Mereja.Forum

Sovereignty: Amara’s Model vs Tegaru’s Style vs Eritrea’s Type vs Oromo’s Way!

According to the ongoing discussion in Oromo nationalists’ circle, the three types of sovereignty, in forms of Amara’s model (assimilative), Tegaru style (imperial) and Eritrean type (exclusive) are not as such bad for the Oromo people in the future, but preferable is the Oromo way (Oromumma led rainbow union). Amara’s model is an assimilative like having free development and use of Afaan Oromo at the federal level, which will assimilate the other neighboring language groups into being Oromo, thus practically Oromia = Ethiopia. This dictatorial assimilative approach must be distinguished from the democratic accomodative and integrative option of the Oromo’s way in the suggested rainbow union. Tegaru’s style is an imperial, where the Oromo people having free Oromo state, and at the same time, ruling over other nations. Such imperial rule is also not the same to democratic autonomy for all nations and nationalities in the Oromo’s option. Eritrean type is an ‘independent Oromo state’ as separate nation-state, free from other nations; this Eritrean way can be a rule-out result, in case all other nations refuse to live with us and leave the Oromo way of rainbow union.
Read more: https://fayyisoromia.wordpress.com/2017 ... mos-way-2/

The new approach, which can now be pursued by Oromo organizations and Oromo people, if we want, is an optimal option, so that we necessarily ought not be fixated on only the option of “separation.” That is why the endless cry of Habesha cadres, who do lament day and night about their claim to “know the fact” that OLF is a “secessionist” organization and their accusation of Oromo nationalists as “separatists,” does not hold water. On contrary, the Gadaa people with our principle of freedom and democracy do prefer Oromo’s method leading us to our desired optimal sovereignty. We want to give chance to rainbow union; and only if this noble Oromo’s choice fails to be materialized, due to the possible arrogance and authoritarian nature of Abyssinian elites, Oromo people will be obliged to move towards the choice of being exclusive and reject the possible union with them

As far as Oromo people and our liberation organizations are concerned, we can even try to promote the type of unity, which the “pro-unity” forces want to realize. But, these forces have to be sure that the language into which we all need to melt will be the two Afaan Oromo’s, that means – not only Amharigna, but also Oromiffa. Now, some Oromo nationalists seem to support this view, hoping that the “pro-unity” forces do agree with this way of solving the language issue. Amarigna was in reality created by Oromo nobility in the year 1270 around Hankobar in central Oromia. The Oromo nobility just wanted to have a language, which was different from that of ordinary Oromo, thus created “Lisane Negus” – Amarigna. Now, both Amarigna and Oromiffa are suggested to be considered as Afaan Oromo (languages of Oromo people). Sure is that Oromiffa is language of Oromo heroes, who did start liberation struggle of Oromo people from the Habeshanized rulers of Agaw and Oromo, whereas Amaringa is unfortunately still associated with domination and subjugation of Gadaa people by this Abyssinized part of Cush nations.

Kkkkkkkkkkk

Hankobar?

Changing Yekuno Amlak identity?

The first mentioning of Amhara in history comes from 1127 which states Amhara in conflict with the Werje Sultanate in Shewa somewhere near Sendafa-Aleltu

What language similarities are there between Amharic and Afaan Oromo ... these languages are like 98% different

All similarities are due to recent changes since Zemene Mesafint

If Oromo made Amharic language why does Amharic have much more in common with Semetic Geez than with Cushtic languages

Stop changing history !

Subhuman

This theory now seems to be entertained by the ongoing Oromo liberation movement. By the way, was Nagaasso Gidadaa’s UDJ party not one of those with the mentality of Habeshanized Cushites? When we look at program of the party, its §3.2.4 said: “Amharic shall serve as working language of the federal state; when approved by referendum, there can be another language, in addition to Amharic, that serves as working language of the federal state.”

Why not referendum on Amarigna, whereas it is compulsorily needed to allow Oromiffa to have the same status? Is this not a double standard? Why did Dr. Nagaasso and other Oromo nationalists in this party fail to put Oromiffa as one of the federal working languages explicitly, just as they did Amarigna? Are they not making the same mistake committed by emperor Minilik Caalaa and his best general Gobanaa Daacee? Both of these members of the nobility, being Oromo (the first being Habeshanized Oromo, the second non-Habeshanized), they could have promoted Oromiffa to be the working language of Ethiopian state they built, instead of making “Lisane Negus” the only one officially used in the country.

Now, Oromo liberation movement should take heed of Habesha organizations, which want to repeat the same mistake. No other move, except the following three ways of OLF movements, is acceptable to Oromo people: the first-generation OLF, which concentrates on achieving only an ‘independent Oromia,’ as a fair goal without influencing other nations; the second-generation OLF talking about either an ‘independent Oromia’ or an ‘autonomous Oromia;’ and the third-generation OLF being more inclusive and open for an ‘independent Oromia,’ an ‘autonomous Oromia within rainbow union’ and an ‘integrative Oropia (Oromumma led geo-federal Ethiopia).’ I think these three options of our future sovereignty are not bad, but the question lies on the timing of stressing one of the alternatives vis-à-vis the other two. Clear is that any nation under oppression and with a threatened security prefers and stresses independence, whereas the nation, which does have a confidence to survive, to thrive and which is even sure to be able to lead other nations do emphasize the other two alternatives, the most confident nationals opting for an integrative Oropia.

We may then ask: which position should the Oromo people, who are still under Amaranet domination need to emphasize now? Surely, we need to stress independence, just as the first-generation OLF correctly had done and is still doing. Even though it is not bad that the second-generation accepted a possible autonomy within a union as another option, and the third-generation has now started to further entertain even the third alternative of an ‘integrative Oropia,’ the smart side of all the three generations is that they have never given up and will never give up the independence option. As long as Oromo people are under oppression, the question for ‘independence’ is mandatory as a rule-out result. But, care must be taken for this position is mis-used by Biltsigina cadres as a means to neutralize the “pro-unity” Amhara forces, which are also nowadays archenemies of Biltsigina. Clearly, Biltsigina regime is surviving and thriving by making these Amhara forces and the pro-independence Oromo fronts neutralize each other. Thus, it is better to tone down the independence rhetoric and emphasize the union option.

As repeatedly mentioned, the common denominator of the three OLF generations is ‘freedom of the Oromo’. The first-generation is for freedom of the Oromo + independence of Oromia. The second-generation for freedom + independence (in a form of Oromia’ or a ‘union of autonomous nations). The third-generation is for freedom + independence (in a form of an ‘independent Oromia’ or a ‘union of autonomous nations or an ‘integrative Oropia’). As I do see, we are moving from the status quo occupied Oromia of subjugated Oromo people — through the smaller OPP’s Oromia — small OLF’s Oromia — the Oromia proper — to Oropia with respected and realized freedom of all nations.