Free Oromo and Oromia as a Precedent for the Liberation of Nations in Ethiopia and Africa
Posted: 25 Jan 2026, 15:25
Free Oromo and Oromia as a Precedent for the Liberation of Nations in Ethiopia and Africa
By Fayyis Oromia*
The Oromo people and Oromia have reached an advanced stage in their long struggle for freedom. By historical measures, Oromia is approximately 75 percent liberated—a status achieved incrementally through three major political ruptures: 1974, 1991, and 2018. Each moment represented a partial dismantling of external domination and authoritarian rule. The next inevitable regime change in Finfinne is therefore expected to complete this process, resulting in the full (100 percent) liberation of the Oromo people and their homeland, both from external subjugation and internal authoritarianism. At that juncture, genuinely representative Oromo leadership—grounded in Oromo national interests—should assume state power.
Once full liberation is achieved, the responsibility of the Oromo political elite will extend beyond Oromia itself. A magnanimous and principled political approach would require championing the liberation of all oppressed nations within Ethiopia and, more broadly, across Africa. In this regard, a free Oromia could serve as a powerful precedent for dismantling both colonial legacies and domestic dictatorships throughout the continent.
With Finfinne positioned as the capital of Oromia, Ethiopia, and potentially a continental hub, the Oromo people are uniquely situated to exercise constructive leadership at national, regional, and African levels. This historic opportunity must be managed wisely and in a manner that prioritizes the long-term interests of Oromia and the Oromo people.
At the same time, contemporary political dynamics reveal persistent challenges. Some Amhara political activists—who previously supported the ruling Prosperity Party (EPP) in the belief that it would marginalize Oromo nationalist forces—have increasingly adopted overtly anti-Oromo positions. These tendencies are now reinforced by the leadership of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed. While Tigrayan elite hegemony has largely collapsed, the assimilationist Amhara political elite continues to pose a serious challenge, given its entrenched cultural, linguistic, and economic dominance accumulated over several centuries. These structures of privilege require continuous political scrutiny.
The Prime Minister, who is widely perceived as both Oromo and supportive of Oromummaa, has instead facilitated the survival and consolidation of these dominant elites. The central distinction between Emperor Menelik II and Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed appears less ideological than performative: Menelik did not claim Oromo identity, whereas Abiy invokes Oromummaa while advancing policies that reinforce Amharic cultural and political dominance. This approach undermines Oromo self-determination.
The Two Phases of the Oromo Liberation Struggle
The Oromo liberation movement has historically encompassed two interconnected phases:
- The struggle for freedom and self-determination
- The determination of the form of sovereignty to be realized
Following the rise of the EPP under Dr. Abiy Ahmed, many believed the first phase had been completed. However, subsequent political developments have demonstrated otherwise. As a result, the Oromo people find themselves compelled to reengage in a renewed struggle against what is widely perceived as a neo-Naftagna political order. Instead of debating the future political arrangement—whether an independent Oromo republic or a voluntary, Oromummaa-led democratic federation (often conceptualized as “Oropia”)—the movement has been forced back into resistance. The struggle, therefore, continues.
For over 150 years, under imperial, military, and ethnocratic regimes, the Oromo people were nominally allowed to elect leaders. However, the absence of genuine political freedom rendered these processes largely symbolic. As Ethiopia approaches another electoral cycle, critical questions arise: Is the country truly free from neo-Naftagna domination? Can upcoming elections be free and fair? What political choices remain available to the Oromo and other oppressed nations?
The available options are clear:
- Supporting the ruling EPP
- Aligning with Oromo individuals operating within unitarist parties such as Ezema
- Supporting democratic unionist Oromo parties such as the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) and the Oromo Federalist Congress (OFC)
In practice, Ethiopian politics has polarized into three broad camps:
- Unitarists, who advocate a centralized state, a single national language and culture, and the dismantling of Oromia
- Oppressors, represented by the ruling EPP, seeking to retain centralized power
- Unionists, including the OLF and OFC, who promote a voluntary union of self-governing nations
For the Oromo people, the strategic question is which of these camps best serves their collective interests. The unionist position offers the most viable path forward, as it supports genuine federalism, national self-determination, and the recognition of Afaan Oromo as a primary federal working language.
The concept of “unity” itself requires clarification. Unitarists deploy the term to justify forced assimilation, whereas unionists define unity as a voluntary association of equals. This distinction lies at the heart of Ethiopia’s political crisis.
Why Unionism Represents the Most Viable Path
There are several reasons why the Oromo people and other oppressed nations should support unionist political forces:
- Unitarist ideology is historically outdated and seeks to dismantle Oromia through cultural and political subjugation.
- Neo-Naftagna elites within the EPP aim to maintain control over Oromia’s resources while denying Oromo self-determination.
- Global and regional trends increasingly favor both national liberation and voluntary continental integration, aligning with unionist principles.
- Even flawed elections can function as arenas for peaceful resistance and political advancement.
- The OLF has evolved into a significant political and military actor with the experience and strategic capacity to influence regional transformation.
The long-term objective should be to transform unitarist forces into unionists, enabling all oppressed peoples to unite against authoritarian rule. This includes encouraging Amhara communities to pursue their own self-determination as a prerequisite for genuine partnership within a broader union of free nations.
The ideal future for the Horn of Africa is one free from both Amhara elite unitarism and Tigrayan elite hegemonism. Achieving this vision requires collective commitment to a unionist framework that ensures all nations and citizens can freely determine their political destinies.
Conclusion
Accordingly, the Oromo people and all oppressed nations are called upon to:
- Reject unitarist political forces
- Oppose authoritarian rule under the EPP
- Support and elect unionist parties
- Participate actively in the electoral process
- Engage in peaceful political mobilization against anti-Oromo policies
Unitarist forces can gain Oromo support only by accepting fundamental principles, including the recognition of Afaan Oromo as a federal working language, respect for Oromo national symbols, and acknowledgment of the multinational character of the state.
With the decline of Tigrayan elite dominance, the central political challenge now lies in confronting neo-Naftagna rule centered in Finfinne. Once this phase is resolved, the peoples of the region can collectively determine the form of sovereignty they wish to pursue.
Finally, the revitalization of the languages and cultures of all nations—including the historically significant Agaw people—must be an integral part of this political transformation.
May Wàqà guide this struggle.
Galatôma.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/06/1 ... generally/
By Fayyis Oromia*
The Oromo people and Oromia have reached an advanced stage in their long struggle for freedom. By historical measures, Oromia is approximately 75 percent liberated—a status achieved incrementally through three major political ruptures: 1974, 1991, and 2018. Each moment represented a partial dismantling of external domination and authoritarian rule. The next inevitable regime change in Finfinne is therefore expected to complete this process, resulting in the full (100 percent) liberation of the Oromo people and their homeland, both from external subjugation and internal authoritarianism. At that juncture, genuinely representative Oromo leadership—grounded in Oromo national interests—should assume state power.
Once full liberation is achieved, the responsibility of the Oromo political elite will extend beyond Oromia itself. A magnanimous and principled political approach would require championing the liberation of all oppressed nations within Ethiopia and, more broadly, across Africa. In this regard, a free Oromia could serve as a powerful precedent for dismantling both colonial legacies and domestic dictatorships throughout the continent.
With Finfinne positioned as the capital of Oromia, Ethiopia, and potentially a continental hub, the Oromo people are uniquely situated to exercise constructive leadership at national, regional, and African levels. This historic opportunity must be managed wisely and in a manner that prioritizes the long-term interests of Oromia and the Oromo people.
At the same time, contemporary political dynamics reveal persistent challenges. Some Amhara political activists—who previously supported the ruling Prosperity Party (EPP) in the belief that it would marginalize Oromo nationalist forces—have increasingly adopted overtly anti-Oromo positions. These tendencies are now reinforced by the leadership of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed. While Tigrayan elite hegemony has largely collapsed, the assimilationist Amhara political elite continues to pose a serious challenge, given its entrenched cultural, linguistic, and economic dominance accumulated over several centuries. These structures of privilege require continuous political scrutiny.
The Prime Minister, who is widely perceived as both Oromo and supportive of Oromummaa, has instead facilitated the survival and consolidation of these dominant elites. The central distinction between Emperor Menelik II and Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed appears less ideological than performative: Menelik did not claim Oromo identity, whereas Abiy invokes Oromummaa while advancing policies that reinforce Amharic cultural and political dominance. This approach undermines Oromo self-determination.
The Two Phases of the Oromo Liberation Struggle
The Oromo liberation movement has historically encompassed two interconnected phases:
- The struggle for freedom and self-determination
- The determination of the form of sovereignty to be realized
Following the rise of the EPP under Dr. Abiy Ahmed, many believed the first phase had been completed. However, subsequent political developments have demonstrated otherwise. As a result, the Oromo people find themselves compelled to reengage in a renewed struggle against what is widely perceived as a neo-Naftagna political order. Instead of debating the future political arrangement—whether an independent Oromo republic or a voluntary, Oromummaa-led democratic federation (often conceptualized as “Oropia”)—the movement has been forced back into resistance. The struggle, therefore, continues.
For over 150 years, under imperial, military, and ethnocratic regimes, the Oromo people were nominally allowed to elect leaders. However, the absence of genuine political freedom rendered these processes largely symbolic. As Ethiopia approaches another electoral cycle, critical questions arise: Is the country truly free from neo-Naftagna domination? Can upcoming elections be free and fair? What political choices remain available to the Oromo and other oppressed nations?
The available options are clear:
- Supporting the ruling EPP
- Aligning with Oromo individuals operating within unitarist parties such as Ezema
- Supporting democratic unionist Oromo parties such as the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) and the Oromo Federalist Congress (OFC)
In practice, Ethiopian politics has polarized into three broad camps:
- Unitarists, who advocate a centralized state, a single national language and culture, and the dismantling of Oromia
- Oppressors, represented by the ruling EPP, seeking to retain centralized power
- Unionists, including the OLF and OFC, who promote a voluntary union of self-governing nations
For the Oromo people, the strategic question is which of these camps best serves their collective interests. The unionist position offers the most viable path forward, as it supports genuine federalism, national self-determination, and the recognition of Afaan Oromo as a primary federal working language.
The concept of “unity” itself requires clarification. Unitarists deploy the term to justify forced assimilation, whereas unionists define unity as a voluntary association of equals. This distinction lies at the heart of Ethiopia’s political crisis.
Why Unionism Represents the Most Viable Path
There are several reasons why the Oromo people and other oppressed nations should support unionist political forces:
- Unitarist ideology is historically outdated and seeks to dismantle Oromia through cultural and political subjugation.
- Neo-Naftagna elites within the EPP aim to maintain control over Oromia’s resources while denying Oromo self-determination.
- Global and regional trends increasingly favor both national liberation and voluntary continental integration, aligning with unionist principles.
- Even flawed elections can function as arenas for peaceful resistance and political advancement.
- The OLF has evolved into a significant political and military actor with the experience and strategic capacity to influence regional transformation.
The long-term objective should be to transform unitarist forces into unionists, enabling all oppressed peoples to unite against authoritarian rule. This includes encouraging Amhara communities to pursue their own self-determination as a prerequisite for genuine partnership within a broader union of free nations.
The ideal future for the Horn of Africa is one free from both Amhara elite unitarism and Tigrayan elite hegemonism. Achieving this vision requires collective commitment to a unionist framework that ensures all nations and citizens can freely determine their political destinies.
Conclusion
Accordingly, the Oromo people and all oppressed nations are called upon to:
- Reject unitarist political forces
- Oppose authoritarian rule under the EPP
- Support and elect unionist parties
- Participate actively in the electoral process
- Engage in peaceful political mobilization against anti-Oromo policies
Unitarist forces can gain Oromo support only by accepting fundamental principles, including the recognition of Afaan Oromo as a federal working language, respect for Oromo national symbols, and acknowledgment of the multinational character of the state.
With the decline of Tigrayan elite dominance, the central political challenge now lies in confronting neo-Naftagna rule centered in Finfinne. Once this phase is resolved, the peoples of the region can collectively determine the form of sovereignty they wish to pursue.
Finally, the revitalization of the languages and cultures of all nations—including the historically significant Agaw people—must be an integral part of this political transformation.
May Wàqà guide this struggle.
Galatôma.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/06/1 ... generally/
