Consensus on Federal Union at the Cost of Independent Oromia and Integrative Oropia?
By Fayyis Oromia*
According to recent developments, the EPP, as a merged entity of the former EPRDF, continues to promote ethnofederalism and supports a democratic federal union, maintaining the current language-based federation. When I hear about Obbo Leenco Bati of the ODF endorsing the Medemer/Ida’amü/Synergy project led by the Prime Minister, it becomes clear that the ODF is now aligned with the EPP. This vision was originally inspired by Obbo Léncô Lataa.
On the other hand, a few months ago, around six Ethiofederalist parties—including AG7, which supports an integrative Oropia (i.e., an Ethiopia led by Oromummaa)—merged to form a stronger unified party, the Ethiopian Citizens for Social Justice (ECS), in preparation for the 2020 Ethiopian election. This plan is rooted in the vision of Dr. Haile Fida.
Meanwhile, confederalist forces such as the AFD are working to strengthen their cooperation. Their goal—national independence with a possibility of voluntary union (i.e., independent Oromia)—was once championed by Bàrô Tumsà. The ruling party, EPP, will likely face challenges from both opposition camps: AFD and ECS.
Ethiofederalists are attempting to replicate the 2005 CUD (Qinijit) phenomenon. The key question now is: Can the confederalists forge a strong enough opposition to challenge both the incumbent EPP and the Ethiofederalists?
Time will tell. The 2020 election will be a three-way competition: Ethiofederalist ECS vs. Confederalist AFD vs. Ethnofederalist EPP. Who among them will prevail remains to be seen.
Confederalist groups like the OLF, ONLF, SLF, BGLM, GPLM, and possibly the TPLF could unite to challenge both ECS and EPP. Could the TPLF join AFD to form a stronger confederalist bloc? For now, it appears that most Oromo forces—and Ethiopian forces more broadly—have agreed to pursue a democratic federal union, effectively moving away from two other sovereignty models: independent Oromia and integrative Oropia.
A few years ago, Gadaa.com published a noteworthy comment titled: “An Alliance of Necessity: Last-Ditch Effort to Save the Crumbling Empire”
It also featured the following insight:
“Meles planning to replace UDJ with a puppet UDJ
Meles once planned to replace the real UDJ with a pro-government faction, led by Prof. Mesfin. This group received support from the state media, ETV. Prof. Mesfin believed that uniting all opposition parties under a single umbrella like ‘Medrek’ would give more influence to advocates of group rights over individual rights. By attacking any coalition aimed at removing Meles Zenawi, Prof. Mesfin effectively joined Lidetu Ayalew’s camp. UDJ leaders accused the ruling EPRDF of exploiting intra-party divisions to weaken its main rival.”
This perspective helped me reflect on a likely quasi-alliance between Ethiofederalists (those who support a geography-based federation to avoid Ethiopia’s disintegration) and hegemonist TPLF forces, against ethnofederalists like Medrek.
Summary of Ideological Differences
Ethiofederalists: These actors often oppose the right of nations to self-administration and self-determination, labeling such rights as “ethnic politics.” They aspire to reinstate a system in which all nations are assimilated into Amharic-speaking Ethiopia. For them, it is “natural” to demand Amharic as the sole national language, with others subordinate. While they claim to support cultural diversity, they offer token gestures—such as a few songs in non-Amharic languages—while maintaining dominance through Amharic-centric media and institutions.
Hegemonist TPLFites: They pay lip service to principles like freedom, democracy, and the right to self-determination (up to secession), but in reality, they focus solely on preserving their own power and economic interests. Any opposition is labeled “anti-peace” and systematically suppressed.
Ethnofederalists: Representing hope for many nations, ethnofederalists advocate for a federation of autonomous nations within Ethiopia. Their democratic approach contrasts with the authoritarianism of hegemonist forces. They promote collective national rights and individual rights alike. However, they hesitate to fully embrace the principle of national self-determination via referendum, unlike the more far-sighted unionists.
Confederalists: These groups offer a long-term solution that transcends the limitations of federalism. Their vision addresses the colonial legacies that have led to conflict across the Horn of Africa—such as tensions between Eritrea and Tigray, Djibouti and Eritrean Afars, Abyssinia and Oromia, and others. Their aim is a union of liberated nationsthroughout the region, not just a federation of autonomous ones.
As Gadaa.com noted, the unitarists and hegemonists have formed a tactical alliance to stop the Oromo-led movement from advancing through a democratic ethnic federation (Medrek’s vision) toward eventual self-determination and a confederation (PAFD’s vision). These conservative forces fear losing their grip on the empire.
The political evolution of Ethiopia can be summarized as: From dictatorial Ethiofascism (Derg) → dictatorial Ethnofascism (Woyane) → democratic federalism (present transition) → future democratic confederation (liberated union of nations)
This alliance of necessity among status quo forces aims to maintain the existing empire. But the coordinated push by all nations toward federalism—first as a transitional goal, then confederation as the ultimate objective—is gaining momentum.
Regional Inspiration: The East African Community (EAC)
Even The Economist recognized regional progress: “East Africa’s common market—it really may happen.”
The EAC is laying the groundwork for deeper integration, starting with trade and aiming for eventual political federation. With a combined population of 130 million and a GDP of $75 billion, its success could inspire models like the one confederalists in the Horn of Africa envision.
Unitarist critics have accused the TPLF of enabling fake ethnic federalism. Ironically, they prefer the hegemonist TPLF to the democratic ethnofederalists or radical confederalists. But that era is ending. The collective will of the nations within Ethiopia is moving toward true ethnofederalism and ultimately, confederation—not back to a centralized unitary state.
Can democratic Ethiofederalism (as envisioned by AG7) offer an alternative to democratic ethnofederalism?Possibly, if Afaan Oromo becomes the primary working language and democracy is respected. The Oromo may support either camp.
Either way, a democratic Ethiopia will inevitably become Oropia—a shared nation reflecting Oromo identity and values. The traditional unitarist-hegemonist alliance cannot stop the progress toward federal or confederal unity.
Now, the power struggle is no longer between dictatorship and democracy, but among three democratic camps:
- Ethiofederalists (e.g., ECS of AG7) – favoring integrative Oropia
- Confederalists (e.g., PAFD of OLF) – advocating for an independent Oromia
- Ethnofederalists (e.g., EPP of ODF) – aiming for a democratic federal Oromia within Ethiopia
These camps must assist Dr. Abiy’s administration in managing the transition. The final question remains: Who will lead Ethiopia in this democratic transition and win the coming elections? Ethiofederalists, Confederalists, or Ethnofederalists?
A compromise solution could be a consensus on a democratic federal union.
May Wàqa guide us on the right path!
Galatôma!
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2018/12/1 ... over-tplf/