MAC Politics of the OFC vs MOA Politics of the Oromo vs MAP Politics of the OLF
Both OFC and OLF didn’t yet get an optimal solution for the unique situation of the Oromo. Union Ethiopia (multinational federation) of OFC is good for minority at the center (MAC) and an independent Oromia of the OLF is nice for minority at the periphery (MAP). Oromo nation is neither mac nor map, but majority over all (MOA) of the country. An optimal solution thus can be just taking over of the whole state of Ethiopia and name it Oropia. Let the other nations have their right to self-determination from the Oromo, be it in OFC’s model or OLF’s style.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/mac-polit ... f-the-olf/
Re: MAC Politics of the OFC vs MOA Politics of the Oromo vs MAP Politics of the OLF
For the Oromo, our moa politics should concentrate on realizing Oropia (Oromummà led Ethiopia), where Afàn Oromo will be primary working language of the union and the whole country be named Oropia, instead of Ethiopia. Thus, Oromo’s strategy should be to dismantle the empire state, foster a union state & give an own state for others, if they want. Secession is not and can not be Oromo’s agenda. The Oromo are unique in the globe to be dominated as a majority nation all over the country and having political center of the empire as its own capital. So, all the five moves undertaken by Oromo nationalists till now are not optimal solutions for such unique situation:
1. Dr. Nagàsô Gidàdà working with the hegemonits,
2. Ob. Andargachew Tsige struggling together with the unitarists,
3. Gn. Kamal opting for an independent Oromia,
4. Ob. Dawud asking for referendum on ‘independent Oromia vs union Ethiopia’ and
5. Ob. Léncô choosing union Ethiopia
These are not best solutions for the Oromo. Oromo people, as the majority all over the country, need to takeover the state power in Tullü Dàlatti palace of Finfinné and then dismantle the empire system, foster union state called Oropia and give right to self-determination up to forging their own independent state for other nations, who are far away from the political center – Finfinne, including for Bahirdar of the Amara state and Maqale of the Tegaru state!
Regarding Oromo’s unique colonial situation and the necessary optimal solution, we know that there were many colonized or dominated nations in the globe to be compared. All wanted to be liberated from subjugation and demanded their right to self-determination. There are five types of such nations and the Oromo are unique having our own situation not shared by any other nation in the world. The five groups are:
1. those colonized by oversee colonizers like Europeans subjugating Africans. The solution for such domination was an external self-dertermination in a sense of complete independence. Some Oromo nationals try to equate Oromo’s situation with this and demand an independent republic of Oromia without necessarily having referendum. FIO (Front for Independent Oromia) of Gn. Kamal Galchu chose this way. But is Oromia colonized by oversee nation to apply such solution?
2. minority nations at the periphery dominated by the centeral power; e.g Eritrea, South Sudan, Kosovo, East Timor, Ogaden…etc. The required self-determination was defined as having referendum on: ‘independence from the political center’ vs ‘post freedom political union with the center’. Ob. Dawud Ibsa’s OLF is following this approach. But is Oromia at periphery not to affect self-determination right of others by excercising its own. North Ethiopia and South Ethiopia will be separated without their free will just if the Oromo decide for our independence.
3. minority nations at the center under domination of another nation; e.g the Gurage, Harari, Hadiya, Kambata…etc. For such nations, good solution is internal self-determination within a union by getting rid of the system of domination and achieving self-rule within shared rule, without necessary referendum. OFC of Dr. Mararà wanted to apply such solution. But are the Oromo such minority at the center?
4. major nation with dominating culture, but being exploited and oppressed by its own internal dictators and tyrants. Such nations usually struggle to get rid of their own subjugators, thus concentrate more on freedom struggle in a sense of dismantling the system and replace it with possibly democratic and just rule for all peoples in the country without considering right of nations to self-determination, be it external or internal. AG7 of Ob. Andargachew Tsige (also an Oromo) being influenced by Amara elites with dominating culture and language in the country belongs here. But does this serve an interest of Oromo nation with hitherto dominated (not dominating) culture and language?
5. minority nation dominating the politcal center but masked as an inclusive multi-national force and formally accepting self-rule of nations, though in reality following very tight centeralist party rule. The TPLF regime followed this decieving move and OPDO of Dr. Nagàsô working with this group surely served only an interest of the hegemonist minority Tigrean elites.
The Oromo as major nation at the center or all over the country being dominated by smaller neighbouring nation is unique condition, which requires unique solution. There is no such big nation, where the political center is its own center, but politically marginalized and colonized in the world; the Oromo must be the only one. Such unique situation requires unique solution. The above five approachs are not optimal. The optimal approach here should be to liberate the center (Tullü Dàlatti of Finfinné) and take over the state machinary in order to transform the empire into a union; if necessary, changing flag of the federation, language of the union and name of the country. Then the Oromo can allow others to have their self-determination in above three ways (autonomy, referendum, independence). The Oromo should act as future giver of those rights, not as reciever from the minor nations, be it from the Amara of Bahirdar or Tegaru of Maqale.
1. Dr. Nagàsô Gidàdà working with the hegemonits,
2. Ob. Andargachew Tsige struggling together with the unitarists,
3. Gn. Kamal opting for an independent Oromia,
4. Ob. Dawud asking for referendum on ‘independent Oromia vs union Ethiopia’ and
5. Ob. Léncô choosing union Ethiopia
These are not best solutions for the Oromo. Oromo people, as the majority all over the country, need to takeover the state power in Tullü Dàlatti palace of Finfinné and then dismantle the empire system, foster union state called Oropia and give right to self-determination up to forging their own independent state for other nations, who are far away from the political center – Finfinne, including for Bahirdar of the Amara state and Maqale of the Tegaru state!
Regarding Oromo’s unique colonial situation and the necessary optimal solution, we know that there were many colonized or dominated nations in the globe to be compared. All wanted to be liberated from subjugation and demanded their right to self-determination. There are five types of such nations and the Oromo are unique having our own situation not shared by any other nation in the world. The five groups are:
1. those colonized by oversee colonizers like Europeans subjugating Africans. The solution for such domination was an external self-dertermination in a sense of complete independence. Some Oromo nationals try to equate Oromo’s situation with this and demand an independent republic of Oromia without necessarily having referendum. FIO (Front for Independent Oromia) of Gn. Kamal Galchu chose this way. But is Oromia colonized by oversee nation to apply such solution?
2. minority nations at the periphery dominated by the centeral power; e.g Eritrea, South Sudan, Kosovo, East Timor, Ogaden…etc. The required self-determination was defined as having referendum on: ‘independence from the political center’ vs ‘post freedom political union with the center’. Ob. Dawud Ibsa’s OLF is following this approach. But is Oromia at periphery not to affect self-determination right of others by excercising its own. North Ethiopia and South Ethiopia will be separated without their free will just if the Oromo decide for our independence.
3. minority nations at the center under domination of another nation; e.g the Gurage, Harari, Hadiya, Kambata…etc. For such nations, good solution is internal self-determination within a union by getting rid of the system of domination and achieving self-rule within shared rule, without necessary referendum. OFC of Dr. Mararà wanted to apply such solution. But are the Oromo such minority at the center?
4. major nation with dominating culture, but being exploited and oppressed by its own internal dictators and tyrants. Such nations usually struggle to get rid of their own subjugators, thus concentrate more on freedom struggle in a sense of dismantling the system and replace it with possibly democratic and just rule for all peoples in the country without considering right of nations to self-determination, be it external or internal. AG7 of Ob. Andargachew Tsige (also an Oromo) being influenced by Amara elites with dominating culture and language in the country belongs here. But does this serve an interest of Oromo nation with hitherto dominated (not dominating) culture and language?
5. minority nation dominating the politcal center but masked as an inclusive multi-national force and formally accepting self-rule of nations, though in reality following very tight centeralist party rule. The TPLF regime followed this decieving move and OPDO of Dr. Nagàsô working with this group surely served only an interest of the hegemonist minority Tigrean elites.
The Oromo as major nation at the center or all over the country being dominated by smaller neighbouring nation is unique condition, which requires unique solution. There is no such big nation, where the political center is its own center, but politically marginalized and colonized in the world; the Oromo must be the only one. Such unique situation requires unique solution. The above five approachs are not optimal. The optimal approach here should be to liberate the center (Tullü Dàlatti of Finfinné) and take over the state machinary in order to transform the empire into a union; if necessary, changing flag of the federation, language of the union and name of the country. Then the Oromo can allow others to have their self-determination in above three ways (autonomy, referendum, independence). The Oromo should act as future giver of those rights, not as reciever from the minor nations, be it from the Amara of Bahirdar or Tegaru of Maqale.