Mereja Forum

[OPFist]

Ethiopia Surely Shall Give Birth to Oromia and/or Oropia!

It is not what both Oromo and non-Oromo politicians want to hear, but a bitter truth, which should and will be swallowed by all the concerned. The hitherto Ethiopia is in reality Amapia (Amaranet dominated country). But, the henceforth Ethiopia shall be transformed to Oropia (Oromumma led state) slowly but surely. The only way to hinder this transformation is by the possible separation of all other neighbouring nations from Oromia. As long as the territorial integrity of Ethiopia is kept intact under the leadership of Oromumma, definately Ethiopia will be de facto Oropia. In short, Ethiopia’s destiny is already determined, i.e to give birth to Oromia and/or Oropia. That means, one of the following three possibilities will be realized: 1) an independent Oromia without Oropia, 2) autonomous Oromia within Oropia, 3) an integrative Oropia without Oromia.
Read more: https://fayyisoromia.wordpress.com/2023 ... ve-oropia/

[OPFist]

Actually, the Oromo liberation movement has got two wings and a backbone as three important positions, from where it is fighting against the enemy. One wing wants to establish an independent Oromia, which will have influential position in whole region of the Horn, i.e only self-rule of Oromia as objective. The backbone pushes to liberate federal Union (Oromia within Oropia) and to make Oromia a leading nation-state of the whole country, i.e self-rule of Oromia and shared rule of Oropia. Another wing strive to transform the whole Ethiopia to democracy, if necessary name the country as Oropia and promote Afaan Oromo to primary federal language of the country replacing Amharigna, but disregarding self-rule of Oromo national area, i.e only shared rule of Oropia as post-freedom objective.

[OPFist]

These three parts of Oromo national liberation movement are trying to harmonize their moves against our common current enemy – the dictatorial regime. Accordingly, we now find Oromo national movement in whole spectrum of opposition parties and liberation fronts against the oppressive regime. Surprisingly, there is no organization on the ground to represent the whole national liberation movement coordinating and accommodating the three parts. This reality persuades us to think that Oromo liberation in one of the three forms is inevitable, and the possible future three types of our sovereignty are not as such disadvantageous for Oromo people.

[OPFist]

.The three parts of our liberation movement are results of the three approaches, which Oromo nationals have towards our history. It seems that we are treating our history in three dimensions: (1) as only conflicting parallel history of Oromia and Abyssinia, such as Minilik’s invasion and the so-called Oromo expansion; (2) as both common proud history and conflicting parallel history of Oromia and Abyssinia. (3) as only common proud history of Oromia and Abyssinia, such as Adwa battle. Now, we do see that the consequences of these three approaches are three possible post-freedom destinies regarding future sovereignty (an independent Oromia, a federal Union and an integrative Oropia). If we want to achieve our freedom efficiently, despite these different views, we have to firstly try to fight together for our common freedom from the hitherto system of domination, and then settle to choose one of the three types of sovereignty based on the version of Oromo history we respectively do have in mind. It is clear that:

– those, who perceive only the conflicting parallel history, prefer liberation in Russian style (independent Oromia of Ob. Galasaa Dilboo). Russian elites dismantled Soviet union and established the Russian federation, which uses Russian national language, the federation which still does have an influence on its neighboring nations, because of its economic and military strength. Does this way of dismantling Abyssinian empire and fostering the highly wished independent Oromia having further influence over other liberated neighboring countries more advantageous than the other two types of sovereignty?

– those, who tend to accept both the common and conflict part of our history opt for liberation in Anglican model (federal Union of Dr. Leenco Lata). English people liberated themselves from the 700 years rule of Roman empire, formed England as an autonomous region and united it with the neighboring others to form United Kingdom; they used English as working language of the Kingdom. Can’t Oromia, being autonomous and free from alien forces, be united with neighboring autonomous regions to forge a federal Union, similar to that of the United Kingdom and promote Afaan Oromo to a primary working language of the union, replacing Amharigna?

– those, who do believe in only common proud history, tend to choose liberation in Indian type (integrative Oropia of Dr. Haile Fida). The Hindi people liberated themselves together with all nations and nationalities in their region and named the whole country as India, made Hindi the working language of Indian federation and, of course, divided the national area of Hindi into multiple federal regions. Why not we, the Oromo, liberate whole nations and nationalities in the empire, promote Afaan Oromo to the primary working language of the federation and call the whole country Oropia with the historical local Odaa’s (Odaa-Bisil, -Bulluqi, -Bultum, -Gaarres, -Makodi, -Nabee and -Roobaa) being the future separate federal regions of the country?

[OPFist]

All Oromo nationals are entitled to choose what we believe is the best for our nation; what matters, at last, is, of course, voice of Oromo majority. I think Oromia’s self-rule and/or Oropian shared rule should be an agenda of the Oromo, in contrast to federation or separation goal of Tigrayan elites. Interestingly, the three Abyssinianist groups (elites of Amhara, Tigrai and Eritrea) have got only one option respectively in their political struggle: Amhara elites still can only sing about the Indian-type for they know that Amharigna has got privilege to be federal language of the empire; Eritrean elites, as minority at periphery, were so insecure to live within a union so they had only an alternative of separation (Russian-style); Tigrayan elites can neither have language privilege to opt for Indian-type nor the capacity to live alone as an independent nation in order to choose Russian-style, so they do stick to Anglican-model. But, the Oromo and Oromia, being majority and largest area at the center, can play all the three cards (Anglican-model, Russian-style and Indian-type) as long as rule of the game in the region will be freedom and democracy. So, let Oromo people use our advantage and coordinate our struggle with all pro-freedom and pro-democracy forces in the empire against the existing system of Amaranet domination to come to the position of voting for one of these three options we do have.

[OPFist]

As far as I am concerned, all the three ways and visions are not harmful, but the decision must be made by the politically-conscious Oromo polity and Oromo public per referendum, when the time comes. This short essay is a bitter pill I wanted to present to Oromo foes, who are delighted by observing division of an Oromo liberation vanguard (the OLF) into three. For their information, OLF has got in its pocket, from the very beginning, only one goal of freedom, which, at the same time, can be interpreted as three types of post-freedom sovereignty (an independent Oromia, a federal Union and an integrative Oropia). It plays with these three cards of sovereignty based on the objective reality it is in, i.e. according to the “here and now” of situations (according to the Zeitgeist)!