As Biltsigina Attempts to Survive Through Polarizing Amhara and Oromo, the Opposition Must Champion Oromara!
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 02:09
As Biltsigina Attempts to Survive Through Polarizing Amhara and Oromo, the Opposition Must Champion the Oromara Project
By Fayyis Oromia*
It is intriguing to note that Dr. Abiy Ahmed appears to be employing the same strategy of dividing and polarizing the Amhara and Oromo communities to secure his political survival, a tactic previously used by Meles Zenawi. Dr. Abiy has positioned himself at the center of Ethiopia’s political landscape, with the Amhara Popular Force (APF) on the far-right, the Amhara Prosperity Party (APP) on the center-right, the Oromo Prosperity Party (OPP) on the center-left, and the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) on the far-left. By manipulating the APP vs. OPP and APF vs. OLF dichotomies, he seeks to foster division between the Amhara and Oromo groups.
Dr. Abiy skillfully balances these factions by portraying both as victims, depending on the level of pressure exerted by each side. When the Amhara bloc becomes powerful enough to threaten his regime, he leans toward the Oromo side to weaken them, and vice versa. Currently, the APP, supported by the APF, is engaged in a bitter struggle against the OPP, which has partial backing from the OLF. Dr. Abiy is manipulating both ends of the political spectrum to neutralize them, thereby consolidating his control over the power structures in Addis Ababa. He is keenly aware that only a genuine alliance between Amhara and Oromo forces can pose a serious threat to his regime. The concept of an Oromara coalition has the potential to once again challenge the authoritarian rule of Abiy and his loyalists in the Ethiopian Prosperity Party (EPP), just as such alliances previously led to the downfall of the TPLF regime.
However, the elites from both the Amhara and Oromo communities have yet to overcome their mutual mistrust, largely due to the enduring dominance of Amharanet at the expense of Oromummà. The Amhara elites remain hesitant to relinquish their dominance, while the Oromo elites, justifiably, continue their struggle for self-determination and liberation. This ongoing division presents a significant opportunity for Abiy and his EPP to maintain their grip on power, as the possibility of the Oromara alliance emerging as a formidable force—capable of overthrowing the regime—remains unlikely in the short term. It is for this reason that Abiy is eager to perpetuate the Amharanet vs. Oromummà conflict. His party members and supporters are intentionally exacerbating this ethnic polarization.
Dr. Abiy strategically delays addressing key demands from the Oromo community, such as elevating Oromiffà and Oromummà to their rightful leadership positions, in order to sustain the division between the two largest ethnic groups in the country. Some protests in the Amhara and Oromia regions are likely orchestrated by the EPP to fuel further conflict. The crucial question for the opposition is: how will they respond to this strategy? Will they fall prey to being used as tools for division, or will they reverse the trend by advocating for the Oromara project as a means to oust the dictatorial Biltsigina regime, just as they did with the TPLF years ago? Time will ultimately reveal the answer.
The Core Conflict in Ethiopian Politics
In previous writings, I have expressed support for democratic federalists while also critiquing their weaknesses. The central conflict in Ethiopia today can be understood as a struggle between two broad camps:
Anti-Oromia Forces: These are primarily reactionary unitarists from the unity camp.
Pro-Oromia Forces: These advocates for national self-administration are represented by Oromo nationalists and other marginalized groups.
Historically, this divide has been seen as irreconcilable, and the EPP has expertly exploited this rift to divide and rule. However, there have been promising moments of cooperation. For instance, in 2006, forward-thinking leaders from the OLF and CUD overcame this division by forming the Alliance for Freedom and Democracy (AFD), a significant step towards cooperation between seemingly opposing forces. Unfortunately, the AFD faced resistance from three directions: the ruling TPLF regime, conservative Ethio-nationalists, and left-wing radical Ethno-nationalists. The internal split within CUD and the withdrawal of the EPPF ultimately led to the collapse of the alliance.
Although the time may not yet be ripe for a lasting solution through AFD, the future seems to favor the vision of such a union—one based on the freedom and self-determination of all peoples within Ethiopia. Similar to the historical reconciliation between France and Germany, former enemies can transform into the foundational pillars of a peaceful federation, such as a democratic Amharaland and Oromoland contributing to a harmonious Ethiopian federation.
Medrek, ENM, and the Mid-Ground Approach
A subsequent effort towards this vision was Medrek, an alliance that emerged after two years of dialogue among moderate Ethiopian politicians. Both the UDJ (Unity Party) and OFC (Oromo Federalist Congress) came together to oppose the TPLF regime. However, this alliance also faced resistance from:
- The ruling TPLF regime,
- Conservative unitarists,
- Radical ethno-nationalists.
Nevertheless, Medrek represented a compromise, a centrist position attempting to unite historically divided factions. UDJ, in particular, was the only party that tried to shift from a far-right stance toward the center. Medrek’s value lay in its ability to bring together opposing forces—a remarkable achievement that demonstrated the possibility of cooperation despite profound differences.
Later, the ODF and AG7 formed the Ethiopian National Movement (ENM), a “Mid-Referendist” platform that sought to embrace both Ethiofederation and Ethnofederation, with the future determined by the will of the people.
Who Opposed ENM—and Why?
As with Medrek, the ENM faced opposition from three primary groups:
- The fascist TPLF regime,
- Reactionary unitarists seeking a centralized state,
- Radical Oromo nationalists and fake cyber “independence” activists loyal to the TPLF.
Despite lacking a comprehensive program from either side, ENM developed a “mini-program”—a pragmatic compromise that made cooperation between opposing factions possible. This move again proved that what once seemed impossible could, in fact, become a reality.
The Critical Role of Oromian Unity
I have been a critical supporter of both Medrek and ENM. While I acknowledge their achievements, I emphasize that they must not compromise on the unity of Oromia, just as they uphold the unity of Ethiopia. True unity can only be achieved when both Oromia and Ethiopia’s unity are respected and preserved. Proposals that call for the dismantling of Oromia through a national referendum must be reconsidered. If the referendum is confined solely to the Oromo people, it may be justifiable; however, involving non-Oromo populations in such decisions is inherently unjust. Genuine consensus can only be achieved when all parties respect Oromia’s right to exist as a united entity.
The Challenges Faced by ENM—and the Path Forward
For ENM to thrive and become a reliable political force, it must overcome three major challenges:
- Internal Tensions: Emotionally charged groups with conflicting agendas may threaten the stability of the coalition.
- External Sabotage: The ruling regime will likely attempt to divide and weaken ENM, just as it did with CUD and UDJ.
- Reconciling Oromian and Ethiopian Unity: True and lasting support from the Oromo people will hinge on this delicate balance.
Once ENM accepts Oromian unity alongside Ethiopian unity, its foundation will be unshakable. Otherwise, Ethiopia risks disintegration (a concern for right-wing unitarists) or the emergence of a chaotic independent Oromia (a fear among left-wing radicals).
The Path Forward
ENM and similar alliances hold the potential to be a powerful force for democratic change—a modern solution to Ethiopia’s historical problems. If properly guided, such coalitions can unite all oppressed peoples and nations under the banners of democracy, federalism, and mutual respect. Particularly, the re-emergence of Oromara cooperation could be the most effective means of dismantling the oppressive Biltsigina regime.
May divine wisdom guide the leaders of opposition parties in making this vision a reality. Let the youth take the lead. Let courage and foresight light the path. The alternative is continued rule by the dictatorial Biltsigina. Only alliances founded on justice, compromise, and mutual respect can deliver Ethiopia from dictatorship.
Galatôma!
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/04/0 ... a-project/
By Fayyis Oromia*
It is intriguing to note that Dr. Abiy Ahmed appears to be employing the same strategy of dividing and polarizing the Amhara and Oromo communities to secure his political survival, a tactic previously used by Meles Zenawi. Dr. Abiy has positioned himself at the center of Ethiopia’s political landscape, with the Amhara Popular Force (APF) on the far-right, the Amhara Prosperity Party (APP) on the center-right, the Oromo Prosperity Party (OPP) on the center-left, and the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) on the far-left. By manipulating the APP vs. OPP and APF vs. OLF dichotomies, he seeks to foster division between the Amhara and Oromo groups.
Dr. Abiy skillfully balances these factions by portraying both as victims, depending on the level of pressure exerted by each side. When the Amhara bloc becomes powerful enough to threaten his regime, he leans toward the Oromo side to weaken them, and vice versa. Currently, the APP, supported by the APF, is engaged in a bitter struggle against the OPP, which has partial backing from the OLF. Dr. Abiy is manipulating both ends of the political spectrum to neutralize them, thereby consolidating his control over the power structures in Addis Ababa. He is keenly aware that only a genuine alliance between Amhara and Oromo forces can pose a serious threat to his regime. The concept of an Oromara coalition has the potential to once again challenge the authoritarian rule of Abiy and his loyalists in the Ethiopian Prosperity Party (EPP), just as such alliances previously led to the downfall of the TPLF regime.
However, the elites from both the Amhara and Oromo communities have yet to overcome their mutual mistrust, largely due to the enduring dominance of Amharanet at the expense of Oromummà. The Amhara elites remain hesitant to relinquish their dominance, while the Oromo elites, justifiably, continue their struggle for self-determination and liberation. This ongoing division presents a significant opportunity for Abiy and his EPP to maintain their grip on power, as the possibility of the Oromara alliance emerging as a formidable force—capable of overthrowing the regime—remains unlikely in the short term. It is for this reason that Abiy is eager to perpetuate the Amharanet vs. Oromummà conflict. His party members and supporters are intentionally exacerbating this ethnic polarization.
Dr. Abiy strategically delays addressing key demands from the Oromo community, such as elevating Oromiffà and Oromummà to their rightful leadership positions, in order to sustain the division between the two largest ethnic groups in the country. Some protests in the Amhara and Oromia regions are likely orchestrated by the EPP to fuel further conflict. The crucial question for the opposition is: how will they respond to this strategy? Will they fall prey to being used as tools for division, or will they reverse the trend by advocating for the Oromara project as a means to oust the dictatorial Biltsigina regime, just as they did with the TPLF years ago? Time will ultimately reveal the answer.
The Core Conflict in Ethiopian Politics
In previous writings, I have expressed support for democratic federalists while also critiquing their weaknesses. The central conflict in Ethiopia today can be understood as a struggle between two broad camps:
Anti-Oromia Forces: These are primarily reactionary unitarists from the unity camp.
Pro-Oromia Forces: These advocates for national self-administration are represented by Oromo nationalists and other marginalized groups.
Historically, this divide has been seen as irreconcilable, and the EPP has expertly exploited this rift to divide and rule. However, there have been promising moments of cooperation. For instance, in 2006, forward-thinking leaders from the OLF and CUD overcame this division by forming the Alliance for Freedom and Democracy (AFD), a significant step towards cooperation between seemingly opposing forces. Unfortunately, the AFD faced resistance from three directions: the ruling TPLF regime, conservative Ethio-nationalists, and left-wing radical Ethno-nationalists. The internal split within CUD and the withdrawal of the EPPF ultimately led to the collapse of the alliance.
Although the time may not yet be ripe for a lasting solution through AFD, the future seems to favor the vision of such a union—one based on the freedom and self-determination of all peoples within Ethiopia. Similar to the historical reconciliation between France and Germany, former enemies can transform into the foundational pillars of a peaceful federation, such as a democratic Amharaland and Oromoland contributing to a harmonious Ethiopian federation.
Medrek, ENM, and the Mid-Ground Approach
A subsequent effort towards this vision was Medrek, an alliance that emerged after two years of dialogue among moderate Ethiopian politicians. Both the UDJ (Unity Party) and OFC (Oromo Federalist Congress) came together to oppose the TPLF regime. However, this alliance also faced resistance from:
- The ruling TPLF regime,
- Conservative unitarists,
- Radical ethno-nationalists.
Nevertheless, Medrek represented a compromise, a centrist position attempting to unite historically divided factions. UDJ, in particular, was the only party that tried to shift from a far-right stance toward the center. Medrek’s value lay in its ability to bring together opposing forces—a remarkable achievement that demonstrated the possibility of cooperation despite profound differences.
Later, the ODF and AG7 formed the Ethiopian National Movement (ENM), a “Mid-Referendist” platform that sought to embrace both Ethiofederation and Ethnofederation, with the future determined by the will of the people.
Who Opposed ENM—and Why?
As with Medrek, the ENM faced opposition from three primary groups:
- The fascist TPLF regime,
- Reactionary unitarists seeking a centralized state,
- Radical Oromo nationalists and fake cyber “independence” activists loyal to the TPLF.
Despite lacking a comprehensive program from either side, ENM developed a “mini-program”—a pragmatic compromise that made cooperation between opposing factions possible. This move again proved that what once seemed impossible could, in fact, become a reality.
The Critical Role of Oromian Unity
I have been a critical supporter of both Medrek and ENM. While I acknowledge their achievements, I emphasize that they must not compromise on the unity of Oromia, just as they uphold the unity of Ethiopia. True unity can only be achieved when both Oromia and Ethiopia’s unity are respected and preserved. Proposals that call for the dismantling of Oromia through a national referendum must be reconsidered. If the referendum is confined solely to the Oromo people, it may be justifiable; however, involving non-Oromo populations in such decisions is inherently unjust. Genuine consensus can only be achieved when all parties respect Oromia’s right to exist as a united entity.
The Challenges Faced by ENM—and the Path Forward
For ENM to thrive and become a reliable political force, it must overcome three major challenges:
- Internal Tensions: Emotionally charged groups with conflicting agendas may threaten the stability of the coalition.
- External Sabotage: The ruling regime will likely attempt to divide and weaken ENM, just as it did with CUD and UDJ.
- Reconciling Oromian and Ethiopian Unity: True and lasting support from the Oromo people will hinge on this delicate balance.
Once ENM accepts Oromian unity alongside Ethiopian unity, its foundation will be unshakable. Otherwise, Ethiopia risks disintegration (a concern for right-wing unitarists) or the emergence of a chaotic independent Oromia (a fear among left-wing radicals).
The Path Forward
ENM and similar alliances hold the potential to be a powerful force for democratic change—a modern solution to Ethiopia’s historical problems. If properly guided, such coalitions can unite all oppressed peoples and nations under the banners of democracy, federalism, and mutual respect. Particularly, the re-emergence of Oromara cooperation could be the most effective means of dismantling the oppressive Biltsigina regime.
May divine wisdom guide the leaders of opposition parties in making this vision a reality. Let the youth take the lead. Let courage and foresight light the path. The alternative is continued rule by the dictatorial Biltsigina. Only alliances founded on justice, compromise, and mutual respect can deliver Ethiopia from dictatorship.
Galatôma!
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/04/0 ... a-project/