Political Spectrum of Oromo Elites:
Geo-Amapianist Mengistu Haile Mariam, Ethno-Amapianist Abiy Ahmed, Confepianist Daud Ibsaa, Ethno-Oropianist Lenco Lata, and Geo-Oropianist Haile Fida!
According to the five phases of the Oromo liberation journey, it seems that we are now actively engaged in the third phase. We have already completed the first two, and two more remain to be accomplished in the future. The five phases are summarized as follows:
- First Phase: The struggle until 1991, during which we effectively dismantled the unitary Amapia system of Mengistu Haile Mariam (Amharanet-dominated Ethiopia).
- Second Phase: The movement up to 2018, when we sought to overcome the ethno-federal Amapia of Abiy Ahmed.
- Third Phase: The current period, in which we are striving to fully deconstruct Amapia and promote Confepia (a confederation of free nations) as envisioned by Daud Ibsaa—an arrangement in which all linguistic communities are free from Amharanet/Amharigna domination.
- Fourth Phase: A near-future goal, where we aim to construct a true ethno-federal Oropia as conceptualized by Lenco Lata—an Oromummà-led Ethiopia with Afan Oromo as the federation’s primary working language, replacing Amharigna.
- Fifth Phase: The ultimate objective, which we may pursue in the more distant future—an integrative Oropia envisioned by Haile Fida, featuring a geo-federation of all citizens, languages, and nations within the country.
This year, we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF). The OLF initiated its liberation struggle during the dark era of the monarchy, when both the Oromo people and the Oromummà identity were on the verge of being extinguished. Guided by the bilisummà (freedom) mindset, the Oromo, under the leadership of the OLF, have led three major revolutions—in 1974, 1991, and 2018.
With these milestones, we achieved:
- 25% of our bilisummà through the first revolution,
- 50% through the second, and
- 75% through the third.
We now anticipate the fourth and final breakthrough that will bring us to 100% freedom—from both non-Oromo domination and internal dictatorship. Only then can we build a genuine democracy under the legitimate leadership of Oromummà, not only in Ethiopia but throughout the Cushitic region (the Horn of Africa in general).
For this vision to be realized, genuine Oromo nationalists must:
- Own the Finfinné palace,
- Promote Afàn Oromô as the primary working language of the federation,
- Work toward integrating the Horn of Africa and uniting all Oromo people—from Meroe in northern Sudan to Mombasa in southern Kenya.
The 50-year-old OLF is now mature enough to take on this visionary task—going beyond the achieved independence of Oromia to broader regional integration.
Unity for Freedom: The Panacea for the Oromo Predicament
As repeatedly emphasized by Oromo journalists and scholars, unity for freedom is the ultimate remedy for the long-standing Oromo predicament; there is no viable alternative. That is why the main enemies of the Oromo liberation movement focus on sabotaging the unity of Oromo liberators—especially those rallying behind the OLF.
Since the spontaneous, uncoordinated, and sporadic Oromo resistance to colonization transformed into an organized struggle led by the OLF, nearly all politically conscious Oromo nationalists have supported, joined, or sympathized with this beloved liberation front. It is a well-known fact that both pro-independence and pro-union individuals have coexisted within this organization, united by a common goal: the freedom of the Oromo people.
Such inclusivity is not unique to the OLF. Most liberation fronts in history have exhibited similar tendencies—accommodating both pro-independence and pro-union forces—so long as they shared the goal of freeing their people from domination. These fronts wisely chose to postpone the independence-versus-union debate until after achieving national liberation through armed struggle or political pressure.
The OLF was established with this same spirit. Its very name—Oromo Liberation Front—reflects this inclusiveness. The founders deliberately avoided labels like “Oromian Independence Front” or “Ethiopian Union Force.” In practice, the OLF has accommodated two ideological camps:
OFI: Oromo for Freedom and Independence (pro-independence nationalists)
OFU: Oromo for Freedom and Union (pro-union nationalists)
Both groups share freedom as their core objective, hence the name “liberation front.” In the armed struggle against colonial subjugation, these forces had to work together to achieve liberation. Once that goal is attained, each group could then promote its vision—either independence or union—through a democratic referendum.
This inclusive idea enabled Oromo nationalists from both camps to unite under the OLF until divisions emerged. Over time, some factions separated, each pursuing an exclusive agenda—either independence or union. Unfortunately, what followed was mutual condemnation:
Pro-independence factions began labeling pro-union groups as traitors,
Pro-union groups began portraying pro-independence activists as extremists or reactionaries.
This rhetoric of exclusivity is harmful and counterproductive. Neither side—whether exclusively pro-independence or pro-union—can replace the power and effectiveness of the inclusive, united, and visionary OLF as originally conceived. The division only serves our enemies, who welcome and exploit our internal fragmentation.
The polarization of the OLF into ideological purists has only benefited hegemonic forces like the TPLF, which sought to fragment and weaken the Oromo liberation movement. In particular, it has been easier to attack pro-union Oromo forces, as they are often misunderstood and mischaracterized as collaborators—merely because oppressors also talk of “unity.”
But the union envisioned by Oromo nationalists is not the same as that promoted by Abyssinian elites:
- The Oromo vision of union is based on democratic consent via referendum.
- The Abyssinian elite’s version is based on force and the rejection of nations’ rights to self-determination.
If pro-independence Oromo nationalists can recognize this fundamental difference, they will stop mischaracterizing pro-union nationalists. This realization will make it easier to reunite the OLF into a single, inclusive front that accommodates both visions.
A wise liberation front embraces inclusivity; a foolish one pursues ideological purity. I do not understand why the OLF should follow an unwise, exclusivist path when a strong, integrative, and inclusive liberation movement is clearly more effective.
The Need for an Inclusive OLF: Against Premature Division
I have personally recognized the issue of division within the OLF and have consistently advocated for a return to the inclusive and pragmatic orientation of the original organization—one that respected both independence and union as legitimate outcomes of the Oromo people’s right to self-determination.
The OLF was not formed as a purist organization favoring only one direction; rather, it embraced both camps—those who prioritize independence and those who prefer union—as long as they shared the common goal of freedom. After achieving liberation, the Oromo public should be the one to decide through a referendum whether Oromia becomes independent or remains in union with others.
Unfortunately, even factions that once seemed committed to this inclusive vision are now becoming increasingly exclusive. One such faction, once perceived as emphasizing the principle of self-determination, has reacted defensively to pro-union Oromo groups collaborating with Habesha “democratic” opposition forces. In response, it has adopted a more rigid pro-independence stance and has started denouncing pro-union groups as traitors.
This shift is both disappointing and misguided. The Oromo cause is fundamentally about self-determination—not about enforcing either independence or union as the only acceptable solution. As a matter of principle, every Oromo individual and institution must have the right to choose—and that choice must come through a referendum, not political intimidation or ideological purism.
The root of the confusion in Oromo politics lies in the manipulation of terminology:
- The term “federation” has been tainted by its abuse under the Tigrayan-led regime.
- The word “union” has been corrupted by Amhara elites using it to justify centralization and assimilation.
Because of this, many in the Oromo community instinctively reject both terms. The only words that have not yet been sullied by Abyssinianist narratives are “independence” and “Oromia.” However, even these terms are sometimes weaponized by self-serving actors who pose as radical pro-independence figures solely to demonize and vilify pro-union Oromo nationalists. These actors often aim to create conflict rather than build unity.
What truly matters is not what one believes internally, but rather where one directs their struggle:
-The enemies of the Oromo liberation movement are those who aim their political and rhetorical weapons at other Oromo nationalists, simply because of differing views.
- Genuine Oromo nationalists, in contrast, understand that the real enemy is the oppressive regime in Finfinne—and direct their political firepower accordingly.
- Thus, we must pause and reflect: How many Oromo nationalists have we attacked, alienated, or discredited—not because they stood against Oromo freedom, but simply because they held a different strategy or perspective?
It’s time for both pro-independence and pro-union Oromo nationalists to stop wasting energy attacking each other, and instead focus on developing coordinated strategies to confront the actual enemy of the Oromo people.
Even if reconciliation proves impossible at this stage, we must ask: Is the emergence of purely exclusive factions—one camp for independence, another for union—truly better than maintaining a unified, inclusive OLF?
I strongly believe the current moves toward ideological purism are premature and the timing is counterproductive. The debate over Oromia’s future sovereignty (independence vs. union) should be addressed after we achieve freedom. For now, the focus must be on defeating tyranny and securing liberty for the Oromo people.
Two Camps: Colonizers vs. Liberators
At this critical point in our struggle, we must reframe the narrative: the real conflict is not between pro-independence and pro-union Oromo forces, but between two fundamentally opposed camps in Ethiopia:
- The Camp of Colonizers:
This includes the ruling regime and other Habesha political forces that oppose the Oromo people’s right to self-determination. These actors—whether they operate under Amhara or Tigrayan political identity—reject the principle of freedom for oppressed nations. If a political party like EZEMA refuses to recognize this right, then it belongs to the colonizers’ camp, regardless of its rhetoric.
- The Camp of Liberators:
This consists of all Oromo freedom fighters, regardless of whether they advocate independence or union, whether they are operating “legally” inside the country or “illegally” in the diaspora, whether or not they have tactical alliances with Habesha opposition groups. So long as they fight for freedom from oppression, they belong to the liberation camp.
Let us not fall into the trap of assuming that collaborating with Habesha opposition groups automatically makes a pro-union Oromo group a collaborator with the enemy. That’s a dangerously simplistic view. Many such alliances are tactical, aimed at toppling the current regime—not at compromising the Oromo people’s freedom or right to self-rule.
What matters is not who you’re willing to talk to, but what you stand for. If a pro-union group is unequivocally against the dictatorship in Finfinne and committed to freedom, it remains part of the liberation bloc, regardless of whom it temporarily partners with.
The Way Forward: Reuniting for Common Purpose
Therefore, I urge all freedom-seeking Oromo nationalists, whether they lean toward independence or union, to strive to reunite the OLF under its original inclusive and pragmatic vision.
If full reunification proves too difficult, then at the very least:
- Let the pro-independence groups unite under a single structural organization, perhaps branded as OFI (Oromo for Freedom and Independence).
- Let the pro-union groups consolidate into a single organization, perhaps OFU (Oromo for Freedom and Union).
There is no valid reason why multiple pro-independence or pro-union factions should continue to operate separately. By merging into unified entities, both sides can cooperate strategically on the shared goal of Oromo freedom, and later compete democratically to promote their respective visions for Oromia’s final status—through public referendum.
The momentum we now have in the Oromo liberation movement must be preserved and strengthened. No regime—whether led by the Amhara or Tigray elite—has shown genuine willingness to allow true democracy or self-determination. They may talk about unity and reform, but their actions show continued commitment to domination.
There is no shortcut to freedom. As history has shown, freedom for the Oromo can only come through persistent struggle, including armed resistance when necessary. That is why the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA)—under the leadership of an inclusive, re-united OLF—remains central to our liberation.
Just as:
The Wollo Oromo warriors brought down Amhara emperor Theodore at Maqdala, and
Oromo Muslims joined forces with Sudanese allies to defeat Yohannes at Matamma in response to his forced Christianization campaign,
Today’s Oromo freedom fighters must now confront and dismantle the modern colonial system led by Tigrayan warlords in Finfinne.
Whether our future lies in:
Oromia’s independence within the African Union (as envisioned by pro-independence forces), or
Oromia’s self-rule within a genuine Ethiopian federation (as preferred by pro-unionists),
both goals are complementary, not contradictory—until the Oromo people decide otherwise through referendum.
Conclusion: Toward an Inclusive OLF and a United Horn
As I have emphasized throughout, the goals of Oromia’s independence and union within a democratic federation are not mutually exclusive. They are simply two options to be presented to the Oromo people at the appropriate time—after liberation is achieved. In fact, each can serve as a stepping stone for the other. The pro-union agenda can be a prelude to full independence, and the pro-independence campaign can help secure the leverage needed for a fair and equal union.
It is therefore vital that we move beyond ideological purism. The idea that a “purely” pro-independence or pro-union OLF is superior is a dangerous fallacy—one that weakens, rather than strengthens, our liberation struggle.
Only an accommodative, re-united, and inclusive OLF can lead us effectively:
- From oppression to liberation,
- From fragmentation to unity,
- From resistance to the realization of a democratic and self-determined Oromia.
The Oromo struggle should be seen not only as a national project, but also as a regional vision. Once Oromia is fully liberated, the OLF and other progressive forces should take the lead in promoting the integration of the Horn of Africa, starting with the unification of Oromo communities from Meroe (in northern Sudan) to Mombasa (in southern Kenya).
As we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the OLF, we must reflect on how far we have come:
- We initiated the struggle during the oppressive reign of the monarchy.
- We survived the brutality of military rule.
- We dismantled the unitarist Amhara-dominated state under Mengistu.
- We resisted the ethnic manipulation of the Tigrayan-led regime.
- We stood firm in the face of the current ethno-federalist system led by Abiy Ahmed.
Now, we are entering a decisive moment. The OLF, at 50, is no longer a young movement. It is a mature force with the experience, vision, and legitimacy to lead not just Oromia, but the entire region, into a new era of justice, freedom, and cooperation.
Let us therefore reject division, heal our fractures, and focus our struggle on the real enemies of Oromo freedom—not on each other. Let us direct our political energy toward building a future where Oromummaa leads not only a liberated Oromia, but a democratic and just Horn of Africa.
May Wàqa bless the Oromo struggle.
May the 50-year-old OLF be reborn—stronger, more inclusive, and victorious.
Galatômà.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/06/2 ... third-one/