Why Hybrid Elites under Dr. Abiy Ahmed Target ATO-Democrats Associated with Dr. Lemma Megersa
Posted: 25 Jan 2026, 14:32
Why Hybrid Elites under Dr. Abiy Ahmed Target ATO-Democrats Associated with Dr. Lemma Megersa
By Fayyis Oromia*
Abstract
This article examines Ethiopia’s contemporary political crisis through the lens of elite fragmentation, focusing on the role of hybrid elites within the Prosperity Party (PP) and their relationship to ATO-democratic forces associated with Dr. Lemma Megersa. It argues that authoritarian consolidation is sustained through multi-angular confrontation among Amhara, Tigrayan, and Oromo elites, while democratic cooperation across these groups remains the only viable path toward political transformation. The paper further analyzes competing federal, confederal, and nationalist projects shaping Oromo and Ethiopian politics and concludes by advocating inclusive self-determination grounded in democratic principles.
Hybrid Elites and Authoritarian Consolidation
Many supporters of Prime Minister Dr. Abiy Ahmed within the Prosperity Party (Biltsiginna) and its affiliated networks can be described as hybrid elites—actors whose identities are ethnically, socially, and ideologically mixed. These elites frequently present themselves as guardians of “Ethiopia” and Ethiopiawinet, while simultaneously consolidating political power for economic and class-based advantage.
Over time, this group has evolved into a privileged political class aligned with state authority. Rather than serving as a bridge across Ethiopia’s diverse societies, hybrid elites have increasingly functioned as stabilizers of authoritarian rule, benefiting from political fragmentation and elite rivalry.
ATO Elites: Democratic Cooperation versus Authoritarian Confrontation
A critical distinction must be drawn among Amhara, Tigrayan, and Oromo (ATO) elites. One camp advocates democratic cooperation across national groups, while another remains committed to mutual antagonism and zero-sum competition. The former promotes triangular collaboration; the latter perpetuates triangular confrontation.
This confrontational dynamic ultimately benefits the incumbent regime, which relies on divide-and-rule strategies. Political polarization among ATO elites weakens collective opposition and reinforces authoritarian governance.
Abiy Ahmed and Lemma Megersa: A Strategic Divergence
The political tension between Dr. Abiy Ahmed and Dr. Lemma Megersa can be understood within this broader framework. Dr. Abiy appears to benefit from divisions among authoritarian-leaning ATO elites, using intra-elite conflict to neutralize opposition across Amhara, Tigrayan, and Oromo constituencies.
Dr. Lemma Megersa, by contrast, appears to be gravitating toward a strategy of democratic alliance-building among ATO actors. This approach seeks to replace confrontation with cooperation as a means of challenging authoritarian rule. Whether democratic collaboration or elite rivalry prevails will significantly shape Ethiopia’s political future.
Multi-Angular Politics and the Limits of Confrontation
Ethiopia’s political trajectory increasingly depends on whether opposition forces adopt multi-angular cooperation or remain trapped in multi-angular confrontation. The latter—often unintentionally—reinforces the ruling party’s political dominance.
Despite widespread opposition to the government, many activists and opposition groups continue to engage in internal conflict. In particular, rivalry among Amhara, Tigrayan, and Oromo elites has repeatedly undermined collective democratic struggle. Sustainable political change requires unity across social class, ethnicity, political party, profession, and religion.
Confederalism versus Federalism in Oromo Politics
Recent years have witnessed the emergence of a confederalist alliance, formed in Washington, D.C., with the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA) as a key actor. This alliance positions itself against the authoritarian system led by Dr. Abiy Ahmed and challenges what critics describe as the ruling party’s insincere federalism.
Traditional advocates of geographical federalism have become less influential, often mobilizing federalist rhetoric primarily in opposition to confederalist ideas. While confederalist forces may gain momentum—particularly with growing international attention—a critical unresolved question remains: Who will control Finfinne?
If the Tigray Defense Forces (TDF) were again to enter Finfinne under circumstances similar to 1991, Oromo political aspirations could once more be subordinated to external dominance. Oromo elites, including nationalist elements within the ruling party, must therefore coordinate with the OLA to ensure that Finfinne’s political future reflects Oromo interests. Neither Amhara nor Tigrayan forces should determine the fate of Oromia or its capital.
The “Fourth Revolution” and Oromo National Struggle
The present moment has been described as a potential “fourth revolution” in the Oromo national struggle. Historically, the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) expanded Oromo self-rule incrementally—approximately 25% in 1974, 50% in 1991, and 75% in 2018. The current phase presents an opportunity to consolidate full self-determination and dismantle long-standing systems of domination.
Ethiopia’s Political Spectrum: From Polarization to Pragmatism
Ethiopia’s political spectrum is shaped largely by the relationship between Amhara and Oromo elites, marked by both conflict and latent potential for cooperation. Encouragingly, pragmatic initiatives have emerged, such as the OLF-led People’s Alliance for Freedom and Democracy (PAFD), which fostered cross-national engagement.
Five major ideological positions currently structure the Amhara–Oromo political landscape:
- Far right: Amharic-dominated geographical federation
- Center-right: Amharic-dominated ethnic federation
- Center: Rainbow confederation of free nations
- Center-left: Oromic-led ethnic federation
- Far left: Oromic-led geographical federation
The ruling Prosperity Party seeks to balance these forces to preserve the status quo, but its internal divisions are widening, with its Amhara wing drifting rightward and its Oromo wing moving leftward. The OLF’s “rainbow confederation” proposal occupies a centrist position within this spectrum.
ENM versus PAFD: Implications for Oromo Liberation
Ethiopian political elites can be broadly classified into seven ideological categories, ranging from Ethiocentralism to ethnoseparatism. The Ethiopian National Movement (ENM), led by Obbo Lencho Bati, occupies a middle position that supports a referendum between competing federal arrangements.
This position could serve as a basis for Amhara–Oromo cooperation against authoritarianism, provided it respects ethnofederalist principles. If not, Oromo political actors may prefer alternative frameworks, including democratic ethnofederalism as articulated by the Oromo Democratic Front (ODF). A shift toward rigid geographical federalism risks undermining Oromia’s territorial and political integrity.
Toward Inclusive Self-Determination
Both ENM and PAFD, in their current forms, remain limited. ENM excludes the option of full Oromian independence, while PAFD excludes the possibility of preserving a unified Ethiopia. A durable political settlement requires inclusive self-determination, allowing the people to choose among all legitimate political futures:
- Ethiopian integration
- Ethio-federalism
- Ethno-federalism
- Oromian independence
Oromo liberation—and Ethiopian democratization more broadly—must rest on popular sovereignty rather than elite bargaining or predetermined outcomes. A sustainable political order should reflect Gadà principles of inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. A broad alliance encompassing all ideological streams offers the most promising path toward peace and justice.
Conclusion
The emerging confederalist alliance, with the OLA at its core, represents a significant challenge to Ethiopia’s authoritarian system and its hybrid elite class. Whether this movement succeeds will depend on its ability to foster democratic cooperation across national and ideological divides.
May Waaqaa guide all democratic and anti-authoritarian forces toward genuine unity and lasting peace.
Galatooma.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/06/1 ... operation/
By Fayyis Oromia*
Abstract
This article examines Ethiopia’s contemporary political crisis through the lens of elite fragmentation, focusing on the role of hybrid elites within the Prosperity Party (PP) and their relationship to ATO-democratic forces associated with Dr. Lemma Megersa. It argues that authoritarian consolidation is sustained through multi-angular confrontation among Amhara, Tigrayan, and Oromo elites, while democratic cooperation across these groups remains the only viable path toward political transformation. The paper further analyzes competing federal, confederal, and nationalist projects shaping Oromo and Ethiopian politics and concludes by advocating inclusive self-determination grounded in democratic principles.
Hybrid Elites and Authoritarian Consolidation
Many supporters of Prime Minister Dr. Abiy Ahmed within the Prosperity Party (Biltsiginna) and its affiliated networks can be described as hybrid elites—actors whose identities are ethnically, socially, and ideologically mixed. These elites frequently present themselves as guardians of “Ethiopia” and Ethiopiawinet, while simultaneously consolidating political power for economic and class-based advantage.
Over time, this group has evolved into a privileged political class aligned with state authority. Rather than serving as a bridge across Ethiopia’s diverse societies, hybrid elites have increasingly functioned as stabilizers of authoritarian rule, benefiting from political fragmentation and elite rivalry.
ATO Elites: Democratic Cooperation versus Authoritarian Confrontation
A critical distinction must be drawn among Amhara, Tigrayan, and Oromo (ATO) elites. One camp advocates democratic cooperation across national groups, while another remains committed to mutual antagonism and zero-sum competition. The former promotes triangular collaboration; the latter perpetuates triangular confrontation.
This confrontational dynamic ultimately benefits the incumbent regime, which relies on divide-and-rule strategies. Political polarization among ATO elites weakens collective opposition and reinforces authoritarian governance.
Abiy Ahmed and Lemma Megersa: A Strategic Divergence
The political tension between Dr. Abiy Ahmed and Dr. Lemma Megersa can be understood within this broader framework. Dr. Abiy appears to benefit from divisions among authoritarian-leaning ATO elites, using intra-elite conflict to neutralize opposition across Amhara, Tigrayan, and Oromo constituencies.
Dr. Lemma Megersa, by contrast, appears to be gravitating toward a strategy of democratic alliance-building among ATO actors. This approach seeks to replace confrontation with cooperation as a means of challenging authoritarian rule. Whether democratic collaboration or elite rivalry prevails will significantly shape Ethiopia’s political future.
Multi-Angular Politics and the Limits of Confrontation
Ethiopia’s political trajectory increasingly depends on whether opposition forces adopt multi-angular cooperation or remain trapped in multi-angular confrontation. The latter—often unintentionally—reinforces the ruling party’s political dominance.
Despite widespread opposition to the government, many activists and opposition groups continue to engage in internal conflict. In particular, rivalry among Amhara, Tigrayan, and Oromo elites has repeatedly undermined collective democratic struggle. Sustainable political change requires unity across social class, ethnicity, political party, profession, and religion.
Confederalism versus Federalism in Oromo Politics
Recent years have witnessed the emergence of a confederalist alliance, formed in Washington, D.C., with the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA) as a key actor. This alliance positions itself against the authoritarian system led by Dr. Abiy Ahmed and challenges what critics describe as the ruling party’s insincere federalism.
Traditional advocates of geographical federalism have become less influential, often mobilizing federalist rhetoric primarily in opposition to confederalist ideas. While confederalist forces may gain momentum—particularly with growing international attention—a critical unresolved question remains: Who will control Finfinne?
If the Tigray Defense Forces (TDF) were again to enter Finfinne under circumstances similar to 1991, Oromo political aspirations could once more be subordinated to external dominance. Oromo elites, including nationalist elements within the ruling party, must therefore coordinate with the OLA to ensure that Finfinne’s political future reflects Oromo interests. Neither Amhara nor Tigrayan forces should determine the fate of Oromia or its capital.
The “Fourth Revolution” and Oromo National Struggle
The present moment has been described as a potential “fourth revolution” in the Oromo national struggle. Historically, the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) expanded Oromo self-rule incrementally—approximately 25% in 1974, 50% in 1991, and 75% in 2018. The current phase presents an opportunity to consolidate full self-determination and dismantle long-standing systems of domination.
Ethiopia’s Political Spectrum: From Polarization to Pragmatism
Ethiopia’s political spectrum is shaped largely by the relationship between Amhara and Oromo elites, marked by both conflict and latent potential for cooperation. Encouragingly, pragmatic initiatives have emerged, such as the OLF-led People’s Alliance for Freedom and Democracy (PAFD), which fostered cross-national engagement.
Five major ideological positions currently structure the Amhara–Oromo political landscape:
- Far right: Amharic-dominated geographical federation
- Center-right: Amharic-dominated ethnic federation
- Center: Rainbow confederation of free nations
- Center-left: Oromic-led ethnic federation
- Far left: Oromic-led geographical federation
The ruling Prosperity Party seeks to balance these forces to preserve the status quo, but its internal divisions are widening, with its Amhara wing drifting rightward and its Oromo wing moving leftward. The OLF’s “rainbow confederation” proposal occupies a centrist position within this spectrum.
ENM versus PAFD: Implications for Oromo Liberation
Ethiopian political elites can be broadly classified into seven ideological categories, ranging from Ethiocentralism to ethnoseparatism. The Ethiopian National Movement (ENM), led by Obbo Lencho Bati, occupies a middle position that supports a referendum between competing federal arrangements.
This position could serve as a basis for Amhara–Oromo cooperation against authoritarianism, provided it respects ethnofederalist principles. If not, Oromo political actors may prefer alternative frameworks, including democratic ethnofederalism as articulated by the Oromo Democratic Front (ODF). A shift toward rigid geographical federalism risks undermining Oromia’s territorial and political integrity.
Toward Inclusive Self-Determination
Both ENM and PAFD, in their current forms, remain limited. ENM excludes the option of full Oromian independence, while PAFD excludes the possibility of preserving a unified Ethiopia. A durable political settlement requires inclusive self-determination, allowing the people to choose among all legitimate political futures:
- Ethiopian integration
- Ethio-federalism
- Ethno-federalism
- Oromian independence
Oromo liberation—and Ethiopian democratization more broadly—must rest on popular sovereignty rather than elite bargaining or predetermined outcomes. A sustainable political order should reflect Gadà principles of inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. A broad alliance encompassing all ideological streams offers the most promising path toward peace and justice.
Conclusion
The emerging confederalist alliance, with the OLA at its core, represents a significant challenge to Ethiopia’s authoritarian system and its hybrid elite class. Whether this movement succeeds will depend on its ability to foster democratic cooperation across national and ideological divides.
May Waaqaa guide all democratic and anti-authoritarian forces toward genuine unity and lasting peace.
Galatooma.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/06/1 ... operation/