August 01, 2009

Co-operation of Amhara pro-democracy forces and Oromo pro-freedom fronts against fascist Weyane

Co-operation of Amhara pro-democracy forces and Oromo pro-freedom fronts against fascist Weyane

by Fayyis Oromia

It was already written that Weyane's leader, Meles Zenawi, has said: Amhara-Oromo conflict, i.e the historical face-off between Oromo and Amhara, is a unique historical advantage for Weyane to perpetuate its rule. He also said regarding the dialogue between Amhara forces and Oromo fronts within AFD, seemingly rightly, that it is a marriage between "fire and straw (isat ina ciid)". It is really pity that these two BIG nations live in conflict against each other just caused by the hitherto ruling class of the empire and its sponsors aka European colonizers, the effect being the fate of both nations to live now under subjugation by minority group of Tigrean ruling class.
Disregarding the hitherto Abesha ruling class, actually both Amhara and Oromo peoples were victims of European colonizers. The main conflict and imbalance of power between Amharas and Oromos started at the end of 19th century at which time Europeans had their programm of scramble for Africa. It is said that French colonizers used to move horizontal between Dakar and Djibouti, whereas British colonizers' move was vertical between Cape town and Cairo. These two forces were about to confront each other in the Horn of Africa. To avoid the confrontation the British had to do their usual manipulation in Africa: choosing one ethnic group as a "superior", and using it to suppress the others which they consider as the "inferiors". They told the Amharas that they are "superior" semitics and christians who had to "civilize" the "inferior animist" Oromos and others in the south. They gave them weapons and helped them by giving military advice. Indirectly they controlled the area without confronting the French army. With such manipulation, both Amharas and Oromos became victims, since then both are not free. Amhara rulers being the ex-servants of British (as suppressors of Oromos), both Amharas as a people and Oromos as the suppressed subjects were/are still lacking freedom.

Now a days Tegarus' ruling class play the same role as servants of American imperialists again to suppress Oromos and of course at the moment Amharas are as suppressed as Oromos. Theoretically now there is nothing which can hinder the alliance of Amhara and Oromo forces to come together and fight for their freedom as they attempted in AFD, but still there are practical problems. Both need yet to learn to stop their mantra of crying for mere unconditional Ethiopian unity and mere Oromian independence without a union respectively. Amharas crying for unconditional unity makes Oromos only be sceptical for Oromos know what Amharas want to achieve with this pretext. At the same time the attempt of some Oromos to forge independence without giving the possibility for a union and without giving a value for the benefit of a union among neighbouring nations makes Amharas to panic for they think that they will be driven out of Oromia. Such move of certain Oromo organizations seems to be as contraproductive as the cry of Amharas for unity.

Beside that, Weyanes do manipulate this "difference" between the two BIG nations to creat more discord and make them fight each other. In order to neutralize such evil deed of Weyane, very important now for the two is to concentrate on the common agenda: freedom and democracy. If both come to their senses and rally behind these two ideals, the other two virtues they cry for will be fullfilled indirectly: independent Oromia in an integrated (united) Ethiopia. Is this impossible? NO! It is possible if all nations in the empire will be free from tyranny, killing, and looting like what is happening under Weyane now. So our main problem now a days is the lording, killing and looting that all the nations in the empire do suffer under fascist Weyane. The "fool" victims from the two BIG nations need to come to their sense and say together: NO to fascism!

To achieve the durable alliance of the two forces against fascism, the two BIGs need to forge one common ground as a common goal. I do recommend as a common goal: union of independent nations aka independent Oromia in an integrated Ethiopia as a result of self-determination of each nation. Till now, it was very difficult to get a common purpose on which the pro liberty Oromos and the pro unity Amharas could agree. Pro independence Oromos argue that Oromos must be free from Abyssinian colonization by any meanse. Very few smart pro unity Amharas argue that Abeshas are the semiticized Oromos and Agews speaking Amharinya and Tigrinya, so that Oromos don't have to separate from their own, but they should bring the semitized Oromos back to their lost origin and Oromos should have an appropriate position in the politics of the country.
Further more most Amharas do fear the disintegration of the empire they did build. So they seem to do every thing possible so that Oromos never have an upper hand in Ethiopian politics for they fear that Oromos may opt for independence of Oromia. On the contrary, Oromos do all thing possible to hinder the come back of Amharas to power, for they know what Amharas are going to do: amharinization of the whole nations in the empire. The two BIGs simply saboutage each other's succeess. As an example we can look at the political moves during and after election 2005. As Amhara dominated CUD was almost on the verge of coming to power, almost all Oromo forces didn't give support. As OLF was in its highest point of influence and forged AFD to be an alternative for power in Finfinne, it was Amharas in UEDF and other Amhara parties who vehemently cried foul.

This mistrust between Amharas and Oromos is the God-given opportunity that Weyane is using to rule over the country as long as possible. Unless Amharas and Oromos come to term and cooperate against these blood suckers, all nations in the empire have to settle for the rule of Weyane not only for few years, but for many decades. I think the union of independent nations based on the right of nations to self-determination is a middle ground and can be used as a common purpose on which the two groups aka the two giant nations of the region can agree. Union of independent Amhara, Tigrai, Afar, Oromia, Ogadenia, Sidama, Gurage.....etc as a result of their respective self-determination and even the union including Eritrea, Djibouti and Somalia (if they agree based on free will) is the noble cause for which all can fight together. Not accepting this model meanse unconditional separation of these independent nations as an alternative.

The question to be asked is: do the fanatic (unity freak) Amharas choose to settle for this last alternative or should they be compelled to swallow such fact as alternative to their refusal of accepting a union based on self-determination? I know Tigreans will accept such alternative of separation as soon as they sense that they may loose power in Finfinne palace. To compell Amharas to accept such a union based on national self-determination, we just have to demote Amharinya to be used only in Amhara region and promote Afaan Oromo to be federal language. Then they will see that Ethiopianity will not be equivalent to Amharanet (as it is now), but it will be the same to Oromummaa. In such scenario of Oromummaa being equivalent to Ethiopianity, Oromos will definetly start to be pro Ethiopianity against "ethnicity" and Amharas start to defend their identity by opting for self-determination of Amhara people, so that they support "ethnicity" and reject Ethiopianity aka Oromummaa. This way, they can comprehend what it meanse to struggle for national independence with or without regional union.

Till now certain steps have been taken by OLF to forge the common ground and to kill Weyane in Ethiopian political history. The short sighted Weyanes who are good at winning battles, but can never win the war, think that Weyane is killing OLF by persecuting and massacring Oromos who do support OLF. But these measures of Weyane gave OLF even more mass support of Oromo people, which it didn't have till 1991. Further more interesting is that OLF killed not supporters of Weyane, but it took away the existence of Weyane in Ethiopia in a long run. OLF did this by taking two very important measures. In 1992 OLF denied Weyane the legitimacy it needed in Oromia. With this Weyane became the eternal enemy of Oromo people. Fool Weyane could have made OLF its partner and enjoy Oromos' support, but it formed OPDO and made its self alien to Oromos. In 2006 OLF formed AFD together with Amhara parties like CUD and with that it took away the very important instrument Weyane used to rule over Ethiopians: designating Amharas as centeralist chauvinists and Oromos as separatists so that Amharas and Oromos fight each other instead of struggling together against fascist Weyane. Now this instrument is dead and Weyane is under attack from both Amhara and Oromo forces. Surely take it only 1 year or as long as 10 years, Weyane will die away like Isepa of derg. After loosing power, Weyane will be remembered in Ethiopia as fascists, just like Naizis are now remembered in Germany. The coming Tigaru generation will distance its self from Weyane and will be ashamed of this Weyane`s history just like the new generation of Germany are doing now regarding their forefather's deed.

Actually I do appreciate the effort of the few pro-democracy Amhara forces who are trying to foster the democratic unity of the region called Ethiopia. It is not bad to preach about such unity. As I understood from their hitherto writings, they do use both religious and poletical methods to promote and keep the unity. This is actually very dangerous combination, specially when used by one and the same individual. I advice them as individuals to leave one method and persue the other. The problem is that as a politician, one can persue the interest of the group he/she does support, e.g Amharas' interst to keep the empire intact against Oromians' interest to dismantle the empire and build a union. As a religious person, one is morally obliged to think inclusive, trying to satisfy both Amharas and Oromos, which will bring him/her in to difficult position. Otherwise inorder to know what type of unity such Amhara forces do preach, they need to see the difference between an empire and a union. Amharas use the euphemy unity to mean keeping the empire intact. Just to put the difference in short, empire is "unity per force" and union is "unity per free will". If the pro-democracy Amhara forces are the believers of the second premise, then they also do risk that "the free will" to be expressed in a referendum can lead to independence of nations without a union instead of only to the unconditional unity some Amharas want to achieve.
Other wise, it is good to see that there is also a difference between a unity and a union. The first is pre-modern, whereas the second is post-modern. In summary here is the difference between the pre-modern unity and the post-modern union. I don't remember his name, but certain English scholar classified countries in the world in to three: 1) pre-modern chaotic states like the artificial constructs/countries in Africa, such as the Ethiopian empire, which Amharas seem to love, 2) modern nation-states like some mono-national-states in Asia and Latine America and 3) post-modern union of free nations like those in European union. So, Amhara forces should see that African nations, including the empire, are kept as pre-modern due to the arrangement made by European colonies and which is still being perpetuated further by AU-dictators, who are dedicated not to change it. But we Africans need to leave the artificial nations like Eritrea, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Somaliland, Somalia and Kenya behind and forge the productive natural nation-states like Eritigrai, Amhara, Afar, Oromia, Somalia...etc in order to be transformed from our present position (pre-modern), passing through the stage of modern status like independent Oromia without a union to the post-modern situation like independent Oromia in a union with neighbouring independent nations, the status which the Europeans them selves are enjoying now.

I hope Amhara forces do not misunderstand my position by reading my point of view here. I am not a representative of OLF, but I am a simple private person who tries to think independently. There can be certain views of mine which may be the same to that of OLF, but not always. Supporting OLF unconditionally and helping it to be on power is not my goal. My goal is self-determination of Oromos which can lead to an independent republic of Oromia with a union of nations in the empire/region or to independence of all nations in the empire without a union. I know few Amharas do accept this first option, but many do reject the second END goal. They do want larger unitary Ethiopia than the "inferior mini states" such as Amharai and Oromia. I am for the larger Ethiopian union based on the free will of Oromos, which can be the result of a referendum. But I fear that Amharas including some of the pro-democracy ones do advocate for the unconditional unity of the Imiye, which is dictatorial unity. To forge the END aka a democratic union based on self-determination, we need the alliance of all pro-democracy forces and pro-liberty fronts in the empire against fascist Weyane. I hope this is also the status, which some pro-democracy Amharas want to achieve. This form of the alliance between the democratic forces and the freedom fighters is the meanse to get rid off the dictator and the alliance can struggle for the union of nations in the empire as an END, i.e. as the goal to fight for.

Some of these pro-democracy Amhara forces even, at least theoretically, do believe that the destiny of the Oromo people should be decided by the Oromo people who live in Ethiopia and who are also Ethiopians. If they really believe in what they some times write, that meanse they are ready to leave the decision on Oromo destiny for Oromos. Then the question to be asked is: what will happen if the very Oromos they do mention as part of Ethiopians do decide against the unity which they want, but opt to build the independent state of Oromia without a union? Do they accept it and move on or do they fight against it? Pro-democracy Amharas should be clear on the type of unity they want to forge. Union based on free will or unity based on force? Those who do advocate unity by force have their own arguements. Specially it is interesting to read that some of them are trying to instrumentalize the present American politics in order to push for the success of their own unity mantra, which is again an euphemy for keeping the empire. They do say just as American union was saved by force, we will struggle to save Ethiopian union. Can't their "intellectual" mind grasp the difference between the two "unions"? America is the land of immigrants being melted together to take the American identity speaking only English. Do they want the native "Ethiopian" nationalities be melted to take such uniformity and speak only Amharinya?

As far as I know, even the most liberal Amhara movement aka Ginbot-7 preaches unconditional Ethiopian unity, which is not the goal of Oromos and other oppressed people who do fight for self-determination of nations. I am not against Ethiopian union based on free will of all nations, but I am against forced unity of any kind, which disregards the free will of nations like Oromo. If Ginbot-7 wants a unity of purpose with Oromo freedom fighters like OLF, I just suggest that it accepts only a union based on self-determination of nations as a common denominator, instead of praying the unconditional unity mantra. I read that G.-7 is calling for an alliance of all pro-democracy forces and pro-liberty fronts as a meanse to get rid of the brutal dictator Weyane. I do accept it. Here is my concern and the question I would like to ask: In reality, alliance of whom against Weyane?
As I understood till now, Ethiopian politics is kept in balance due to a fighting between the following three blocs: 1) the bloc of the governing fascist Weyane or Tigrai domination force; 2) the bloc of the so called "unity forces", who are mostly Amharas and who do fight to keep the empire intact and strive to bring back Amhara glory. They do use different tactics in the name of democracy, but their message is simple and clear: save the Imiye from disintegration; 3) the bloc of freedom fighters of all oppressed nations in the empire, who do first want to be liberated from the system of domination before trying to talk about unity. For this group Ethiopian union must be only the result of self-determination of all nations in the empire. When the pro-democracy Amhara forces do talk about alliance against Weyane, do they mean alliance of only political and civic organizations in the 2nd bloc? Or do they also want to include those in the 3rd block? As I understood from the rhetoric of G-7 leaders till now, they already put a precondition for the alliance to be forged against the 1st bloc aka Weyane: i.e accepting Ethiopian unity unconditionally! With this precondition they seem to exclude those in the 3rd bloc such as OLF, ONLF SLF...etc, who want to achieve a self-determination for their respective nations. In order to include the 3rd bloc in to the alliance they want to forge against Weyane, they need to change this precondition and they should try to find a common denominator with the 3rd bloc.

I think the only common denominator can be acceptance of a union based on self-determination of nations. If G-7 people are democrats in practice as they do preach day and night, I hope they do accept this. Nations should decide on their own destiny, be it for independence with in a union or for an independence without a union based on free will. Does their rhetoric about democracy include such demand of peoples to decide on their destiny? Are they smart unitarist Amhara foxes in sheep's skin? Or are some of them just naive poleticians, being instrumentalized to fullfill the intention of these extremist Amharas, who want to restore their domination at any cost? I hope such pro-democracy people will think and act independently from the hitherto extremist minded conservative Amharas.

The two positions, i.e Amhara pro-democracy forces' position (unconditional unity) vs Oromo pro-liberty fronts' position (union based on free will) should be discussed and debated before attempting to forge an alliance against the fascist Weyane. Even if Oromos give their vote to independence with in a union, then it is mandatory to decide secondly on which type of federal arrangement is to be accepted as suitable. Pro-democracy Amharas are advocators of geography based federalism in contrast to a language based federalism ("ethnic federalism"), which most Oromos do prefer. As "democrats", all can live accepting the winner per public verdict. This is what UDJ wanted to achieve in Medrek (FDD) . Actually it got what it intended: §39 is rejected and if Medrek wins the next election, the issue of the type of federation will be decided by the public verdict. Here it seems Oromo parties in Medrek lost in the compromise. They didn't insist to achieve the right of Oromo nation to self-determination and even they compromised the further existence of Oromia for the fact that if geography based federation wins, Oromia will be dismantled.

The acceptance of unconditional Ethiopian unity by Oromos in Medrek is like making a compromise on one's own wife, who is being raped daily by a neighbour bully. If a certain bully from a neighbour goes in some body's hause and rape daily the wife of his helpless neighbour infront of his eyes, the helpless man can only beg the bully to reduce his rape action to help his wife get less pain. If the bully agrees to come every other day instead of every day, that is the success for the helpless man. That is what Oromos in Medrek did achieve by not raising the right of Oromo nation to self-determination, but just only accepting the demand of Abeshas for unconditional Ethiopian unity. They are simply helpless vis a vis the well armoured Abesha domination forces.

Now the question to pro-democracy Amharas is: can't they extend the philosophy the do apply for deciding on which type of federation based on public verdit as agreed in Medrek also to the arguement: independence with in a union vs independence without a union, which requires self-determination of nations to decide on which type of sovereignity peoples/nations can have? Can they imagine that the public can also decide on this issue per a referendum (public verdict)? Or doesn't their democracy rhetoric include this option? Can they accept and live, if certain public decide for independence without a union? Or do they go to the forest and fight for the union they want to see? As I heard till now, G.-7 didn't even decide on the issue which type of federation to support.
Amhara pro-democracy forces should not understand me that I am against a union. I do support it, when it is based on free will. My question to them is that just as UDJ accepted the principle of public verdict on decision regarding geography based federation vs language based federation, can they just in principle accept that people also can/should decide regarding the type of sovereignity they want to have aka independence with in a union or independence without a union? Concerning the benefit/cost discussion in cmparing the type of sovereignities, all of them of course can try to convince the public so that the majority do accept their respective wish before voting. Pro-democracy Amhara forces can preach and teach the advantage of a union and pro-liberty Oromo fronts can preach and teach the importance of an independence. Of cource the compromise and the common ground can be an independence with in a union, which can be advocated by both forces if they make a consensus on it. Then the alliance of both forces can try to convince the public about the importance and benefit of this common goal aka union of independent nations. At last the public should decide which to prefer.

Yet interesting is to read that some Amhara forces fear that peoples can be brain washed and vote against their own interest. It is simply wrong to think that peoples decide against their own interest. If they do mistakenly vote against their own interset like the Americans elected Bush by mistake, let it be. That is also part of democracy! Do such Amharas want that certain force should have raised and prevented this election of Bush or do they want that just like Meles Zenawi did, certain forcefull person take away the victory and declare him self the winner? During election, informing the public before making the decision is some thing good, but just taking away this possibility of decision from the people is undemocratic. So my message to pro-democracy Amhara forces is that there is no half backed democracy. Either they accept it as it is, including the right of nations to self-determination or they just stop acting like a pop of democracy and condemn those who are undemocratic, for it is known that they can be also the same or even worse if they get the chance to be in power. If they do reject such simple right of nations, being in a position of oppostiion, one can imagine what they do if they got power: they may do worse than what Meles is doing.

That the concerned people may be brain washed by interest groups to vote against their own interest is the reality we have to live with. All nations do have our own interest and each of us want to convince people that our position is right. By the way, why should we call it brain washing instead of calling it convincing? It is about influencing people, be it this way or that way. In America, Evangelicals were convinced and were successfull with Bush and now quasi-Socialists are successfull with Obama. Where is brain washing? It is about convincing the majority. The one who won the hearts and minds of the majority was the victor. In the free and fair competition, for pro-democrats who struggle for unity, there is the same chance to that of pro-liberty fronts (advocator of union as a result of self-determination). Their freedom is mutually respected.

But regarding those Amhara dictatorial unifiers who are advocating unconditional unity without the option for a public verdict, it should be known that they do take the freedom of pro-liberty fronts by advocating their position. For example, when they say "be Ethiopia andinet lay anideraderim!", they are sending the message: you either accept this andinet or we will deal with you. They don't say, we advocate for Ethiopian unity and then let the public decide. Their approach is arrogant, dictatorial and uncompromising! To such people, pro-liberty Oromo fronts also should say: "be Oromia netsanet lay anideraderim". Now how can two groups who say "anideraderim" deal with each other democratically? The only solution will be Bullet, as it has been till now. Till now the pro-unconditional-unity dictatorial forces won for the last 150 years and they "united" us by force. Oromos call this as colonization, for it is not a union based on free will. People with similar ideology are now braging to continue the status quo at gun point. That is why others say: such forces are not open for the lasting solution, but they stay to be the cause for the misery in that region.

The question yet to be answered is again: do we see any possibility and any common denominator for an eventual alliance between the above mentioned bloc of Amhara unity forces and bloc of Oromo freedom fighters against Weyane's camp? I suggested that the only common denominator is acceptance of a common strategical goal aka a union based on Nations' right to self-determination.

In relation to this common denominator, we can classify the political organizations in Ethiopia now a days in to the following three roups: 1- on the right side are ethio-nationalists, most of them being Amharas, who want to see Ethiopia with uniformily amharanized one people; they are geogeraphy based federalists who do advocate for democratic federal Ethiopia, where there will be no visible danger for future distintegation, they actually plan to get rid of national areas like Oromia; 2- in middle are federalists aka language based federalists usually known as ethnic federalists, who want to see autonomous nations like Oromia determining their fate in their national area, but this group does exclude the right of nations to self-determination per a referendum; 3- on the left side are ethno-nationalists, who want to excercise the right to self-determination to forge a sovereign, independent republics of their national areas like independent gadaa republic of Oromia with in a union or without a union of nations in the empire/region.

I think the position of OLF is the 3rd one i.e self-determination of Oromo people per a referendum which can lead either to language based federation (a union of independent nations) or to independent gadaa republic of Oromia without a union. Now coming to the call for alliance by G-7, I think it is the alliance of all these three groups, who can agree on establishing federal democratic Ethiopia per public verdict to decide on the type of sovereignity: YES to a union vs NO to a union and then to decide on the type of federation: language based federation vs geography based federation. OLF can be part of this alliance for its vision of Oromo's right to self-determination leading to the independence with in a union or to the independence without a union based on the referendum amomg Oromos is accepted and respected.

Also in the Oromo liberation camp now a days there are three tendencies or directions: 1) ethiopianist Oromos rallying behind UDJ/G-7 seem to claim that Ethiopia belongs to Oromos or Oromos belong to Ethiopia and they say we have to fight for freedom of all Ethiopians from any sort of domination, exploitation and subjugation. They advocate for Afaan Oromo to be a working language of federal government as it is a language of majority. This group of Oromos are very smart to claim Oromos' right in a very diplomatic way. 2) federalist Oromos like those rallying behind OFC (OFDM/OPC) are supporters of the language based federation, they want to see Oromia having its autonomy and limited sovereignity, but this group don't dare to push for the right of Oromos to self-determination, instead they do accept the unconditional unity of the empire. They say every other region can be devided if they want to forge geography based federalism, but this is not the vision of Oromos and should not be the fate of Oromia. They look at the geography based federalism as a plot to dismantle Oromia. That is why I do ask: can G-7 get support of this group? 3) oromianist national Oromos include all Oromos rallying behind their different liberation fronts, specially behind OLF and they want to achieve a self-determination of Oromia leading to either an independence with in a union or an independence without a union based on the outcome of a referendum among Oromos.

I hope the right oriented Ethio-nationalists, who want to stablish Ethiopia with geography based federalism (Oromos take this as a pre-text to dismantle Oromia) and the middle positioned ethno-federalists, who want to establish a democratic Ethiopia with language based federalism or with the assymetric federalism (having both mononational states like Oromia and multinational states like SNNP) will give up their respective positions and join the left oriented ethno-nationalists, who want to liberate their respective national area (Ethiopianists percieve this as a way to dismember Ethiopia) and simultaneously forge a union of independent nations based on free will expressed in their self-determination. To be clear, neither the vision to dismantle Oromia nor the intention to dismember Ethiopia per force can lead to the unity Amharas want to see. So I hope we can bring all stake holders to rally behind this common goal of building language based federation or a union of independent nations based on self-determination as a compromise solution.

Just as some pro-democracy Amharas seem to love Ethiopia, some Oromos suspect that this Amhara group do hate to see Oromia existing. By the way every body opposing the mantra of the unconditional unity is not as bad as the pro-democracy Amharas like those in G-7 some times think! When I do hear and read the persistent rhetoric of G-7 leaders talking that acceptance of Ethiopian unity is the precondition for the alliance they want to forge, I can just conclude that G-7 is simply an araada version of the notorious Amhara chauvinists! They do exhibit the arrogant stand of "my way or high way", which doesn't promot the Ethiopian unity they actually want to realize. I do believe that the only viable Ethiopian unity should come from the free will of nations in the empire through self-determination. Otherwise these people in G-7 can cry and pray as long as they want, they can never win the hearts and minds of Oromos and all other self-concsious oppressed nations (excluding the mental slaves who are already acting to be more Abesha than the native Abeshas).

Clear is that G-7 fights against the fascist Weyane, but it seems to make no constructive compromise to build an alliance with the freedom fighters. With that it already made a big obstacle even for unity forces. Intentionally or unintentionally it is against the cause it seems to preach. Sure is that its bloc of unity forces can not win against both the first (Tigrai domination forces) and third blocs (bloc of freedom fighters), who actually do have a potential to build a strategical alliance against it. It should remember that its bloc lost the struggle in 2005 not only because of the brutal Weyane, but also because of the support it lost from Oromos and other oppressed nations. OFDM and UEDF abondoned the alliance at the last minute, as they observed the danger CUD might bring by reversing the fake language based federation of Weyane (in which at least a limited cultural autonomy of nations is respected), if it comes to power.

Now G-7 seems to do the same mistake. That is why I dare to say, these people in G-7 are either naive politician (new convert) or an implant to saboutage the intention of Amhara unitiy forces, for their approach at last leads not to Ethiopian unity. If they realy want a lasting Ethiopian unity, they have to agree to accept the verdict of the people. When the time comes, they can preach the unity they do believe in, others will preach the independence of their respective nation, then let us leave the result for the people to decide. That is what we call the right to self-determination. But if the parties in the alliance make a consensus to forge a union of independent nations from the very beginning, all can advocate together for their common vision and allow the public to either accept or reject it. If this is the view of pro-democracy Amhara forces, we do have nothing to quarell on. Let the people decide 1stly on the type of sovereignity regarding independece with in a union vs independence without a union and then 2ndly after deciding for independece with in a union based on free will, people can yet decide on the type of federation we will have: language based federalism vs geography based federalism. If this is the view of the bloc of unity forces, there is no hinderance for the possible alliance with the bloc of liberation fronts against the bloc of the fascistic ruling party aka Weyane.

Other names for the language based federalism used by different autors on this topic are: internal self-determination, national independence with regional union, self rule with shared rule, national self determination with multi-national democracy, unity with liberty, union of independent nations, united states of Ethiopia, genuine ethnic federalism, autonomous nations in federated Ethiopia, independent Oromia in an integrated Ethiopia...etc. Can this independent Oromia in an integrated Ethiopia be fact or it remains to be fancy? To comprehend this, let's look at the following facts.

Concentrating only on Oromo nation, Oromos' political move against Weyane is to be grouped roughly in to three: 1) the struggle for individual freedom and democracy in Ethiopia disregarding the national self-determination of Oromos. Amharanized Oromo people like those in UDJ and in G-7 belong to this group; 2) the struggle for freedom and democracy including internal self-determination of Oromos (autonomous Oromia) in Ethiopian context, i.e accepting Ethiopian unity unconditionally. Oromos in OFDM and OPC seem to belong to this categorie; 3) the struggle for independent gadaa republic of Oromia (external self-determination of Oromos) either with a union or without a union of nations, which is represented by Oromos in OLF and ULFO. After many years of struggle, now the trend tends to consolidate in a coordinated move of the three groups. People in the first group started to recognize that ignoring the right of Oromos to self-determination is no more possible because of the irriversible growth of Oromo nationalism to demand self-rule of Oromia. Politicians in the second group started to believe that they can not make elite-determination on the fate of the nation, at last self-determination will be demanded by nations be it this way or that way, what ever time it may take. Those in the third group have learned to accept the 2nd option as the temporary compromise solution, of course leading lately to self-determination deciding on independence of Oromia, whether to be with in a union or without a union.

If genuinely excercised the genuine ethnic federalism aka the independent Oromia in an integrated Ethiopia based on free will is the good common option. Therefore the move of G-7 and OLF to struggle together for freedom and democracy in Ethiopia is very smart and timely, if G-7 give up its mantra of Ethiopian unity as a precondition for the possible alliance. It is a middle way compromise solution to the apparently irreconcilable goals of these two political organizations (OLF struggles for independent Oromia and G-7 wants to achieve an integrated Ethiopia). Any alliance similar to AFD is the best way to self-determination of Oromos as a nation and to the democratization as well integration of the resulting union of nations in Ethiopia/Horn as a region (national independence with in regional union). The result will be independent Oromia in an integrated Ethiopia. This is not just a fancy, but a fact to be realized.
Last but not least, I would like to say: no empire in history has ever changed through reforms. It was only the fall of empires that freed nations imprisoned under them. For democratic Oromiyaa and union of nations in Ethiopia to be realized, the Ethiopian empire must end and the Ethiopian union can be forged. Sovereignty of Oromians over their country shall be recognized. All nations in the empire big or small will have equal rights to national self determination. It is only if they are free that they can decide on their destiny. At the end, peoples of the empire and many more can join in a union if they will so. There should be no other nation to decide on the fate of others. The same is true for all nations in Africa. Then there will be a possibility for a united sate of Africa to be established based on the free will of its entire nations and peoples. Even the Abasha peoples that have never had a say in the way they were governed, will get the opportunity to excercise their own self-determination and elect leaders of their own choice freely. As long as domination persists the struggle to liberate the dominated nations and peoples of Africa shall continue.

The Opinions of The author Do Not Necessarily Reflect The Opinions of OromiaTimes.

No comments: