The Incumbent Survives by Polarizing the Opposition: Unity Against Dictatorship Is Imperative
By Fayyis Oropia
In Ethiopian politics, the incumbent has often survived by polarizing the opposition. Therefore, democratic forces need to struggle in unison if they want to remove the regime. All possible barriers to unity, including ethnicity, religion, and ideology, must be addressed. In particular, Oromo democratic movements and liberation forces have to take the lead in uniting the opposition against the current Biltsigina regime in order to promote the transformation of Ethiopia into Oropia (an Oromic-led country) through a process of democratization.
It is intriguing to note that Dr. Abiy Ahmed appears to be employing a strategy similar to that used by Meles Z. Gobena: dividing and polarizing the Amhara and Oromo communities to secure his political survival. Dr. Abiy has positioned himself at the center of Ethiopia’s political landscape, with the Amhara Fanno Movement (AFM) 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 Army (OLA) on the far left. By manipulating the APP-versus-OPP and AFM-versus-OLA dichotomies, he seeks to foster division between the Amhara and Oromo communities.
Dr. Abiy skillfully balances these factions by portraying each side as a victim, depending on the level of pressure exerted by the other. When the Amhara bloc becomes powerful enough to threaten his regime, he leans toward the Oromo side to weaken it, and vice versa. Currently, the APP, supported by the AFM, 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 Prosperity Party (PP), just as similar alliances previously contributed to the downfall of the TPLF regime.
However, elites from both the Amhara and Oromo communities have yet to overcome their mutual mistrust, largely because of the enduring dominance of Amharic at the expense of Oromic. Amhara elites remain hesitant to relinquish their historical dominance, while Oromo elites, justifiably, continue their struggle for liberation and self-determination. This ongoing division presents a significant opportunity for Abiy and his party to maintain their grip on power, as the possibility of an 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-versus-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 Oromic 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 may be orchestrated by the PP 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 of division, or will they reverse the trend by advocating for the Oromara project as a means of ousting the dictatorial Heftegna (hybrid-Neftegna) 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: Primarily reactionary unitarists from the unity camp.
- Pro-Oromia Forces: Advocates of national self-administration, represented by Oromo nationalists and other marginalized groups.
Historically, this divide has been seen as irreconcilable, and the Heftegna establishment 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 toward 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 the 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 an AFD-like arrangement, 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 themselves into the foundational pillars of a peaceful European union. In the Ethiopian context, a democratic Amharaland and Oromoland could contribute to a harmonious Ethiopian federation.
Medrek, ENM, and the Mid-Ground Approach
A subsequent effort toward this vision was Medrek, an alliance that emerged after two years of dialogue among moderate Ethiopian politicians. Both the UDJ (Unity Party) and the OFC (Oromo Federalist Congress) came together to oppose the TPLF regime. However, this alliance also faced resistance from:
- The ruling TPLF regime;
- Conservative ethio-unitarists; and
- Radical ethno-nationalists.
Nevertheless, Medrek represented a compromise—a centrist position that attempted to unite historically divided factions. UDJ, in particular, was the only party that attempted to shift from a far-right position toward the center. Medrek’s value lay in its ability to bring together opposing forces. This was 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 to be 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 ethio-unitarists seeking a centralized state; and
- Radical ethno-nationalists and fake cyber “independence” activists loyal to the TPLF.
Despite lacking a comprehensive program acceptable to either side, the ENM developed a “mini-program”—a pragmatic compromise that made cooperation between opposing factions possible. This move once again demonstrated 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 such a referendum is confined solely to the Oromo people, it may be justifiable; however, involving non-Oromo populations in such a decision 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:
1. Internal Tensions: Emotionally charged groups with conflicting agendas can threaten the stability of the coalition.
2. External Sabotage: The ruling regime may attempt to divide and weaken ENM, just as it did with CUD and UDJ.
3. Reconciling Oromian and Ethiopian Unity: Genuine and lasting support from the Oromo people will hinge on achieving this delicate balance.
Once ENM accepts Oromian unity alongside Ethiopian unity, its foundation will be significantly strengthened. Otherwise, Ethiopia risks either disintegration—a concern among right-wing unitarists—or the emergence of a chaotic independent Oromia, a fear among left-wing radicals.
The Path Forward
ENM and similar alliances could have the potential to become a powerful force for democratic change—a modern solution to Ethiopia’s historical problems. If properly guided, such coalitions can unite oppressed peoples and nations under the banners of democracy, federalism, and mutual respect.
In particular, the re-emergence of Oromara cooperation could be one of the most effective means of challenging the oppressive Heftegna 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 Heftegna establishment. 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/