Amapia is Already Dead—and the Dying Amarpia Will Surely Give Birth to Oromia, Orompia, or Oropia!
By Fayyis Oromia*
It is becoming increasingly clear that Ethiopia is changing its colour—slowly, but surely. The white Amapia (an Amharanet-dominated unitary state) is already dead. The yellow Amarpia (an Amharia-dominated ethnic federation) is in the process of dying. The future belongs either to the green independent Oromia, the brown federal Orompia, or the black integrative Oropia.
The next likely stage is a free Oromia—either as an independent state or as part of a genuine federation or confederation with other free nations. If Ethiopia is to continue existing as a united country with territorial integrity, then a transformation into Orompia (an Oromia-led ethnic federation) or Oropia (an Oromummà-led geo-federation) is inevitable.
This may not be what either Oromo or non-Oromo political elites want to hear—but it is a bitter truth that must, and eventually will, be accepted by all concerned. The Ethiopia we’ve known until now has effectively been Amapia—a state dominated by Amhara nationalism. However, the Ethiopia of the future is on a trajectory toward becoming Oropia—a state led by Oromummà. This transformation will unfold gradually but certainly. The only way to stop this shift would be the separation of all nations bordering Oromia. As long as Ethiopia maintains its territorial integrity and Oromummà leadership, the state will inevitably become Oropia.
Ethiopia’s Destiny: Oromia, Orompia or Oropia
Ethiopia’s future is already set: to give birth to either Oromia, Orompia, or Oropia. That means one of the following three scenarios will materialize:
- An independent Oromia without Oropia.
- An autonomous Oromia within Oropia—i.e., Orompia.
- An integrative Oropia without a distinct Oromia.
The Oromo liberation movement consists of two wings and a backbone—three core positions from which it challenges a common adversary. One wing advocates for an independent Oromia as a sovereign state, focused on self-rule and emerging as a power in the Horn of Africa. The backbone of the movement supports a federal Orompia—a powerful Oromia within a democratic Ethiopia, combining self-rule with shared rule. The other wing seeks to transform Ethiopia into a democratic state called Oropia, with Oromic as the primary federal language and less emphasis on regional autonomy—prioritizing shared rule over self-rule.
Though these three positions reflect different visions, they are currently working—more or less in parallel—against the same dictatorial regime. As a result, we see Oromo forces across the spectrum: political parties, liberation fronts, and civic movements. Yet, there is no single organization coordinating these three branches under a unified national liberation front. This absence makes the realization of one of the three outcomes inevitable—and none of them are necessarily unfavorable to the Oromo people.
Historical Narratives Behind the Visions
These three political visions are rooted in differing interpretations of Oromo and Abyssinian history:
Some see Oromo and Abyssinian histories as parallel and conflicting—such as the contrast between Menelik’s conquest and the so-called Oromo expansion.
Others view the past as both shared and conflicting.
Still others focus on a proud shared history, exemplified by the victory at Adwa.
From these historical perspectives arise the three post-liberation scenarios:
- Independent Oromia (Oromia without Oropia)
- Federal Orompia (Oromia within Oropia)
- Integrative Oropia (Oropia without Oromia)
To achieve freedom, despite our differing views, we must first unite against the current oppressive regime. Once this is achieved, we can democratically decide the form of sovereignty the Oromo people prefer. Consider the following global analogies:
- The Russian Model – Those who see only conflict prefer this path. Like Russia dismantled the USSR to create a dominant Russian Federation, an independent Oromia could emerge as a regional power. This view aligns with Ob. Galàsà Dilboo.
- The British Model – Those who recognize both shared and conflicting histories support a federal structure. England freed itself from Roman rule, formed the UK, and retained English as its working language. Similarly, Oromia could gain autonomy and join others in a federal Oropia. This view is supported by Dr. Lénco Latà.
- The Indian Model – Those who emphasize shared pride prefer an integrative Oropia. India promoted Hindi, renamed the region India, and based federal regions on historical-cultural zones. Oromia could lead the liberation of the empire, rename the country Oropia, promote Oromic, and form new federal regions based on historic Odà centers—e.g., Odà Bisil, Bulluqi, Bultum, Garres, Makodi, Nabee, and Robà. This view resonates with Dr. Haile Fida.
Three Visions, One Nation in Struggle
Every Oromo has the right to choose the future they believe is best for their nation. Ultimately, the will of the Oromo majority must prevail. Oromia’s self-rule and/or Oropia’s shared rule should become the central theme of Oromo political discourse—moving beyond the simplistic federation vs. separation debate seen among Tigrayan elites.
Interestingly, the dominant Abyssinian political camps each follow one path only:
- Amhara elites cling to the Indian-type model, benefitting from Amharic’s privileged status as the federal language.
Eritrean elites, long marginalized, chose the Russian-style full separation.
- Tigrayan elites, lacking both linguistic dominance and viable statehood, opt for the British-style federalism.
- By contrast, the Oromo—being the demographic majority and occupying the central region—are uniquely positioned to consider all three models. As long as democracy and freedom are the rule, the Oromo should leverage this advantage, coordinating with all democratic forces in the empire to defeat the current Amharanet-dominated system. Only then can the Oromo vote on their preferred path forward.
Conclusion: One Goal, Three Outcomes
In my view, all three visions are valid and viable. The final decision must come from the politically conscious Oromo polity, and it should be ratified by public referendum when the time is right.
This essay may be a bitter pill for those who rejoice in the fragmentation of the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) into multiple factions. What they fail to understand is that the OLF has always had one ultimate goal: freedom. The three outcomes—independent Oromia, federal Orompia, and integrative Oropia—are simply different interpretations of the possible sovereignty after freedom. The movement adapts to changing realities and plays its cards in tune with the Zeitgeist.
Galatôma.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/05/0 ... ve-oropia/
Re: Amapia is Already Dead—and the Dying Amarpia Will Surely Give Birth to Oromia, Orompia, or Oropia!
It is becoming increasingly clear that Ethiopia is changing its colour—slowly, but surely. The white Amapia (an Amharanet-dominated unitary state) is already dead. The yellow Amarpia (an Amharia-dominated ethnic federation) is in the process of dying. The future belongs either to the green independent Oromia, the brown federal Orompia, or the black integrative Oropia.