames in one's legacy.
Inconsistency is the source of blames. If I am not mistaken, I have heard him say in another interview that they didn't have enough experience when they started the struggle. In my view, that is blameless: ወጣት ሳይሆን ጎልማሳ የሆነ የለም። If I understood him in this interview, he appears to suggest that it was flawless.
Another inconsistency here is saying there is no "Oromo," "Amhara," or "Tigre" government and saying in the same interview that there was an "Amhara" government before 1991 and a "Tigre" government after 1991. For practical purposes, I take ሃይል to mean the same as government.
This inconsistency can be sorted out by way of traditional and conventional narratives.
In the traditional narrative, the decision-maker at the highest level represents the government. Whether that decision-maker is legitimate or not is another matter.
The conventional narrative, a logical narrative going forward, is having a convening narrative that if any group is not elected by any constituency, it would be illegitimate to call that group a representative of that particular constituency.
If all Ethiopians boldly reach a consensus that this narrative should be the conventional national narrative moving forward, I think that it will go a long way in sorting out the various sectarian narratives.
Transitioning from one of Obbo Lencho Leta's unusual statements of ኢትዮዮጵያዊ ለመሆን እንደራደራለን to saying we are all Ethiopians that ought to have a national conventional narrative would be a significant political change. I could make sense of that unusual statement only after I heard one of his recent interviews that he attended college for his BA degree outside Ethiopia. That is missing about four years of the college experience in Ethiopia where young people from about every corner of Ethiopia intermingle in their formative years.
Even the intermingling experience after college can open one's eyes wider. I remember a man from Ghinchi who has lived in both Ambo and Axum saying that he couldn't tell apart the cultures of the people in both places and that he felt very comfortable living in both places.
I am not sure if Obbo Lencho Leta's sense of security among the Afan Oromo-speaking Ethiopians in contrast to all Ethiopians is experiential or based on a deeper reflection. Then again, wouldn't it be a shallow sense of security when you know that we have multiple ጎሳ heritages, starting from Obbo Lencho Leta himself: ቦረነ ኣኙዋክ፣ ቦረነ ጉሙዝ፣ ቦረነ ገበሮ፣ ቦረነ ሲዳመ፣ ቦረነ ሶማሌ፣ ቦረነ ሀረሪ፣ ቦረነ ወርጂ፣ and so on?