Accommodative Oromummaa of the OLF vs. Assimilative Amaranet of the OPP!
By Fayyis Oromia*
The main conflict in Ethiopia nowadays is based on the national ideologies of the previously assimilative Amaranet and the now accommodative Oromummaa. Ethiopia, under the rule of the OPP, is still Amapia (an Amaranet-dominated country), not yet transformed into Oropia (an Oromummaa-led state). Surely, the OLA’s best vision is the transformation of Ethiopia from Amapia to Oropia. The question yet to be answered is whether the OPP under Dr. Abiy will commit itself to this project of transforming Ethiopia from its previous status as Amapia to the legitimate position of Oropia. Will Amapia or Oropia prevail through the ongoing negotiations? It is clear that the main factor necessary for this transformation is the God-given privilege of promoting Afan Oromo to the primary working language of the federation, of course replacing Amarigna. I hope that the OLA and OPP will agree on this point as well as on placing Finfinne under Oromia’s administration. If they agree on these two issues, all other matters are secondary, as far as I am concerned.
There is no question that the Oromo are already free from Abyssinian (Amhara and Tigray) domination. The TPLF has already lost in the war against the Pro-Amaranet elites (PAE) of the OPP led by Dr. Abiy Ahmed. Amara elites were used against the TPLF because of their revenge mentality against the Tigray, but they have little chance to return to the Finfinne palace. At the end of the day, there will be a bitter struggle between the PAE of the Oromo and the POE (Pro-Oromummaa elites). The conflict will definitely be between the Oromo prosperitans in power, who now seem to maintain the existing domination of Amaranet/Amarigna at the cost of Oromiffa/Oromummaa, and the Oromo republicans as the major opposition. Oromo prosperitans are cautious about taking radical steps to address Oromo’s basic questions, such as promoting Afan Oromo to federal working language status and reclaiming lost Oromian territories like Finfinne and Dire Dawa. The prosperitans are moving slowly but surely toward implementing these rights of the Oromo, whereas the radical republicans demand quick implementation. Are Dr. Abiy and his administration trying to balance the triangular forces (Amhara, Tigray, and Oromo) in Ethiopia, or are they using the conflict between them to divide and rule?
At the beginning, all three angles supported the prime minister, hoping he would serve their respective interests. After a few months, as the PM began releasing political prisoners, reforming the polity, and pushing for accountability of criminals, the Tigray angle started to oppose him. Then, observing the PM’s approach to Oromo issues like the Finfinne question, the Amara angle began protesting. Of course, Oromo republicans from the third angle accuse the PM of neglecting the Oromo to appease the two Habesha forces. How long can he balance this triangle of conflict? Why are Amara elites the only opponents of Oromo rights to Finfinne? Did the war against the TPLF empower the PAE, or was it an opportunity for the POE to take over power in the Finfinne palace?
The past attempts by all oppressed nations in Ethiopia to forge an all-inclusive alliance against the TPLF have provoked controversial debates and discussions. Especially, the approach of Amara democratic forces and Oromo liberation forces since the formation of the AFD in 2006 has caught the attention of the Tigrayan dictators, who have ruled and survived by polarizing Amara and Oromo elites and instigating conflict between these two major nations. The AFD was a symbolic first move that later grew substantially toward a real and effective alliance of all oppressed nations, including the Amara nation.
Just as the AFD failed due to continuous campaigns by Tigrayan forces and the mutually mistrustful nationalists — Amara integrationists struggling to re-establish a unitary country without an autonomous Oromia, and Oromo independents fighting to liberate Oromia by dismembering Ethiopia but open to a union of free peoples — today, these three forces (Tigrayan colonists and the mutually mistrustful Amara and Oromo nationalists) are doing their best to hinder a possible inclusive alliance. Especially, one argument from Oromo nationalists opposing the alliance is that “Amara elites are colonizers, whom the Oromo, as a colonized nation, should not trust to forge any alliance with.” This argument led me to ask: Were the Amara under TPLF rule (since 1991) a colonized nation or a colonizing force?
Fortunately, I came across an interesting article by Amara intellectual Professor Daniel Kinde, describing how the TPLF colonized Amaraland, especially how parts of Gondar and Wollo were annexed into Tigray. This rhetoric parallels some Amara nationalists, who have started to feel and sense what it means to live under an apartheid system of national domination. It is clear that the Amara nation was under Tigrayan colonial rule since the end of the twentieth century, just as the Oromo nation was since the end of the nineteenth century. For operational clarity, let me define colonialism/colonization in this essay.
“Colonialism is a policy by which a nation maintains or extends its control over foreign dependencies, i.e., the acquisition and colonization by a nation of other territories and their peoples. It may also be seen as a search for raw materials, new markets, and new fields of investment. Sometimes, but not always, colonialism was accompanied by colonization — the physical settling of people from the imperial country. Typical aspects include racial and cultural inequalities between rulers and subjects, political and legal domination by the imperial power, and exploitation of the subject people. It is the policy and practice of a strong power extending territorial control over a weaker nation or people. Sometimes, ‘colonial’ must be in quotation marks because where colonization occurred long ago, descendants of settlers feel themselves as much part of the territory as those displaced (e.g., South Africa).”
Therefore, can we not say, according to this operational definition, that Tigreans were colonists of all oppressed nations, including the Amara? Is this not what the Tigrean colonists did — particularly annexing parts of Amharaland and Oromoland (e.g., Raya and Azebo) as well as other areas of the empire? Was the alliance between Amara and Oromo not an alliance of two colonized nations against their common colonizer? I think the last quarter-century was a good time to speak not of the Ethiopian empire or Abyssinian/Amara empire, but only of the Tigrean empire’s system of colonization and domination. Just like Whites in apartheid South Africa, only Tigreans were privileged citizens in their empire, and all others, including Amara, were second-class citizens.
Slowly, some Amara nationalists woke up to avoid manipulation by Tigrean colonists, who used Amharic at the federal level to mask their domination over Amara and others. The fact that Amharic has been the only federal working language is a Tigrean plan to make other oppressed nations, including the Oromo, feel dominated by the Amara. To promote this sense, the Tigrean colonizers opposed Afan Oromo getting the same status, wanting the Oromo-Amara conflict to continue. I think this explains why some Oromo nationalists felt Amara were colonizers and opposed an Amara-Oromo alliance, which was unproductive. I personally believe the Amara nation was as oppressed as the Oromo and other nations under the TPLF.
Almost all Amara nationalists remain centripetal, preferring a unitary centralized country as opposed to the decentralized federation or union of free peoples favored by centrifugal Oromo nationalists. Because Amharic is the only federal language and due to authoritarian culture in Amara society, Amara nationalists are notorious centralists. Had Afan Oromo been the only federal language, surely they would have been centrifugal federalists to protect their region from Oromonization. Tigrean colonists exploited this Amara mentality; many Amara nationalists failed to see their own colonial suffering like the Oromo and others. But it is encouraging that some, like Professor Daniel Kinde, have started to feel the colonial misery under Tigrean fascist rulers.
I hope the future political development will see Amara unitarists (who model after the U.S. government and want a country where all nations melt into Amarigna speakers) convert to Amara unionists, thinking, talking, and acting like Oromo unionists who model after the EU — fostering a union of free peoples developing their own languages but ready to unite for common economic benefit. This conversion would be the best precondition for effective all-inclusive democratization cooperation. Even if not, the suggested opposition alliance could include left-wing Oromo unionists striving for a union of independent nations, a middle group of true ethnic federalists (including most nations in the SNNP), and right-wing Amara unitarists pushing for a unitary country in the form of a geographical federation. The question remains: how can such an alliance be attained and maintained despite the differing visions?
The only common ground is the two-phased struggle against Tigrean colonists’ apartheid system: decolonization/liberation and democratization/election. We have concluded the first phase, in which all three wings acted as liberation fronts to overthrow fascists. In that phase, debate on visions was unnecessary, even though Tigrean cadres tried to instigate division. After liberation, the three wings can either agree on a middle ground — true ethnic federation, which rejects dismantling mono-national regions or dismembering the country — or opt for a public referendum on the three outcomes (union of free peoples, true ethnic federation, or unitary country) and abide by the result.
Now, there is common ground for electoral democracy, as Ob Lenco Lata said in an interview. Election and competition among parties are possible only after liberation and consensus on the political community’s future form. I personally believe the lasting solution will come when Amara nationalists stop nostalgic calls for their lost empire and concentrate on consolidating Amara freedom from Tigrean colonists, while Oromo nationalists remain open to a future union of free peoples.
When these two major nations align for the common struggle of decolonization and democratization — including consensus or referendum on the future political community — it will mark the end of the Tigrean empire. Otherwise, polarization between Amhara forces and Oromo fronts will continue to serve Tigrean minority rule, condemning both nations to live under colonial rule for another century. I hope Amara nationalists will wake up, realize they were colonized by Tigreans, and join the anti-colonial struggle of the Oromo and other nations. It should be the end for Amara nationalists hiding behind the name Ethiopia. Just as Tigrean colonists hiding behind Ethiopia was rejected, Amara nationalists must not be accepted at face value.
Amara nationalists need to be bold and honest to consolidate their liberation from Tigrean domination. Their attempts to forge “multinational” parties have harmed themselves, as such parties are vulnerable to Tigrean infiltrators sowing discord, leading to disintegration. A classic example is the destruction of the strong CUD by infiltrators. That is why Amara nationalists should drop their “Ethiopia” mask, organize as Amara, and honestly forge alliances with Oromo and others. Only then can Amara democrats distance themselves from obsolete conservatives hiding behind Ethiopia’s name, who served Tigrean rulers by opposing genuine opposition, as seen in UDJ factions during recent campaigns. Where are these conservatives now? Are they satisfied with having saved Tigrean colonists from strong opposition like Medrek? Why did they make noise when TPLF was destabilized but stay quiet when colonists stabilized?
Anyway, the question for all Ethiopians is: can we accept and respect Amara nationalists who sincerely distance themselves from obsolete feudals nostalgic for empire and join the anti-colonial struggle alongside Oromo and others? I personally welcome and encourage such Amara freedom fighters to join our fight for decolonization, which must precede democratization of free and liberated nations. The Amara were dominated as a nation, like the Oromo and others. These nations must first be liberated nationally, then democratization will follow to bring individual freedom. Without national liberation from colonization, individual liberty is a pipe dream.
It is important to note that despite some scholars’ attempts to paint the Amara as colonizers, the Amara nation was colonized under the TPLF, though its elites need to awaken. I hope Professor Daniel and others recognize that the Oromo were colonized since the late 19th century just as the Amara were since the late 20th century. Those who paint Amara as still colonizers only serve Tigrean interests. Whether intentional or not, they fuel TPLF polarization. It is time for Amara democrats and Oromo liberators to unite and end Tigrean colonization, as they did a year ago. I believe Oromo people are not from Madagascar, nor are Amara people from Yemen as some claim. A small part of Amara may have Yemeni genes, just as a few Oromo may relate to Madagascar, but historically, both are part of Cush — though until 1991 Amara rulers were colonizers and Oromo colonized; recently, both were colonized, even if most Amara elites woke later.
Finally, the cooperation of Amara democrats and Oromo liberators, including other colonized nations, to forge an all-inclusive alliance against Tigrean fascists was a nightmare for the colonists’ cadres online and offline. They spoke of the Bedenno massacre of Amara, accusing OLF as perpetrators, and sang of the Chelenqo massacre of Oromo to curse Amara King Menelik — all to hinder Amara-Oromo unity. Yet Amara youth followed Wallelign Mekonnen’s example, fighting for Amara freedom and all oppressed nations, instead of celebrating feudal kings like Hailesilassie or the monarchy, as their obsolete feudal leaders did in their “multinational” parties. I find the trend encouraging, as seen in Professor Daniel Kinde’s article and some Amara nationalist rhetoric. Better late than never — Oromians welcome the Amara nation to the club of colonized nations in the Horn of Africa.
Just a year ago, elites of the two big nations (Amara and Oromo) cooperated to overthrow the Tigrean hegemony and succeeded. Now, as the liberal Oromos led by Dr. Abiy implement their program and address crucial Oromo questions, Amara elites cry foul. Are they revealing the colonial mindset of their forefathers? Elites of other nations, including the Tigray, do not oppose Oromo rights to Finfinne. With this stance, Amara elites isolate themselves and show their anti-Bilisummaa (anti-freedom) position. That is why Oromo republicans say: “Amara elites cannot be trusted, and we must cooperate with Tigrayans to block the Amara comeback.” Alliances shift: before 1991, it was Oro-Tigray against Amara; since 1991, Oro-Amara against Tigray; now Oro-Tigray is re-emerging. The third possibility, Ama-Tigray against Oromo, is unlikely due to ideological differences and historical grievances. Now is the time for Oromo liberals to stop hesitating and make decisive moves.
Galatôma!
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2019/03/1 ... -finfinne/