Thanks to the OLF, the Abyssinian Empire Is Pregnant with Oromia, Orompia or Oropia!
By Fayyis Oromia*
The 150-year-old Abyssinian Empire became pregnant by the very potent Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) about 50 years ago. Now, this “mother empire” is carrying a child—or perhaps twins—in her womb. What remains unclear is whether the fetus is Oromia, Oropia (an Oromummà-led geofederation), or a twin of the two (Orompia = Oromia + Oropia)
At present, the Oromo people are divided into three groups based on our vision of the baby to be born in the near future. Some nationalists wish to see an independent Oromia; others favor the birth of twins—an Oromia within a federated Ethiopia; and a few are striving to transform the current Amharanet-dominated Ethiopia (Amapia) into an integrated Oropia. Hence, the three visions within the Oromo community are:
- An independent Oromia,
- A federal Orompia (Oromummà-led ethnic federation), and
- An integrated Oropia.
Which baby do you prefer to see: Oromia, Orompia, or Oropia? One thing is certain: the Abyssinian Empire is in the delivery room, preparing to give birth to one of these three possibilities.
Historical Context of the Three Visions
Independence is typically sought by minorities at the periphery, a federal union is often preferred by minorities closer to the center, and integration is generally the vision of the majority in a diverse country.
The first vision—kàyyô ganamà (early goal)—was raised by Oromo nationalists when we were most insecure, advocating full independence.
The second vision—kàyyô guyyà (current goal)—has gained favor now that we’ve become somewhat more secure, envisioning a federated union.
The third vision—kàyyô galgalà (future goal)—could emerge when we are fully confident in our security and political strength, promoting full integration and leadership in a united Ethiopia.
Thus, the three stages of Oromo political aspiration can be understood as:
Past: Struggle for independence (White Flag),
Present: Movement for union (Red Flag),
Future: Politics of integration (Black Flag).
Structural Composition of the Oromo Liberation Movement
Today, the Oromo liberation movement consists of two wings and a backbone, each representing key positions in the fight for freedom:
One wing pushes for an independent Oromia, envisioned as a powerful actor in the Horn of Africa.
The backbone seeks to liberate federal Orompia (Oromia within Oropia)
The other wing advocates transforming Ethiopia to an integrative Oropia
Though divided in approach, all three factions recognize a common enemy and are attempting to coordinate their efforts. Unfortunately, there is no single organization representing and harmonizing all three factions. Still, this plurality of visions suggests that Oromo liberation—in one of the three forms—is inevitable, and none of the potential outcomes would be disadvantageous to the Oromo people.
Historical Narratives and Their Influence
These three political paths stem from how Oromo people interpret history:
- Only common proud history with Abyssinia (e.g., the Adwa victory),
- Only conflicting parallel history (e.g., Menelik’s invasion and the so-called “Oromo expansion”),
- A combination of both proud and conflicting histories.
These interpretations result in three visions of future sovereignty. If we are to reach freedom efficiently, despite these different views, we must first unite against the current system of domination, and only then choose one path through a democratic process.
Comparative Liberation Models
Each vision corresponds with an international model of liberation:
- Léncô Group (mixed history approach): favors the Anglican model. Like the English who freed themselves from Roman rule, formed England, and later the United Kingdom, Oromia could become an autonomous region united with others in a United Kush (Ethiopia)—with Afaan Oromo as a federal working language.
- Galàsà Group (conflict-based history): prefers the Russian model. Similar to how Russian elites dismantled the Soviet Union to establish the Russian Federation, they envision dismantling the Abyssinian Empire to form an independent and influential Oromia.
- H/Fidà Movement (shared history): supports the Indian model. Just as India united diverse nations and adopted Hindi as a federal language, the Oromo could unite the peoples of Ethiopia under a new federation called Oropia, with regional autonomy and Oromic as the working language.
Oromo Advantage and Sovereign Choice
Oromo people are in a uniquely advantageous position. While elites from Amhara, Tigray, and Eritrea have each been limited to a single political option, the Oromo majority can realistically choose any of the three:
- Amhara elites cling to the Indian model due to Amharic’s federal dominance.
- Eritrean elites, as a periphery minority, sought separation (Russian-style).
- Tigrayan elites, unable to dominate language or sustain independence, opt for the Anglican model.
But Oromo people, as a demographic and geographic majority, have access to all three democratic models—provided the rules of the game are freedom and democracy.
So, let us leverage this advantage and work with all pro-democracy forces to create the conditions necessary for a referendum, where the Oromo public can freely choose the form of sovereignty they desire.
Final Thought
As far as I’m concerned, none of the three visions is harmful. What matters most is that the politically conscious Oromo people make the decision via a fair and democratic process.
This essay is a bitter pill for those who delight in the perceived division of the Oromo liberation movement. For them, here’s the truth: the movement has always had one goal—freedom—which manifests in three potential types of sovereignty, played like cards depending on the circumstances.
Thanks to the potent father OLF, the fertile mother Abyssinian Empire is pregnant with Oromia, Orompia or Oropia. It is only a matter of time before we witness the birth.
May Wàqa grant us the patience to wait and see.
Galatôma!
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2023/04/2 ... or-oropia/