Divide Oromia into Eight Regions to Preserve the Integrity of Oropia!
By Fayyis Oromia*
It appears that Oromo nationalists have reached a consensus to transform Ethiopia from its previous status as Amapia (an Amhara-dominated country) to Oropia (a state led by Oromummaa). The division of the southern region into four smaller entities (Sidama, Southwest Ethiopia, Central Ethiopia, and South Ethiopia) has already been effectively implemented. Recently, the command post has also divided the Amhara region into four parts—West Amhara, Northwest Amhara, East Amhara, and Central Shoa—indicating the potential shape of future regional states. Following this trend, Oromia will likely be divided into eight regions: North Oromia, West Oromia, Southwest Oromia, Central Oromia, East Oromia, South Oromia, Southeast Oromia, and Finfinné.
If the circulating reports on social media are accurate—that Prime Minister Abiy and his regime are planning to transform the current ethnic-based pseudo-federation into a civic geo-federation—then I advise the Prime Minister to ensure that Afaan Oromo becomes the primary national and working language of the federation, replacing Amharic. If Afaan Oromo is elevated to its rightful primary status, then there should be no objection to replacing the current ethno-federal system with a new geo-federal arrangement.
I propose the following as the future member states of the Ethiopian federation:
Tigray – Mekelle
Wolqait – Humera
Afar – Semera
Agaw & Qemant – Gondar
Begemidir – Debre Tabor
Gojjam – Bahir Dar
Shoa – Debre Berihan
North Oromia (Wallo & Raya) – Dessie
Central Oromia (Sheger) – Adama
West Oromia (Wollega) – Nekemte
Southwest Oromia (Ilu & Jimma) – Jimma
East Oromia (Hararge including Harari) – Harar
Southeast Oromia (Arsi & Bale) – Robe
South Oromia (Borana & Guji) – Negele
Finfinne (including Sheger City)
Gambella – Gambella
Southwest Ethiopia – Bonga
South Ethiopia – Arba Minch
Sidama – Hawassa
Wolaita – Sodo
Central Ethiopia – Wachamo
Benishangul – Asosa
Ogaden – Gode
Isaa – Jigjiga
Gaarre – Liban
The working language of each state can be determined by its population and legislated by the respective state councils. In such a setup—where Afaan Oromo is the primary federal language used in all institutions (including the presidency, parliament, judiciary, military, and security services)—the Oromo people will not be at a disadvantage. Instead, Ethiopia would effectively become Oropia, an Oromummaa-led nation broader than just Oromia itself.
On the Formation of New Regional States & Ethnic Identity
Just like the inevitable division of Southern Ethiopia into multiple regions—Sidama, Wolaita, Gurage, Kaffa, Omo, Hadiya, Kambata, Gamo, and others—Northern Ethiopia will also likely be divided into additional regional states such as Kunama, Erob, Tigray, Wolqayit, Raya, Agaw, Qemant, Afar, Argoba, Wollo, Gojjam, Gondar, and Shoa.
When examining the true identities of Ethiopia’s nations and peoples, the historical and cultural evidence suggests that Abyssinia—comprising present-day Amhara and Tigray regions—belongs primarily to the Agaw nation. There is little evidence contradicting the idea that most of Gondar, Gojjam, and parts of Wollo are historically Agaw areas.
This brings up a long-debated anthropological question: is it true when some scholars claim that “Oromo is Cush and Cush is Oromo”? Or is this only half-true? For instance: “Oromo being Cush” is accurate, while “Cush being Oromo” may be a generalization. If the latter is the case, then it’s also a fact that the land inhabited by the Agaw people—a Cushitic sibling of the Oromo—extends from the northern tip of Eritrea, where the Bilen reside, to the southern reaches of Gojjam, where the Awi live. This vast area is historically known as Agaw-Midir.
Isn’t this region of Ethiopia the one most brutally influenced—culturally and linguistically—by the formation of Abyssinia? Admittedly, parts of Shoa, Gojjam, Wollo, and southern Tigray—once inhabited by Oromo communities—also became integral parts of Abyssinia, along with some portions of the Beja, Afar, and Saho homelands. That’s why I assert that Abyssinians are, in reality, ABASO: Afar, Beja, Agaw, Saho, and Oromo—Cushitic peoples who have lost or denied their true cultural identities.
Tragically, it is often the elites among these heavily assimilated Cushitic groups who become the most repressive instruments of the dominant system. They become the worst tormentors of their own people—those who remain un-Habeshanized. This self-alienation has perpetuated internal divisions, aiding the hegemony of the so-called Habesha identity.
Let me now shift focus from Biyya-Oromo (Oromia) to Agaw-Midir.
Agaw-Midir: A Forgotten Cushitic Heartland
The Agaw people were perhaps first mentioned in a 3rd-century Axumite inscription. This inscription refers to a group called the Athagaus (or Athagaous), which may be derived from Ad Agaw, meaning “sons of Agaw.” The Agaw are again mentioned in a 4th-century inscription by King Ezana of Axum and in a 6th-century inscription by King Kaleb.
Based on this historical evidence, many scholars believe that the Agaw were the original inhabitants of much of the northern Ethiopian highlands. Over time, they were either displaced or assimilated by the Semitic-speaking Tigray-Tigrinya and Amhara peoples. Today, the Agaw survive in scattered enclaves, including:
- The Bilen in and around Keren in Eritrea (Northern Agaw)
- The Qemant and Qwara near Gondar (Western Agaw)
- Agaw communities west of the Tekezé River and north of Lake Tana
- The Awi people south of Lake Tana in the Agaw Awi Zone
- A group in and around Sokota (Eastern Agaw)
- Another group often included within this ethnic identity is the Beta Israel (Ethiopian Jews), who historically lived in northern Amhara regions alongside the Qemant and Qwara before migrating to Israel in the late 1990s.
The Agaw ruled Ethiopia during the Zagwe Dynasty (approximately 1137–1270). The name Zagwe itself is derived from the Ge‘ez term Ze-Agaw, meaning “of Agaw,” clearly indicating their ethnic origin. The dynasty is remembered for major architectural and religious achievements, such as the rock-hewn churches of Lalibela—an enduring symbol of Agaw heritage.
Interestingly, just as Ethiopian historians have long claimed the Oromo “migrated” to Ethiopia in the 16th century, many Eritreans similarly claim the Bilen “migrated” to Eritrea during the same period. What a striking parallel! In truth, both the Oromo and the Agaw (including Bilen) are indigenous Cushitic peoples of the northeastern Horn of Africa.
Of the two, the Agaw were the first and most severely affected victims of Habeshanization over the past 3,000 years. In contrast, the Oromo have been more successful at resisting total cultural erasure, largely due to the Oromo Liberation Movement, which actively worked to preserve Oromo language and identity. Thanks to their resilience, much of Oromia remains culturally intact, whereas more than 90% of the Agaw have lost their language and cultural identity, becoming Amharic- or Tigrinya-speaking “Habesha.”
Had it not been for the struggle of Oromo warriors, we might now be looking at an Oromia that resembles today’s fragmented Agaw-Midir: a territory with only small, isolated groups of Afaan Oromo speakers surrounded by a majority of Amharic or Tigrinya speakers. This stark contrast illustrates the devastating success of the Habeshanization process on the Agaw compared to its partial failure in Oromia.
Abyssinian History: A Conflict of Cushitic Elites
Even though today’s Habesha elites often deny their Cushitic roots and claim a distinct identity, they paradoxically embrace the name Ethiopia—a term historically associated with Cushitic peoples. In truth, much of Abyssinian history can be viewed as a series of conflicts between Agaw and Oromo elites, both Habeshanized and non-Habeshanized.
This historical pattern reveals four major types of intra-Cushitic conflicts:
- Habeshanized Agaw vs. Habeshanized Oromo
- Habeshanized Agaw vs. Non-Habeshanized Oromo
- Non-Habeshanized Agaw vs. Habeshanized Oromo
- Non-Habeshanized Agaw vs. Non-Habeshanized Oromo
Some notable examples of these complex power struggles include:
- Emperor Tewodros (Habeshanized Agaw of Qwara) vs. Ras Ali II (Non-Habeshanized Oromo of Wollo)
- Emperor Tewodros vs. Emperor Yohannes (Habeshanized Agaw)
- Tewodros vs. Queen Worqitu (Non-Habeshanized Oromo of Wollo), who played a role in his downfall
- Emperor Yohannes (Habeshanized Agaw) vs. Emperor Menelik II (Habeshanized Oromo)
- Menelik II vs. Ras Gobana Dacche (Non-Habeshanized Oromo)
These conflicts were not simply power struggles between emperors and regional rulers, but also ideological and cultural clashes between the Habeshanized elites—who acted as instruments of assimilation—and the non-Habeshanized Cushitic forces resisting such domination.
Habesha narratives often obscure these ethnic dynamics by emphasizing lineage or political legitimacy while downplaying Cushitic origins. For instance, Ethiopian royal chroniclers might say:
- “Susenyos wasn’t Cushitic, but his mother was Oromo.”
- “Tewodros wasn’t Cushitic, but his wife was Oromo.”
- “Yohannes wasn’t Cushitic, but his wife was Afar.”
- “Menelik wasn’t Cushitic, but his mother and wife were Oromo.”
- “Haile Selassie wasn’t Cushitic, but his mother and wife were Oromo.”
Why this consistent attempt to obscure the Cushitic identity of rulers, while mentioning their wives’ or mothers’ ethnicity? This likely reflects a patriarchal culture that devalues maternal lineage and simultaneously seeks to suppress the political significance of Cushitic heritage within the monarchy.
The only post-imperial Ethiopian leader not publicly linked to Oromo ancestry was Meles Zenawi. Even Mengistu Hailemariam is widely believed to be of Oromo origin, although—while he was in power—Habesha elites claimed he was the son of a certain Dejazmach from Abyssinia to legitimize his rule.
Could Meles Zenawi’s lack of Oromo ties explain why he distrusted and repressed the Oromo more aggressively than his predecessors? He is notably the only modern ruler who surrounded himself with virtually no Oromo allies at the palace in Finfinne—symbolic presidents excluded.
The Struggle for Agaw Liberation and Cultural Revival
Returning to the most marginalized and culturally devastated part of Ethiopia—Agaw-Midir—it is now time for the Agaw people to reclaim their history, language, and identity. What they urgently need today are liberation fighters in the spirit of their legendary ancestor, Yodit Gudit, to champion their cause and defend their right to self-determination.
The Agaw resistance during the Zagwe Dynasty and the era of Queen Yodit was comparable to the 16th-century Oromo liberation movement. Both were Cushitic revolts against Habeshanized elites, who served as tools of foreign domination—especially European powers that employed a divide-and-rule strategy through elite co-optation.
Historically, these colonial actors supported mentally colonized Habesha elites, who were then used to oppress their own people and instigate wars between fellow Cushitic nations. As a result, we witnessed some of the most tragic and senseless conflicts in the Horn of Africa—conflicts grounded not in meaningful borders or ideological differences, but in internalized cultural alienation. Consider the destructive wars between:
- Ethiopia and Eritrea
- Somalia and Ethiopia
- Djibouti and Eritrea
- Somaliland and Somalia
These wars are often falsely presented as border conflicts, when in reality, the root cause lies in the political systems led by Habeshanized elites, who have long acted as gatekeepers for foreign interests. The true, ongoing conflict in the region is between these elites and the non-Habeshanized Cushitic populations seeking to reclaim their history, identity, and self-rule.
So why do the Oromo and other oppressed nations describe the Habesha elites as colonizers? Because these elites—drawn from historically dominated and assimilated peoples—now implement the same colonial logic against other Cushitic groups. The Agaw-Midir has been the most severely impacted by this internal colonization, followed by Oromia, Somali territories, Afarland, Sidama, and others.
Today, the TPLF (Tigray People’s Liberation Front) exemplifies this role. As a modern proxy for Western geopolitical interests, it continues the legacy of these elite-driven systems of domination. The current struggle, therefore, is not simply a national liberation movement, but a Cushitic resistance against neo-colonial tyranny.
There are two versions of Ethiopia:
- Biblical Ethiopia: A spiritual, inclusive, and Cushitic Ethiopia where all peoples—Agaw, Oromo, Afar, Somali, Beja—are respected as the chosen children of Wàqa.
- Fake Ethiopia: A project of Habeshanized elites, where the name “Ethiopia” is used to legitimize their domination, suppress indigenous cultures, and maintain foreign-aligned control.
The Kemant People’s Demand for Self-Rule: A Modern Voice of Agaw-Midir
To support the revival of the Agaw nation, it’s essential to recognize and amplify the voices of its subgroups—such as the Kemant people—who have already begun to demand their rights within the framework of Ethiopia’s federal constitution.
In a significant political development, representatives of the Kemant people from nine woredas (counties) in the Gondar area—numbering more than one thousand delegates and supporters—held a half-day conference at Cinema Hall in Gondar City. The focus was a long-standing and unresolved issue: their demand for constitutional recognition and self-governance.
After an in-depth discussion, the conference issued a formal communiqué, which included the following key declarations:
- We reaffirm the constitutionality of our demand for recognition and self-rule.
- This is not a personal or factional interest but an urgent and collective call from the Kemant people. Our demand is similar to that of other Ethiopian nations and nationalities who have achieved regional autonomy under the federal system.
- We reject the delays and obstruction in the implementation of our rights.
- Though our identity was recognized in principle following the fall of the Derg regime, the slow progress and administrative sabotage we face are not due to government policy but are the actions of individuals undermining democracy.
- We are not asking for charity. We are demanding our rights.
- Our demand stems from our legal entitlement under the constitution—not from the goodwill of political actors. We expect urgent action to address the delay, which is causing significant harm to our people.
- We stand for peace, development, democracy, and equality.
- Our movement is non-violent and rooted in the same principles for which so many Ethiopians have sacrificed their lives. We are simply demanding to be treated with dignity and fairness.
- We insist on cultural representation and census recognition.
- We demand that the Kemant people be recorded as a distinct nationality in future national censuses—as was the case before 2007. Additionally, our exclusion from cultural events like the Hidar 29 Annual Nations-Nationalities Festival must end.
- We urge the Amhara Regional Government to act without delay.
- The constitutional mandate is clear. Our rights must be respected, and any resistance to this recognition should be treated as an unlawful deviation from the federal political framework.
- The Kemant Nationality Interim Coordinating Committees pledged to continue organizing the community, engaging with supporters, and working with government bodies to realize the aspirations of the Kemant people. This struggle is not about ethnic supremacy, but about equal treatment, dignity, and the fulfillment of constitutional promises.
Liberating Agaw-Midir and Biyya-Oromo: Toward a Cushitic Renaissance
The liberation of the Agaw people and other Cushitic groups from the domination of the Habeshanized elites is a critical step toward true justice and national dignity in Ethiopia. The historical oppression, cultural assimilation, and political marginalization imposed on the Agaw—especially in their heartlands such as Gondar, Qwara, Axum, Lalibela, and Bahirdar—have stripped them of their rightful place in Ethiopia’s political and cultural landscape.
The liberation movements of the past—like those led by Yodit Gudit and the Zagwe dynasty—are inspirational reminders that the Agaw nation has long resisted domination and sought self-determination. Today, the struggle continues in a different form: as an effort to reclaim language, culture, identity, and political autonomy.
Similarly, the Biyya-Oromo people, despite suffering from Abyssinian hegemony, have preserved much of their linguistic and cultural identity thanks to their resilient liberation movements. Unlike the heavily Habeshanized Agaw, many Oromo have managed to sustain their heritage, thanks in large part to courageous resistance and leadership.
The key question remains: Can Agaw-Midir and the Habeshanized sections of Biyya-Oromo be liberated from Abyssinian domination? The answer is a hopeful “yes,” if the non-Habeshanized Cushitic peoples unite to assist those who have lost their cultural bearings due to systemic oppression.
Indeed, the present Amhara region is, in essence, an Agaw national homeland, and the Agaw people deserve recognition and restoration of their rights over this territory. The road to freedom demands solidarity among all Cushitic peoples and a collective effort to dismantle the lingering colonial structures maintained by Habeshanized elites and their foreign patrons.
The ongoing struggle is not merely a political contest but a moral imperative to restore dignity, self-rule, and cultural revival. It is about freeing Ethiopia from the artificial identities imposed by colonial history and creating a future where all peoples—Oromo, Agaw, Sidama, Somali, Afar, and others—can coexist with mutual respect and equality.
The demand for Gondar and Qwara as autonomous Agaw areas marks a positive step toward this vision. Expanding this recognition to include Axum, Lalibela, Bahirdar, and other historically Agaw lands will be crucial for restoring justice.
The liberation of Agaw-Midir and Biyya-Oromo represents a decisive break from a past of cultural suppression and political exclusion. It promises the emergence of a truly federal Ethiopia—one that respects its diverse nations and nationalities, protects their rights, and promotes genuine unity based on equality.
Conclusion: Toward an Integrated, Prosperous, and United Africa
The liberation of Agaw-Midir, Biyya-Oromo, and all other oppressed nations within Ethiopia is not just a local or national issue—it is a foundational step toward the rebirth of a truly integrated and prosperous Africa. The historic injustices imposed by Habeshanized elites and their colonial backers have fractured Ethiopia’s unity and suppressed the rich diversity of its indigenous peoples.
By embracing the principles of self-determination, equality, and cultural revival, Ethiopia can transform from a fractured pseudo-federation into a genuine federal state that respects and empowers all nations and nationalities. The promotion of Afaan Oromoo as the primary working language and the recognition of autonomous federal states like Agaw-Midir are key milestones in this journey.
Such an Ethiopia—rooted in the respect for Cushitic heritage and identity—will serve as a beacon for pan-African unity and development. It will demonstrate how diverse peoples can coexist, collaborate, and prosper within a shared framework of respect and justice.
The path ahead requires courage, vision, and unwavering commitment from leaders and peoples alike. It demands that Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and all stakeholders honor the noble original vision of Ethiopia’s founders by fostering a civic geo-federation that uplifts all Ethiopians, not just a select few.
Ultimately, the liberation of Ethiopia’s oppressed nations will unlock the continent’s true potential, paving the way for a United Africa that is strong, just, and inclusive—a continent where all peoples, languages, and cultures thrive in harmony.
May Wàqa guide this noble endeavor.
Galatôma!
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2019/02/2 ... nal-state/