Tsimdo: Shabiya as Landowner, Woyane as Farmer, While Fanno and OLA as the Oxen to Plough?
By Fayyis Oropia
Currently, social media is filled with discussion about the coalition called Tsimdo, reportedly led by President Isaias Afwerki, in opposition to the hybrid regime of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, which critics argue is attempting to become more Oromo-nationalist than even the OLF.
In this coalition, as some critics portray it, Shabiya acts as the landowner or feudal landlord, Woyane as the servant farmer who ploughs the land, while Fanno and OLA serve as the two oxen used to do the ploughing. Are Fanno and OLA really prepared to play this role? Time will tell.
Personally, I would advise both organizations to exercise extreme caution and avoid becoming a Trojan horse facilitating the return of Shabiya and Woyane to Finfinne, as ANDM and OPDO did in 1991.
At a critical juncture in Ethiopia’s political trajectory, segments of Oromo nationalism—particularly republican-oriented actors within the Oromo Federalist Congress (OFC), the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF), the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA), and reformist elements associated with the Oromo Prosperity Party (OPP)—are increasingly engaging in dialogue and, in some cases, coordinated political efforts with democratic forces representing other nations and nationalities.
This emerging alignment can be understood as a strategic response to the consolidation of centralized authority under Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, whose administration is widely perceived by its critics as a hybrid regime that undermines federal principles, national rights, and democratic governance.
Within this context, the formation of a unified republican front is presented by its proponents as both a strategic necessity and a political imperative. They argue that only through coordinated, cross-national cooperation can Ethiopia’s entrenched authoritarian structures be effectively challenged and replaced with a more inclusive and democratic political order.
Ongoing discussions among confederalist actors from the ATO (Amhara–Tegaru–Oromo) triangle, together with representatives of other Ethiopian nations and nationalities, are viewed by supporters as a possible step toward establishing a republican coalition opposed to the Prosperity Party. Advocates argue that such a coalition could provide a broader political platform for advancing democratic reforms, strengthening federalism, and promoting a more inclusive system of governance.
The Case for a Coalition for Democratic Federalism
Recent indications of enhanced cooperation among Oromo political actors and allied democratic groups suggest a potential shift toward collective political action. Ethiopia’s prolonged political crisis has highlighted the limitations of fragmented opposition movements, strengthening the argument for a consolidated political framework.
One such proposal is the establishment of a Coalition for Democratic Federalism, grounded in the principles of equality, self-rule, mutual recognition, and democratic participation among the country’s diverse nations and nationalities.
Historically, Oromo intellectuals and political activists have advocated for unity both within Oromo political organizations and across other marginalized national groups. Current developments may therefore be interpreted as an incremental realization of some of these long-standing aspirations.
However, advocates emphasize that such unity must be anchored in a clearly articulated commitment to preserving and democratizing ethnic federalism as the institutional foundation of the Ethiopian state.
Political Power and the Question of Finfinne
The symbolic and political significance of Oromo influence over Finfinne (Addis Ababa) remains a central issue in contemporary political discourse.
While earlier political developments were perceived by some as marking a restoration of Oromo representation within state institutions, subsequent shifts under the current administration have been viewed by critics as reversing these gains and reasserting centralized control aligned with assimilationist tendencies.
Despite persistent political contestation, Finfinne continues to occupy a central place in Oromo political thought, functioning as a focal point of cultural, political, and strategic importance. Consequently, its status remains a key issue in broader debates concerning federalism, autonomy, political representation, and national identity in Ethiopia.
Conceptualizing Oromia: A Multi-Layered Political Vision
Some strands of Oromo political thought have articulated a multi-layered conceptual framework for understanding national, regional, continental, and global aspirations. This framework includes:
- Oromia: The territorial and cultural homeland, emphasizing the preservation of Oromo language, culture, identity, and indigenous institutions such as the Gadaa system.
- Oropia: A reimagined Ethiopian polity structured around principles derived in part from Oromo political philosophy and promoting coexistence among diverse peoples.
- Orohorn: A broader regional vision encompassing the Horn of Africa and emphasizing cultural and political connections among its peoples.
- Orofrica: A speculative continental framework envisioning a federated Africa shaped, in part, by Oromo political values.
- Oroglob: A global projection in which principles associated with the Gadaa system could inform broader democratic practices.
This framework is generally presented by its proponents not as a territorial expansionist agenda, but as a layered and normative political vision emphasizing inclusivity, democratic governance, self-rule, and shared values.
Federalism and Political Leadership in the Post-TPLF Context
Debates concerning the future of Ethiopian federalism have intensified in the post-TPLF political landscape. Earlier dialogues, including those held within diaspora communities, highlighted tensions between different interpretations of federalism, including distinctions between “Ethio-federalist” and “ethno-federalist” approaches.
Over time, political discourse has shifted significantly. Advocacy for a unitary state has diminished, while nominal support for federalism has become widespread across much of the political spectrum. Nevertheless, disagreements remain regarding the depth, structure, and implementation of federal arrangements.
A central unresolved question concerns future political leadership: Will Ethiopia’s next political phase be guided by actors committed to substantive federalism, or by elites who adopt federalist rhetoric while maintaining centralized political control?
Toward Substantive Federalism
A key argument advanced by proponents of democratic federalism is that sustainable political transformation requires convergence between different federalist perspectives.
In particular, it is argued that actors traditionally associated with “Ethio-federalism” would need to embrace more substantive forms of decentralization that fully recognize the autonomy and political agency of constituent nations, including Oromia.
Historical electoral cycles—2005, 2010, 2015, and 2021—can be interpreted as reflecting an evolution in political discourse, with increasing, although uneven, acceptance of federal principles and mechanisms such as referendums.
This trajectory suggests an ongoing, though incomplete, process of political adaptation.
Oromo Political Alignments and Strategic Considerations
Contemporary Oromo political actors can broadly be categorized into three groups:
- Ethio-federalist actors, who support a federal framework but may favor stronger central institutions;
Incumbent or “hybrid” federalists, associated with ruling-party structures and criticized by opponents for maintaining centralized authority under the guise of federalism; and
- Ethno-federalist actors, who advocate robust regional autonomy, self-rule, and the right to self-determination.
Within this landscape, strategic choices concerning alliances and political direction remain highly consequential.
The fragmentation of opposition forces has historically weakened their effectiveness. This reality underscores the importance of coordinated political engagement, while also raising the question of whether alliances can be built without sacrificing the fundamental political interests of the groups involved.
This is precisely where the relationship among Fanno, OLA, Woyane, and Shabiya deserves careful scrutiny. Coalition-building may be strategically necessary, but strategic cooperation should not mean political subordination.
From Ideological Principles to Political Outcomes
Core Oromo political concepts—including self-rule, freedom, equality, and self-determination—are widely regarded by Oromo nationalists as foundational principles. However, their practical realization requires concrete political processes, institutions, and democratic mechanisms.
Two principal political outcomes are often identified:
- Full independence: the establishment of an internationally recognized sovereign Oromo state.
- Voluntary federation: a political arrangement based on the consent of self-determining political communities.
Both options are generally presented as requiring democratic validation, particularly through referendums conducted under conditions of genuine political autonomy, political freedom, and international or otherwise credible oversight.
Conclusion: The Prospects for a Republican Coalition
The prospect of a broader republican coalition—potentially incorporating Oromo political organizations alongside democratic actors representing other Ethiopian nations and nationalities—could become a significant development in Ethiopia’s evolving political landscape.
Initiatives aimed at fostering dialogue and coordination suggest that ideological differences, although substantial, may not necessarily be insurmountable barriers to collective political action.
At the same time, coalition-building carries significant risks. Political alliances can create opportunities for democratic transformation, but they can also be exploited by stronger actors to advance their own strategic interests.
For this reason, any proposed republican coalition should be built on transparency, equality among its members, mutual consent, clear political objectives, and guarantees against domination by any single state, ethnic group, political organization, or military actor.
The experience of 1991 provides an important historical lesson. Political actors that enter an alliance without clearly defining their interests and safeguards may ultimately find themselves serving a political project different from the one they originally intended to support.
Therefore, Fanno and OLA, as well as Oromo political organizations more broadly, should approach any alliance involving Shabiya, Woyane, or other powerful political actors with strategic caution. Cooperation should not become capitulation, and tactical alliance should not be confused with political alignment.
Ultimately, the success of any republican coalition will depend on whether its participants can translate shared principles into effective political institutions while preserving the political agency and legitimate interests of each constituent community.
The central question is therefore not simply who joins the coalition, but what political order the coalition intends to establish after victory—and who will control it.
Galatôma.
Read more: https://orompia.wordpress.com/2018/12/0 ... of-oromia/