The Necessity of an Inclusive Revolution in Ethiopia: Confronting the Salisawi Derg
Posted: 07 Jan 2026, 14:31
The Necessity of an Inclusive Revolution in Ethiopia: Confronting the Salisawi Derg
By Fayyis Oromia
Introduction
Ethiopia appears to have returned to a familiar and troubling political cycle. The country once endured the authoritarian rule of the Derg, followed by the ethnically exclusionary dominance of the TPLF-led EPRDF, often described as a “second Derg.” During this period, state power was used disproportionately against the Oromo people and their resources, as well as against the Amhara people and their land. Senior TPLF officials openly articulated strategies aimed at subduing these major communities in order to prolong political and economic control.
Although the EPRDF was ultimately removed through an inclusive popular uprising, the promise of democratic transformation has not been fulfilled. Instead, under Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, former authoritarian elites have re-emerged within the Prosperity Party (EPP), widely referred to by critics as Biltsigina or the “Salisawi Derg.” Today, this regime suppresses democratic forces across multiple communities—including Oromo, Amhara, Tigrayan, Somali, Sidama, and others—under the banner of a [deleted] conception of “Ethiopiawinet.”
The Reproduction of Authoritarian Rule
The current government has revived many of the same mechanisms of repression employed by its predecessors. Political pluralism is constrained, dissent is criminalized, and genuine democratic actors are marginalized. Moreover, the regime has deliberately instrumentalized historical tensions between Ethiopia’s major political constituencies—particularly the Oromo and Amhara—to fragment opposition forces and maintain power.
Both Oromo and Amhara communities are now victims of state violence and political exclusion. Yet rather than fostering solidarity among these groups, the ruling party exploits mutual suspicion to prevent the emergence of a unified opposition. As long as this strategy succeeds, authoritarian rule remains secure.
Elections, Mobilization, and the Limits of the Current System
Under previous regimes, elections functioned largely as symbolic exercises rather than meaningful democratic processes. Nevertheless, they served as platforms for political mobilization and consciousness-raising, helping to lay the groundwork for broader resistance. A similar dynamic persists today. While elections under the current system cannot be free or fair, they still provide opportunities to organize and articulate collective demands.
However, a critical unresolved issue continues to undermine opposition unity: the ideological divide between pro-integration Amhara elites and pro-independence Oromo elites. The former envision a strong, unified Ethiopian state, while the latter prioritize self-determination and liberation from centralized domination. Each camp often treats its position as absolute, leaving little room for compromise. The ruling elite has capitalized on this division to block any coordinated challenge to its authority.
The Urgency of an Inclusive Revolution
Ethiopia has reached a critical juncture. Large segments of the population increasingly recognize the necessity of an inclusive revolution to dismantle the existing system of domination. Yet Biltsigina actively works to prevent unity among opposition forces, understanding that its survival depends on their fragmentation.
As long as the current regime remains in power, widespread suffering will continue—manifesting in mass displacement, political imprisonment, and the erosion of civic life. The ongoing confrontation between opposition camps has become a convenient shield behind which the regime governs without meaningful challenge.
A coordinated, nonviolent popular uprising—particularly one involving the Oromo and other marginalized nations—represents the most viable path toward systemic change. For many Oromo constituencies, the continuation of the current system offers little to lose. The collapse of authoritarian rule could open pathways toward genuine autonomy, self-rule, or even independence, including a fair resolution of the status of Finfinne (Addis Ababa).
Fear, Manipulation, and Manufactured Mistrust
The regime relies heavily on fear-based narratives to maintain division:
- A revolution will lead to the dismantling of Oromia.
- Oromo political empowerment will result in the destruction of Ethiopia.
- Mass violence and military crackdowns are inevitable.
- Ethiopia will descend into civil war or genocide.
These claims are designed to paralyze both camps and deter cooperation. Overcoming this manufactured mistrust requires courage and compromise. Pro-independence forces must accept the possibility that independence may not be immediately realized, while pro-integration forces must accept the legitimacy of multinational federalism—or even peaceful separation—if chosen democratically.
The ‘Y’ Model: A Framework for Compromise
A useful conceptual framework is the ‘Y’ model:
- The base represents the current condition of authoritarian rule.
- The junction symbolizes liberation and democratic transition.
- One branch leads toward independence.
- The other leads toward integration.
Both camps must move together from repression to freedom, even if they later pursue different political futures. Once liberated, the ultimate question—unity or separation—should be resolved through a free and fair referendum reflecting the will of the people.
Pathways to Change
There are three principal strategies for political transformation in Ethiopia:
- Armed Struggle – Employed by groups such as the OLA; limited by lack of external support and slow progress.
- Electoral Struggle – Pursued by parties like the OFC; currently ineffective under an authoritarian system.
- Popular Uprising – Largely untested in a coordinated and inclusive form, but potentially the most decisive.
A strategic combination of these approaches could prove effective. This is precisely why the regime invests heavily in sowing discord through loyalists operating in both Amharic and Afaan Oromo.
Conclusion: Toward an ATO Alliance
Meaningful change requires confronting uncomfortable realities. Opposition forces must abandon zero-sum thinking, embrace compromise, and commit to respecting popular sovereignty through democratic mechanisms such as referenda. Whether Ethiopia’s future lies in a consensual multinational union or peaceful separation, the decision must rest with the people.
The tragic experience of Sudan—where millions of lives were lost before separation—offers a sobering lesson. Ethiopia still has an opportunity to avoid a similar fate. However, current policies increasingly resemble the divisive strategies of past regimes.
History demonstrates that authoritarian systems in Ethiopia fall only when broad alliances emerge. Just as the Oromara (Oromo–Amhara) alliance contributed to the downfall of the TPLF, a renewed *ATO alliance—Amhara, Tegaru, and Oromo—*is essential to dismantle the Salisawi Derg.
Now is the time for unity around shared principles of freedom, democracy, and dignity.
Galatôma.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2017/12/2 ... d-of-tplf/
By Fayyis Oromia
Introduction
Ethiopia appears to have returned to a familiar and troubling political cycle. The country once endured the authoritarian rule of the Derg, followed by the ethnically exclusionary dominance of the TPLF-led EPRDF, often described as a “second Derg.” During this period, state power was used disproportionately against the Oromo people and their resources, as well as against the Amhara people and their land. Senior TPLF officials openly articulated strategies aimed at subduing these major communities in order to prolong political and economic control.
Although the EPRDF was ultimately removed through an inclusive popular uprising, the promise of democratic transformation has not been fulfilled. Instead, under Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, former authoritarian elites have re-emerged within the Prosperity Party (EPP), widely referred to by critics as Biltsigina or the “Salisawi Derg.” Today, this regime suppresses democratic forces across multiple communities—including Oromo, Amhara, Tigrayan, Somali, Sidama, and others—under the banner of a [deleted] conception of “Ethiopiawinet.”
The Reproduction of Authoritarian Rule
The current government has revived many of the same mechanisms of repression employed by its predecessors. Political pluralism is constrained, dissent is criminalized, and genuine democratic actors are marginalized. Moreover, the regime has deliberately instrumentalized historical tensions between Ethiopia’s major political constituencies—particularly the Oromo and Amhara—to fragment opposition forces and maintain power.
Both Oromo and Amhara communities are now victims of state violence and political exclusion. Yet rather than fostering solidarity among these groups, the ruling party exploits mutual suspicion to prevent the emergence of a unified opposition. As long as this strategy succeeds, authoritarian rule remains secure.
Elections, Mobilization, and the Limits of the Current System
Under previous regimes, elections functioned largely as symbolic exercises rather than meaningful democratic processes. Nevertheless, they served as platforms for political mobilization and consciousness-raising, helping to lay the groundwork for broader resistance. A similar dynamic persists today. While elections under the current system cannot be free or fair, they still provide opportunities to organize and articulate collective demands.
However, a critical unresolved issue continues to undermine opposition unity: the ideological divide between pro-integration Amhara elites and pro-independence Oromo elites. The former envision a strong, unified Ethiopian state, while the latter prioritize self-determination and liberation from centralized domination. Each camp often treats its position as absolute, leaving little room for compromise. The ruling elite has capitalized on this division to block any coordinated challenge to its authority.
The Urgency of an Inclusive Revolution
Ethiopia has reached a critical juncture. Large segments of the population increasingly recognize the necessity of an inclusive revolution to dismantle the existing system of domination. Yet Biltsigina actively works to prevent unity among opposition forces, understanding that its survival depends on their fragmentation.
As long as the current regime remains in power, widespread suffering will continue—manifesting in mass displacement, political imprisonment, and the erosion of civic life. The ongoing confrontation between opposition camps has become a convenient shield behind which the regime governs without meaningful challenge.
A coordinated, nonviolent popular uprising—particularly one involving the Oromo and other marginalized nations—represents the most viable path toward systemic change. For many Oromo constituencies, the continuation of the current system offers little to lose. The collapse of authoritarian rule could open pathways toward genuine autonomy, self-rule, or even independence, including a fair resolution of the status of Finfinne (Addis Ababa).
Fear, Manipulation, and Manufactured Mistrust
The regime relies heavily on fear-based narratives to maintain division:
- A revolution will lead to the dismantling of Oromia.
- Oromo political empowerment will result in the destruction of Ethiopia.
- Mass violence and military crackdowns are inevitable.
- Ethiopia will descend into civil war or genocide.
These claims are designed to paralyze both camps and deter cooperation. Overcoming this manufactured mistrust requires courage and compromise. Pro-independence forces must accept the possibility that independence may not be immediately realized, while pro-integration forces must accept the legitimacy of multinational federalism—or even peaceful separation—if chosen democratically.
The ‘Y’ Model: A Framework for Compromise
A useful conceptual framework is the ‘Y’ model:
- The base represents the current condition of authoritarian rule.
- The junction symbolizes liberation and democratic transition.
- One branch leads toward independence.
- The other leads toward integration.
Both camps must move together from repression to freedom, even if they later pursue different political futures. Once liberated, the ultimate question—unity or separation—should be resolved through a free and fair referendum reflecting the will of the people.
Pathways to Change
There are three principal strategies for political transformation in Ethiopia:
- Armed Struggle – Employed by groups such as the OLA; limited by lack of external support and slow progress.
- Electoral Struggle – Pursued by parties like the OFC; currently ineffective under an authoritarian system.
- Popular Uprising – Largely untested in a coordinated and inclusive form, but potentially the most decisive.
A strategic combination of these approaches could prove effective. This is precisely why the regime invests heavily in sowing discord through loyalists operating in both Amharic and Afaan Oromo.
Conclusion: Toward an ATO Alliance
Meaningful change requires confronting uncomfortable realities. Opposition forces must abandon zero-sum thinking, embrace compromise, and commit to respecting popular sovereignty through democratic mechanisms such as referenda. Whether Ethiopia’s future lies in a consensual multinational union or peaceful separation, the decision must rest with the people.
The tragic experience of Sudan—where millions of lives were lost before separation—offers a sobering lesson. Ethiopia still has an opportunity to avoid a similar fate. However, current policies increasingly resemble the divisive strategies of past regimes.
History demonstrates that authoritarian systems in Ethiopia fall only when broad alliances emerge. Just as the Oromara (Oromo–Amhara) alliance contributed to the downfall of the TPLF, a renewed *ATO alliance—Amhara, Tegaru, and Oromo—*is essential to dismantle the Salisawi Derg.
Now is the time for unity around shared principles of freedom, democracy, and dignity.
Galatôma.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2017/12/2 ... d-of-tplf/