The truth on self-determination of nations - Ethiomedia

The truth on self-determination of nations

By Tefera Dinberu

Endowed with gorgeous landscapes of mountains, valleys, and rivers, and being mosaic of
cultures, faiths, and many lifestyles, Ethiopia is the home of Christians, Muslims, Jews, and
other traditional faiths. Although God and nature have richly endowed our country of also one of
the ancient civilizations in the world, and although we are proud of our forebears that inherited
us this nation, since we are not endowed with recent leaderships that failed to stand for faith
and justice, and since we could not withstand external and internal problems, we could not
enjoy our natural gifts. So, lagging far behind the dynamic progress of the world, there we are
today still in a predicament as to how to manage our differences and exploit our common
natural resources.

Many democratic folks wish the gap among different political organizations got narrower and
narrower so that these forces could join hands and hold each other against the oppressive
regime of Meles Zenawi and his cronies. Ethiopians are ambitious to see an alliance of all
opposition forces. And it is good news that the Alliance Liberty, Equality, and Justice in Ethiopia
(ALEJE) – Afar People’s Party, Ginbot 7 Movement for Justice, Freedom, and Democracy, and
Ethiopian Movement for Unity and Justice – and Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) have recently
held a conference to create solidarity. This endeavor is commendable among all peace loving
Ethiopians; however, we also believe that this mission should not follow a path that
compromises the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ethiopia. We know that coordination of
efforts can solve problems of the peoples of Ogaden, Sidama, Hadiya, Gambella, Benishangul,
Afar, Oromo, and others through democratic means. However, ambiguous statements put on
OLF programs need to be clarified to the Ethiopian peoples in regards to the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of Ethiopia. Hence, this paper tries to deal with the issue of self-determination
of nations with special reference to OLF and other similar organizations.

The following statements are excerpts taken from the objectives of OLF posted on its official
website:
“The Oromo people's quest for their right to self-determination is just and legitimate.” 1

“The Oromo Liberation Front [OLF] is a political organization that is struggling for the realization
of the national self-determination for the Oromo people and establishment of independent state
of Oromia.”2
“The Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) is a political organization established in 1973 by Oromo
nationalists to lead the national liberation struggle of the Oromo people against the Abyssinian
colonial rule.” 3
“The root cause of political problems in Ethiopia is national oppression by the Ethiopian empire
state and refusal by the state to respect the rights of oppressed peoples to self-determination”4.

1 http://www.oromoliberationfront.org/OLFMission.htm

2 http://www.oromoliberationfront.info/objectives.htm

3 htp://oromooliberationfront.org/static/mission.php

4 http://www.oromoliberationfront.org/OLFPolicies.htm

2

In a joint meeting that was held by Alliance Liberty, Equality, and Justice in Ethiopia (ALEJE)
and Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) on Sunday, July 10, 2011 at the Sheraton National Hotel in
Arlington, VA, in which Dr. Berhanu Nega, Chairman of Ginbot 7 and ALEJE, Dr. Nuro Dedefo,
Executive Committee member and Head of Legal Affairs of OLF, and Dr. Getachew Begahsaw,
Professor of Economics made speeches in which the unity of Ethiopia has been avowed by all
participants in the deliberations. Many folks were interested to hear to Dr. Nuro’s speech that
focused on the importance of creating an alliance in order to put an end to the Weyane regime.
Since a targeted type of state structure was left for the people to decide after a transitional
government is established, we need to know more details on the OLF programs.

A similar meeting was held on November 17 in Seattle, where Mr. Amin Jundi, Secretary of
OLF, Dr. Berhanu Nega, Chairman of Ginbot 7, and Dr. Aregawi Berhe made speeches. Dr.
Aregawi Berhe clearly repudiated a clandestine or covert agenda of secession and emphasized
on the importance of the collective will of our peoples to build a democratic and sovereign
Ethiopia and in line to that Dr. Berhanu Nega summarized the program of Ginbot 7. Mr. Amin
Jundi’s speech focused on the importance of a unified struggle to remove the Weyane regime
from power and create a democratic form of government. Although Mr. Amin did not cite OLF
articles, he said that secession is not the agenda of the Oromo people. If this is an official
renouncement of secession, it is good news for peace and friendship loving peoples of Ethiopia.
However, related crucial issues were left without clarification; for example how the alliance plans
to share power in the state that would be founded and if a federal state structure is the target or
so. Some of Dr Amin’s phrases were, “OLF neither made agreements to live together with other
peoples nor signed anything with Amhara, Ogaden, Tigray, etc. to create a nation…Which
country did Oromo invade…? Oromo lives in its own territories…We want to freely use
resources on Oromo lands… ” He also seemed to make some distinction in his approach
between the desires of the Oromo people and OLF.

In addition to these, some extracted statements from an article on OLF policy that was read on
www.ethiomedia.com website on November 2, 2011 referred to as: “Info Desk OLF PR |
November 2, 2011, by Abo-Olf on Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 9:39pm.” 5 are shown as
follows:

It is obvious that Mr. Zenawi has big fear that always forces his utterance tone to shivery when
he mentions the name of the OLF in his so many speeches and interviews.…We would like to
remind all again that OLF is a liberation movement that came out of liberation struggle of
century old resistance against occupation and exploitation and struggles for the self
determination of the Oromo people…The OLF is mainly targeted as it is the only force that is a
real threat to the regime to stay in power for decades ahead….After half a century of struggle for
peaceful change by several forces everyone is still freshly opting for armed means of struggle.
(Underlined)

A good beginning paves the way to success. Our concern is not only to remove the Weyane
regime from power, but to create an integrated nation of equality, justice and to build a strong
democratic system of state government.

5 http://www.facebook.com/pages/Abo-Olf/172510372795738

3

We need to remember an Ethiopian saying, “አለባብሰው ቢያርሱ በአረም ይመለሱ።”, literally meaning
plowing covered with weeds will compel a farmer to return back to the farmland for a harder task
of weeding.

“Occupation” and formation of an Ethiopian “Empire” is often stated by our nationalists.
However, no one should misunderstand the meaning of an empire as there cannot be an empire
without colonial occupation of a sovereign state or states. And these terms cannot exist without
the context of colonization. Hence, does Ethiopia have colonies? Was Oromia really colonized
by Ethiopia? These questions should get proper and legitimate answers. To find out whether
Ethiopia colonized a land of Oromia or another region, we need to learn what is meant by
colonization and national liberation or self-determination of nations. Before that, it may be
helpful to know how the United Nations defines the concept of indigenous peoples. A
background paper prepared by the Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
New York, 19-21 January 2004 states as follows:

Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity
with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider
themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or
parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to
preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic
identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own
cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into
the present of one or more of the following factors:

a) Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
b) Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
c) Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system,
membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
d) Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of
communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal
language);
e) Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
f) Other relevant factors.
On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous
populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized
and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to
them, without external interference.
Over 75 languages spoken today indicate natives of Ethiopia that lived in the country since
immemorial times. Professor Grove Hudson’s study (from Michigan State University) lists the 75
Ethiopian languages6 – identified by Cushitic, Omotic, Nilo-Saharan, and Semitic categories –
helps also to see a reflection of the indigenous people.

Chapter XI Article 73 of the UN Regarding Non-self-governing territories states as follows:
Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of
territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the
principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a

6 https://www.msu.edu/~hudson/Ethlgslist.htm

4

sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace
and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these
territories, and, to this end:

a. to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic,
social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;
b. to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples,
and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to
the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of
advancement;
c. to further international peace and security;
d. to promote constructive measures of development, to encourage research, and to co-operate
with one another and, when and where appropriate, with specialized international bodies with a
view to the practical achievement of the social, economic, and scientific purposes set forth in
this Article; and
e. to transmit regularly to the Secretary-General for information purposes, subject to such
limitation as security and constitutional considerations may require, statistical and other
information of a technical nature relating to economic, social, and educational conditions in the
territories for which they are respectively responsible other than those territories to which
Chapters XII and XIII apply.
In relation to that article 74 reads as follows:

Members of the United Nations also agree that their policy in respect of the territories to which
this Chapter applies, no less than in respect of their metropolitan areas, must be based on the
general principle of good-neighborliness, due account being taken of the interests and well-
being of the rest of the world, in social, economic, and commercial matters.

Colonization is defined as the extension of political and economic control over an area by an
empire state whose nationals have occupied the area and usually possess organizational or
technological superiority over the native population, i.e. indigenous people whether they have
attained a full measure of self-government or not. A colonizer is an occupier of part or the whole
of a sovereign country. It may consist simply in a migration of nationals to the territory, or it may
be the formal assumption of control over the territory by military force. Colonialists often
exploited local greedy chiefs that raced for power against other local contenders and agents to
infiltrate into different countries. Internal conflicts were the venue through which they could step
in by bribing, supporting or instigating a local leader against other contenders. Colony has been
defined as any people, territory, or a state separated from but subject to a ruling power. The era
of classical colonialism lasted from 15th century to the 20th century. Today what exists is
imperialism that is neocolonialism that exploits small and weak states that have national flags
and leaders. However, the fact that nations wave their own flags and have leaders who can
speak their languages does not mean that they are economically self-sustainable and that the
people can live a better life. Neo-colonialists use divide-and-rule schemes through ethnic
nationalists and elite groups, that struggle for localized power but not able to build a strong
nation-state, to impose their indirect domination in many countries especially in Africa.

Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a geographic area,
such as a territory. It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact
for which no purely legal explanation can be provided. The former UN secretary General Kofi
Annan in defining sovereignty stated that “States are now widely understood to be instruments
at the service of their peoples, and not vice versa.” A new, broader definition of national interest
is needed in the new century, which would induce states to find greater unity in the pursuit of

5

common goals and values. In the context of many of the challenges facing humanity today, the
collective interest is the national interest. (Source: The Economist, 18 Sept. 1999)

The era and mission of Emperor Menelik must not be misunderstood. Some nationalist
politicians just want to start history from turn of 19th century. Politicians can ignore facts and
make interesting speeches to get support from a certain group of people. Such vocalizations
need to be weighted through substance that can remain valid at all times in all places since a
true democrat does not make cosmetic premises solely to darken unwanted past history to meet
intended ends, but respects peoples’ history. Because history is based on objective facts that
nobody can make up. Even some nationalist scholars identified Ethiopia as an empire and
classified all Amharas as neftegnas and Menelik as a colonial occupier of sovereign states.
Some politicians would like to categorize E. Menelik’s reunification of Sidama, Gurage, Bale,
Wolayita, Jimma, Harer, and other local states as an act of Amaran colonization scramble for an
empire by equating it to the role of France, G. Britain, and Italy. In fact during the era of E.
Menelik most neftegnas were Amharic speakers; however, a neftegna is any rifleman from any
ethnicity sent by a state government in the form of military expedition to enforce state rule. By its
literal definition, Weyane gunmen are neftegnas. The Damoti troops who remained in Hadiya –
the Chawa – had similar missions. There were Oromo neftegnas before the era of Menelik when
they invaded and occupied many parts of the country. History tells us also that there was a
community that moved from Northern Ethiopia through a military expedition to the south during
the last years of Aksumite kingdom which constituted the Gurage people that settled in the
central part of the country (Henze 112).

Of course, our history had ups and downs as, elsewhere in the world. Internal power struggle,
problems of power transfer, and other external factors could make a central state weak or
strong. In the later part of medieval ages when Ethiopian emperors tried to secure the ancient
Ethiopian empire, they had conquered Bejas, Jews, Damotis (Sidamas), Zagwes, Walasmas
(Adalites), and Hadiyas. In a situation when a central state was weak, it would be unable to
control tributary local states; it fails to enforce tax collection; it fails to enforce law; and order and
local states apparently exercise a type of sovereignty. When a central state consolidates power,
it often reunifies loosely federated states. Ethiopia was not indifferent to that. Zemen-mesafint is a
good example that shows how local states were so loose that some Sultanates in Eastern
Ethiopia had the privilege of even not having to pay taxes to the central state. In fact, E.
Menelik made one of many reunifications since the reign of Zera-Yahoo (1434-1468). Other
politicians undermined E. Menelik for not fighting on to decolonize other parts of the country,
especially Eritrea, Somalia and Djibouti. If E. Menelik was considered to be a colonizer, is the
unification of Germany under Otto Von Bismark in 1871 a colonial expansion? Was Abraham
Lincoln expanding an empire or unifying a nation? These happened in the process of internal
power struggle, centralization or reunification just like similar events in Great Britain (1707,
1801), Italy (1861), Germany (1871, 1989), France (987), the USA (1776), etc. Similarly, Spain
(1492), Burma (1613), Iran (1501), Portugal (1249), Saudi Arabia (1932), Canada (1867), Brazil
(1852), and many other countries were created by classical military unification of different
smaller kingdoms into one nation without which they could not have existed to date. This was a
process through which many modern countries passed and became sovereign. However, that
style of nation building culminated after the great wars and is not functional today.

In the process of nation building, wars took place for example during the time of Yesehaq,
Amde-Tsion, and Zara-Yaqob, Libne-Dingel, Gelawdewos, Tsertse-Dingel, etc. (14th to 16th
centuries). Other wars took place when local or tributary states like Gojjam, Shewa, Wello,
Wolaita, Jimma Abba Jiffar, Gondar, Hararge, Gurage, etc. refused to pay tributes to whoever
was in control of the central state. This type of wars took place between Tewodros and

6

Hailemelekot, between Menelik and Yohannis, between Menelik and between Teklehaimanot of
Gojjam, etc. It was in such situations that the battle of Chelenko took place in 1887 and Ali Abd
ash-Shakur was defeated while battles between the emperor and Jote Tulu of Lege Quellam,
Kumsa Moreda of Leqa Nekemt were avoided through negotiations. There were several such
internal conflicts, alliances, wars, submissions, and unifications. Whoever was a victor could
build a unified Ethiopian nation. Gragn tried; he could not succeed. Many others tried; but the
leader that succeeded inherited us this nation with all its values and cultural legacies. However
the concept of invasion of an Oromian state by Ethiopia is mere fabrication for political gimmicks
since there had been no Oromian state in history without the context of Ethiopia. It is not only
us, foreigners like Dr.David Living Stone, Devis Levine, Harold Marcus, Grover Hudson, Herbert
S. Lewis, John Markakis, Stuart Munro-Hay, Burstein Stanley, C. Conti Rossini, H. V.
Wessman, Cressida Marcus, E. Cerulli, Edward Ullendorff, the Pankhursts, and other hundreds
and probably thousands of ancient and present scholars have written objective history of
Ethiopia that is supported by tones of geographical, anthropological, archeological,
paleontological, phonological & morphological (linguistics), sociological and other scientific facts
. If one really wants to know the integrity of the people, one can get much sources of information
even from living testimonies of our elderly folks. One must know that it was not only Amharas
that safeguarded Ethiopia from Dervish, Egyptian, French, and repeated Italian invasions.
Oromo natives like Major General Jagama Kello, Geresu Duki, Kebede Bizuneshi, Belay
Zeleke, Webeneh Tessema, Adane Mekonnen, Abichu, Bekele Weya, Jima Senbeta, Abdisa
Aga, Arega Bekerie (Abebe Aregay), Haile-Mariam Mamo, and thousands of other Ethiopian
patriots paid their lives to inherit us this country. This is undeniable historical fact. However, one
has to answer this question honestly: Who roamed and occupied Shewa, Keffa, Wellega, Wello,
Sidadamo, Arsi, Illubabor, and other parts of the country in the 16th and 17th centuries? Who
invaded and occupied natives of Yem, Hadiya, kambata, Gimira, Angota, Dawaro, Wed,
Fat’egar, Ifat, Guragea, Ganza, Conta, Damota, Waleka, Bizama, Kullo, and destroyed many
other traditional kingdoms? It is undeniable fact that emperors – Tewodros, Yohannis, or
Menelik tried to consolidate a central state power by collecting tributes and requested troops
from tributary states especially in case of external aggression. They did not wage any wars
against such local states in the aim of destroying their local states unless they refused to
recognize the central state and pay taxes. However, it is also undeniable fact that the above
mentioned kingdoms were destroyed by forces that invaded them.

It has to be acknowledged that it is after Oromo pastoralist nomads predominantly migrated
from south eastern part of Ethiopia to the central, western, and northern parts of the country
after the reign of Gragn (Ahmed Ibn Ibrahim Al Ghaz) in the 16th century that most previous
kingdoms were destroyed and replaced by Oromo migrants. (Getachew 215-16, 241, Lewis 23-
24) One must also recognize that not all Oromo speaking people were originally Oromos. Many
of the indigenous people speak the language since their grandparents espoused the Oromo
language due to cultural domination by the new dominant migrants (Lewis 38, Tesfaye 4). The
Jimma kingdom of Abba Jiffar I was established in the beginning of the 19th century beside
smaller kingdoms of Limmu-Ennarya, Jimma, Gera, Gomma, and Gummu. The single most
important testimonial is that the first Oromo heads of families that settled in Wello, Shewa,
Sidamo, Wellega, etc. are identified by names – Wello, Qallu,Yeju, Merewwa, Mechaa, Tulema,
Ittu, Akkichu, Weerenesha, Hubbena, Datche, Jille, Gudru, Lume, Liben, Tchile, Webbo, Luba,
Metta, Wayu, Sellale, Ambo, Arusi, Gullele, Dera, Limmu, Jimma, Gera, Wellega, Raya, Borena,
Jigur, Amoru, Wellega, Jimma, Gera, Gimbichu, Hida, Gora, Nole, Ale, Timuga, Horo, Bella,
Boke, Abbo, Azebo, Ashenge, Tcheffa, Akako, Hoko, Kono, Roch, etc. – all children and grand
children of Bertuma and Borena – that also corresponds with names of territories occupied by
them. (ibid 229-32) No ordinary Ethiopian made an issue as to whenever and whatever way
these settlements happened as it was a past history; however, the idea of occupation should not

7

be misrepresented by superficial outlooks. So, OLF and the nationalists should review the issue
of occupation of Oromo land by Ethiopia realizing the true history that can be easily justified on
the contrary.

The word “Empire” does not identify Ethiopia nor is there any classical empire in the whole
world today. This word connotes an outdated outlook of the Ethiopian medieval age. Now we
are in the 21st century. Many things have evolved and developed. Today, we cannot talk about
an empire that at one time included Yemen, Aden, Meroe, or Punt land. That is a past history.
Two world bodies – The League of Nations and the United Nations organizations officially
recognize the borders of Ethiopia. A colonizer is an occupier of part or the whole of a sovereign
country. However, there is no former sovereign country or part of a country that is under a
colonial occupation of Ethiopia. So, although even some of our educated personalities who
speak in flowery words and modern spirit of democracy and justice could not be clean from
hatred that drags them back to the old quagmire, the term that is simply used for political
polarization does not help to create alliance among democratic nationalists.

Genuine Oromo folks do not want to forego the inheritance our forebears. We respect our
Oromo folks. They are typical Ethiopian folks. Oromo without the Ethiopian context and Ethiopia
without Oromo is inconceivable. Although some Oromo elites refused the existing African
alphabet, Geez, and chose Latin, a foreign alphabet instead, still Ethiopians did not deny the
Oromo people. It is doubtful that any democrat would like to alienate these humble people from
their Ethiopian brothers and sisters.
The article referred to the Resolution of the Oromo Liberation Front National Council Fifth
Regular Session and stated the following:
The Oromo liberation struggle for freedom and sovereignty, led by the OLF, continuous to enjoy
popular support of our people, who continue paying immense sacrifices. The ongoing popular
uprising led by the Oromo youth, the Qeerroo, which is gaining wide spread support from the
Oromo and other peoples, is shaking the regime to its foundation. In the course of the struggle,
our organization has encountered and overcame various internal and external challenges. The
council reaffirms its unfolding commitment to the achievement of the Oromo people’s right to
self-determination up to and including independence (underlined). At this junction, we call upon
all Oromo political forces to join hands with us in the continuous effort to liberate our people. We
are committed to peacefully resolve tactical differences that might have existed between us.
The first part of the article that reflected the OLF policy by itself proves that not all Oromo
people accept OLF. It is not only because Meles is divisive, but we live among the Oromo
people and we know that not all the Oromo people believe in a scheme that segregates them
from the rest of the Ethiopian people. It is stated that the people struggled for justice and
democracy for the last half a century with little or no achievements. So, do we have to keep on
sacrificing our sisters and brothers in the old ways that did not bear any fruit for another half a
century, while the World is progressing with newer paradigms? Of course, circumstances dictate
us to change strategies.

All the hitherto oppressive regimes tried to build a nation. However, unparalleled to even to any
ugly oppressive regime, Weyane tried to dismantle Ethiopia from the top. And Weyane needs
marginalized nationalists to advance sectarianism; because, it is this divisive scheme that keeps
the people divided gives the chance for the regime to remain on power and continue its
oppressive scheme. Also no super-power, be it Western or Eastern, will care about democracy
and justice in our country. They all run for their own national interests. When ethnic differences
arise and escalate to civil wars, it is imperialists that benefit out of that. Basically conflicts open
market for their business. As fragmentations continue and smaller and smaller states are
created by secession, imperialists would have more leeway for political and economic

8

influences under the gown of aid, thereby extending their neocolonial domination. Many
examples can be seen: Great Britain supported the establishment of an independent Palestinian
state when Turkey was under its spheres of influence. Nowadays it prefers Israel for its strategic
importance in the Middle East. For example, the USA supported the secession of Armenia
during the time of President Woodrow Wilson, and the same country turned down its support in
the 1980’s. The support that the USA and G.Britain give to the EPRDF/Weyane regime is
primarily based on their national interests. On the other hand, the regime exploits the support
from these developed countries to suppress any contenders to stay on power at the expense of
the people. Our destiny is intertwined and nobody else can take us out of this mess except our
own concerted struggle.

How does the United Nations Organization define the concept of national liberation &
secession?
Before World War II, super powers considered themselves legitimate owners of other countries
that they occupied by forceful colonial expansion. The problem of the time was on the conflict of
their interests. When colonialists agreed in the share of their occupations, there was relative
peace among them. When conflicts arose, colonialists confronted each other. For example,
Belgium, Italy, France, and Great Britain were the main contenders that confronted each other
to colonize Africa and Ethiopia in particular. Africa as a whole except Ethiopia and Liberia was
colonized. Similarly, many Middle East, Asian and Latin American countries were colonized.
Although the murder of the archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria by a Serbian national was an
immediate cause, the First World War exposed the hidden conflict of colonialists in their
scramble for colonies. This conflict reached its highest stage when World War II exploded as
sparked by Fascist Benito Mussolini from Italy and Nationalist Adolf Hitler from Germany.
Whereas the League of Nations that was an organization of free world countries was rather
used as a shelter for colonial interests of super powers of the time, it could not contain the
insatiable greed of the colonialists that resulted in the two world wars. The formation of the
United Nations Organization immediately after the end of World War II in October 1945 resulted
in the legitimacy of national liberations. National liberation was pronounced well by countries
that fell under colonial rules in the late 18th and 19th centuries and especially after the two big
world wars from the point of view of decolonization. The concept of national liberation was to
free a nation that was colonized by another powerful nation. Hence, colonized countries and
territories made separate and unified struggles to liberate themselves from colonialism. For
example, the Mau-Mau movement was a genuine popular struggle to free Kenya from English
colonial occupation. Another example was the civil disobedience method of struggle that
Mahatma Gandhi followed to liberate India. Fascist Italy under the leadership Benito Mussolini
vowed to break Ethiopia that symbolized a free nation and an icon of national liberation
movement in the African continent. And the Ethiopian people irrespective of ethnic differences
fought back the Italian aggressor in 1935-1941 as they did in 1896. Many colonies became free
as a result of such resistances to colonial domination.

The United Nations Organization in its charter7 clearly put the right of Nations to Liberation and
self-determination. The connotation of ‘self-determination’ was meant to give the option of
choosing between a 'guardian’ free nation and being a sovereign nation, which applied
especially for weaker nations and non-self governing territories that were under direct and
indirect colonial rule so that they could decide their fate in the scheme of decolonization. Hence,

7 Article 73 of the UN states, “Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of
territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the
inhabitants of these territories are paramount…and the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and to this end…”

9

after the previous colonizers were defeated, victor nations of the war got entitlements like
‘protectorate' and 'guardian' for legitimacy of occupation of formerly colonized countries or
regions such as Djibouti, Eritrea, Somaliland, Cyprus, Bahrain, Philippines, Puerto Rico,
Albania, Aden, Palestine, Oman, Qatar, Iraq, Rwanda, Morocco, and many others. Literally self-
determination also referred to all colonies that were in the process of building sovereignty as
was implemented through referendum before they attained full sovereignty. The purpose of the
UN is to maintain international peace and security and “to develop friendly relations among
nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples…”
(Chapter 1, Article 1). The UN is clear on this. It does not support secession. Its priority interest
is non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign nations; respect of sovereignty of people
expressed in deciding their fate without intimidation or any use of force. Chapter XI, paragraph 6
states, “Any attempt aimed at the unity and territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with
the principles of the charter of the United Nations.”

Legacies of colonialists were destructive. Due to their divide-and-rule scheme colonialists had
sown seeds of discord among peoples as a result of which the people were subjected to un-
abating local and even regional conflicts. When former colonialists were invited to settle border
issues, mostly they gave temporary solutions that were in line with neocolonial interests that
only postponed the conflicts and left some holes through which they could impose their
influences. They also sponsored organizations that discouraged unity of Ethiopians in Eritrea
and Ogaden regions. The notion of Greater Somalia was engineered by Italy and was later
supported by Great Britain (Marcus 154). Great Britain purposely administered Ogaden with the
northern Somaliland that created a separate identity and implanted a future problem. After the
2nd World War, as Great Britain knew that it could not fulfill its intention of taking over the
Ethiopian territory and Somalia from Italy, it started sponsoring the Somali Youth League (SYL)
to create a” Greater Somalia”; they sponsored the SYL that worked hard to incorporate Somalia,
Kenya, Djibouti, and Ethiopia into one state without the awareness of these countries. At the
same time, G. Britain encouraged personalities like Wolde-Ab Wolde-Mariam by tipping them to
betray the unionist party in British occupied Eritrea and establish a secessionist “Liberal
Progressive” party (Zewdie 78-79). Italy also sponsored a secessionist Eritrean party led by
Ibrahim Sultan (ibid 227-237). During the Italian occupation, Somalis were purposely sent to
massacre priests in Debre Libanos (Marcus 149). It is to be remembered that G. Britain and
Italy based their tripartite treaty with Ethiopia forcing the latter to stop its claims on Somalia. At
the end of the protectorate occupation, when Ethiopia was forced to stop its claim on Somalia
and Somali was prepared for independence, Great Britain was hesitant to demark the border
between Ethiopia and the new Somalia; and it rather preferred to identify the border with racial
settlements, while it was evident that the pastoralist people were predominantly nomads.
Because of this, the idea of expansion was manifested many times by Somalis in different
forms. When Somalia was proclaimed a sovereign nation in 1960, the new leaders started to
publicly refer to the SYL map on which one of the tips of Somalia’s five-pointed star represented
Ogaden that is inhabited mostly by Somali language speakers of Ethiopia (ibid 173).So, Somali
expansionist claims were born immediately after its independence in 1960 and followers of the
former SYL and the first leaders of the new state and invaded Ethiopia in the same year. When
they realized that that scheme that is not initiated by the will of the people could not also be
accepted by the international community, they started to draw ethnic borders based on
language and claimed about a third of Ethiopia that included the whole Ogaden, Harar, Dire
Dawa, Bale, and Shewa regions as far as Awash River valley. The Siad Barre regime invaded
Ethiopian eastern and south eastern regions. Recently Al Ittihad al Islamic (AIAI) worked much
to create a similar great state from Ethiopia, Djibouti, Somalia, and Eritrea. Some hints indicate
that in the 1990’s Somali mercenaries that pretended to be members of OLF murdered innocent

10

Ethiopians in Bale and Ogaden regions8. This shows that once ethnic conflict is sparked, it
spreads wildly with uncontrollable backlash and irredeemable and repercussions.
The population of Ogaden consists of Somali, Afar, Oromo, Issa, and other ethnic groups.
However, it was not only Ogaden, but Oromo, Afar, Aderie, Gambella, Benishangul, Sidama,
Wolayita, and many other nationalities were subjected to poverty, ignorance and destitution.
The Derg regime for the first time seemed to recognize problems associated with
nationality/ethnicity; however, it was not able to handle issues like that of the Ogaden. The
present EPRDF regime did no more exacerbating problems. One has to bear in mind also that
the Ogaden case had previously been pronounced more by Somalia proper especially by the
Siad Barre regime as a territorial claim rather than being a national issue. The people of
Ogaden have become subject to poverty and destitution and a practical solution should be
found; this paper tries to navigate around the truth and analyzes issues of self-determination of
the Ogaden people along with other nationality issues in Ethiopia.

Nationalism: National liberation is a humble term in the sense that self determination of nations
fall in the nucleus of democratic human rights. Nations struggle to be free from all types of
oppression, be it foreign or local; however, since nationalism is perceived in different ways,
problems arise as to who promotes it, the condition in which it is presented to the public, and
how it is attempted to resolve it.
Nationalism is perceived through a political ideology in which a group of people are identified.
One type of identity comprises of all citizens of a country tied with common history, culture, and
economy, irrespective of race, language or ethnicity in building a sovereign multi-ethnic nation;
this type of nationalism unites all natives of a country under a nation-state. This can create a
strong nation-state that can exercise its sovereignty as it can create a favorable situation to
stand against any form of colonial occupation and imperialist domination. Good examples of
such nationalists are liberation leaders like Kwame Nkrumah (Convention Peoples Party), Julius
Nyerere (Tanzania African National Union), Amilcar Cabral (Independence of Guinea and the Cape
Verde Islands), Patrice Lumumba (Movement National Congolese), and Nelson Mandela (African
National Congress). Since this type of nationalism unifies all racial groups and minorities for a
common goal, it fosters democracy.
A second type of nationalism is identified mainly with a group of people that have common
language, culture, history, and geographical location. This type of nationalism often identifies a
group of people with specific race, language, religion, territory or a combination of these in a
localized nature. This strategy may be good in avoiding other political figures in the race for
political power under a situation where democracy encompasses all contesters without
discrimination. However, this isolates an ethnic group from the other people and puts the ethnic
group under the dictatorship of “indispensable” elite group, like Weyane and Shaebia.
Nationalism has been used as an instrument of dictatorship. During the era of
decolonization, leaders of newly liberated states that did not have internal opponents followed
unitary form of leadership leaving no room for power rivals and ruled people tyrannically. Other
insurgents that associated themselves with communist style of national liberation took
advantage of national issues and social class struggle to ascend to power and consolidate it.
Nationalists that are predominantly followers of the blemished communist ideology still exploit
“The Right of Nations to Self-determination and up to Secession” slogan as a means to slip into
political power through the communist state structure. Secessionists adhere to self identity in
terms of language, tradition, beliefs, and specific cultural values and possibly marginalized
economic, geographic and other opportunities and often hail that the only way to guarantee the
freedom of the people is to break away from a mother land. The ethnic groups they belong to

8 http://www.ethiomedia.com/broad/be_wushet_milas.pdf

11

may rally around them because they instinctively believe that a leader that comes from the
same ethnic group guarantees their security. Typical examples are Croatian nationalism,
Serbian nationalism, Georgian nationalism, Quebec nationalism, and Irish nationalism. While
Weyane falls in this category, it tries to distort the pattern by hooking itself with other ethnic
groups by employing mercenary surrogate agents like OPDO, ANDM, etc. The extreme side of
this category promotes the supremacy of a racial group over other groups as manifested by
Fascism, Nazism, and Zionism. We know that the Oromo people are one of the many
oppressed peoples of Ethiopia. However, to categorize or discriminate these people by race or
ethnic background does not help to build democracy in Ethiopia. We have to learn from history
as to how racism had been destructive and traffic to the fate of its pioneers and how it isolated
its people from the family of the World. We also know the endless war that racism caused
between Jews and Arabs in Palestine. The very moment one starts to organize people on the
basis of ethnic background, one automatically joins the camp of racists like P. W. Botha, Ian
Smith, B. Mussolini, A. Hitler, Shimon Peres, or Slobodan Milosevic, Radovan Karadzic, or the
diversionist dictator Meles. Hence, the slogan of secession was genuinely pronounced in the
naïve sector of the people and shrewdly manipulated by dictators under the gown of
nationalism.

Secession is a crucial issue for some nationalists. What makes separatist nationalists
delusional is that such nationalists may hope for uncontested power that originates from
personality cult and indispensability behind the shield of localized ethnic boundaries; because in
real democracy, election may drop them out. On the other hand even illiterate naïve countrymen
that have no other reference but hear the nationalists that speak a similar language and share
similar spiritual rituals can rally behind slogans of such nationalists. Both parties may satisfy
their motives; however, this is the trick. Through secession, new states can wave new flags and
have new leaders postponing unforeseeable consequences. First of all, it may come after
material destruction and priceless human casualties. Breaking the bond of a nation is not a
simple affair like leaving in independent town homes, but rather more sophisticated and bears
newer problems. Secession breaks the whole dynamics of spiritual and material life of peoples.
It does not end up only in geographical, political, and economic isolation of one ethnic group
from another. It is definitely a matter of losing common economic and social strategies, and loss
of security in the wider perspective. Since secession is breaking away from a bigger nation, it
risks the integration of the people. The most important social fabric will be obliterated; it is equal
to losing one’s own brother and sister as a result of which neighbors would be forced to see
each other inimically. Folks will be forced to be alien to each other and become refugees in their
own country. Since secession would not likely happen on consent but through forceful split of
territories, it can result in continuing conflicts on strategic territories or resources. This by itself
can cost multi-dimensional sacrifices. It likely puts the security of the region at more risk. It is a
matter of losing viability of the ceding or seceding nation and gambling adventurously, or failing
to solve known issues and frantically exploring in an unknown venture. Secession minimizes the
economic viability of a nation and may result in loss of strategic importance and would likely
make a nation vulnerable to indirect or direct domination by another stronger nation. It is a
matter of trying to run in the wilderness and face unknown problems that result in irredeemable
sacrifices and unwilling to tackle known problems – building a sound system of democracy and
justice and working on alternative solutions that avoid social conflicts. With justice and good
state administration, internal social conflicts can be resolved; however, such conflicts cannot
easily be resolved when they are externalized. The experience on Ethio-Eritrea conflict on
border issues, from the role of Moise Kapenda Tshombe in the secession attempt of Katanga
from Zaire (Democratic Republic of Congo), the secession attempt of Biafra by Colonel
Odumegwu Ojukwu that claimed over 3 million casualties and enormous loss of resources that
left scars on Nigerians, the Kashmir issue that caused at least three wars between Pakistan and

12

India and invited China to intervene, the deplorable situation of Panama and the Republic of
Colombia after their split in 1903, the history of weak states of Nicaragua, Guatemala, El
Salvador, Honduras and Costa Rica after they broke down from the Federal Republic of Central
America that was dissolved in 1841, the whole lot of border and racial issues after the breaking
apart of former Yugoslavia, casualties in East Timor, Cyprus, losses of Tamil Ealem in Sri
Lanka, and other similar cases can be mentioned. We should learn from consequences of
marginalized nationalism that ended in the demise of the Balkan states from the legacies of
Radovan Karadzic, Slobodan Milosevic, and Franjo Tudjman, as well as Professor Leon
Mugesera, and Colonel Theoneste Bagosora who mobilized the Hutus and the army for the
genocide of about one million Tutsis, from Somali clans that kept on fighting and were unable to
create a viable nation that are some of the lessons of secession. That was why neo-colonialists
targeted Ethiopia whose flag symbolized the Pan African movement that in turn was nipped in the
bud9.

A genuine educated personality of the 21st century with rational thinking knows that
collaboration of nations is very important to fight poverty, to grow mutually benefiting
infrastructure, to share common geographical and natural resources, to share the benefits of
modern technology and culture, and to cooperate in commerce and communication in order to
protect neo-colonial domination and exploitation of nations by powerful imperialist nations.
Whereas European countries for example are trying to avoid tariffs, visas, and are using
common currency to advance trade and communication and are a few steps close to create a
united states of Europe, the rationale of trying to tear nations into fragments of smaller pockets
and into unknown utopian ends with undefined dreams by our third world nationalists is
meaningless. Today, any educated and rational person knows that smaller nations cannot
survive unless they depend on developed countries. Such small nations have nominal freedom,
because they have to rely on foreign aid that compromises not only their independence or
sovereignty but also their ability to use their resources. It does not guarantee them enjoyment of
humane freedom and democracy at all. Even if they have good natural resources, the lion share
goes to the predators. Secession results also in loss of viability in this world of competition.
Secession deteriorates the living condition of the people. For example, it is the repercussion of
secession that left the once prosperous Aseb and Mitsewa ports to be barren and unable to
benefit both Ethiopia and Eritrea. It was the result of secession that split the Afar people and
weakened their economic development.

The real cause of oppression of the people is obliterated as social issues are diverted to
Bantustan type of segregation emphasized in language, religion or ethnicity. While the solution
should be to eradicate oppression, secession in reality has become self-exclusion from
opportunities of a greater setting and voluntary isolation of the people of a country behind
geographic, human, and economic barriers.

Interdependence versus Isolation: We are interdependent and need more integration rather
than alienation. However, the principle of ethnic politics never matches with the principle of
democratic integration. Nationalists may try to take advantage of local natural resources to cede
a territory; examples are mineral rich Katanga of Congo and Biafra of Nigeria. However, such
nationalists undermine the most important potential of development that is interdependence on
social aspects (cultural and human) and geographic strategies besides economic and natural
resources that are crucial in the dynamics of growth. The true remedy to backwardness that
results from oppressive and a tyrannical regime is a sound democratic system in which justice is

9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Africanism#Origins

13

implemented. Democracy and justice can really stand well when all peoples stand in unison for
the general social welfare and against individual motives. There is nothing to fear about
democracy and nobody fears it except classical and neo-tyrants –dictators or ambitious power
mongers. Power mongers fear democracy, not any people. The lust for power and true
democratic thoughts do not match; because, if a democratic state is formed, there may be no
guarantee for ambitious individual power seekers to gain state power as a true democratic state
structure may be organized based on geographical and other factors to represent people, where
constituencies of different ethnic groups including minorities may be structured in a way that can
help common economic development, or communication strategies, where ethnic lines may
have minor magnitudes. Secessionist elites at any cost prefer division of states into ethnic
boundaries and use language, religion, regional and other differences to create ideological
camps into which desperate and vulnerable people can easily be dragged creating a sectarian
trap; and they fan ideological camps between peoples to seclude an ethnic group from fellow
natives creating a barrier of ethnicity against other people that invites power monger elites to
intervene. However, in a popular democratic society, nobody has the right to deny the liberty of
social groups or individuals since it is a sound system of democracy and justice that guarantees
these inalienable rights to all peoples of different ethnic groups in the course of representation in
the decision making and implementation of state affairs – the legislative, executive, and judiciary
branches of government. This happens only when different nationalities cooperate, but not
when they disperse. In separation, since there is lack of challenging democratic constituencies,
the absence of counterchecking forces would leave favorable situations only for dictatorship.

There is no need to merely live together without a purpose; the purpose is to accommodate
situations for the common good of all; the purpose is not to satisfy the greed of oppressors; the
purpose is to stand together and end oppression; to overcome natural and manmade problems.
While everyone knows that cooperation is vital for existence, personal greed changes the whole
picture. Self-centered personalities fan differences and exacerbate solvable problems in order to
exploit volatile situations. Hence, marginalized nationalists can create social cancer when they
fan the differences among poverty stricken people instead of bridging the gap. Most of the times
it is personalities belonging to the same group of people who exploit the situation and make
other external forces intervene; each side working for its own advantages. They create myths,
tales and rally honest people through narrow ideological lines. They fan animosity because if
there is friendship and peace among peoples, there will be nothing to scavenge, nothing to
claim, no need of intervention, no need of arbiters, no reason to sneak and dictate or exploit
circumstances. Once ethnic cleavage comes on the brink, marginalized nationalists fan them
and can make secession a public issue within an ethnic group.

Genuine democratic principles encompass freedom of all peoples irrespective of sex, religion,
language, ethnicity including minority rights. Democratic constitutions create constituent
parliaments and governments, where all ethnic groups irrespective of social, economic,
religious, linguistic and other backgrounds create common forums and form a common
government usually federal. The goal would be the common interests of all the constituencies in
the advancement of a common strong federal, nation-state. In such a democratic nation-state,
there is a very high possibility to withstand foreign economic exploitation.

The economic condition and the low-level consciousness of the people have helped disciples of
the communist ideology to easily lure destitute people who are in need of economic
opportunities and dream of such realization through promises of social changes, while they
actually use socialist democracy as a gown adhering to “centralism” to muster all state power.
Such nationalists exploit their ethnic affiliation to rally support through utopian promises to grip
state power, while it avoids coordination of common interests of different ethnic groups; the

14

eventual political division engenders separation of the country into smaller fragments that only
suits foreign predators – imperialists that also look for strategic territories fan separatist
movements in the world and in the Horn of Africa in particular.

Secession isolates a locality from the rest of the country and exposes it to dictatorship; because
of high likelihood of lacking balance of challenges from contending groups that can facilitate the
interaction of different outlooks on a common forum; the absence of such checks and balances
creates a favorable situation for monopoly of power in the hands of an unchallenged elite group
or military junta. On the other hand, democracy is most expressed in a situation where different
entities – regional states and parties make healthy race or create a common forum and fulfill
their mutual interests through concession. Hence, ethnic politics is incompatible with the
development of the culture of democracy.

Peoples who formed a great Ethiopian nation share:
Long time respect of each other on faith differences and local traditional variations.
Common traditional rites respected by different faith groups (e.g. celebration of New Year,
belonging to similar welfare associations (such as idir,debbo, wonfel,etc.), and other commonly
shared traditional values
Common traditional expressions such as common and unique musical instruments, dresses,
hairdressing, dishes, and many and related ceremonies
People with common history of interaction, fission, fusion, having more common values than
differences
Linguistic similarities manifested in certain patterns of phonetic expressions and grammatical
styles
Economic ties (share of common resources and infrastructure), common farming methods,
social division of labor, and the strength that comes from social, economic interdependence
Social ties, larger as well as individual relations
Geographic ties and common geopolitical strategies
Unity preserved through diversity manifested in fighting back foreign aggression in series of
historical experiences, and common historical values especially in defending common enemies
Brotherhood and sisterhood ties that passed down through generations and the human
population as a dependable force.
For a country and peoples of Ethiopia, secession is more of a suicidal decision rather than being
advantage to any ethnic group; because, the people lose many things that they have in common
rather than getting flags and statesmen. There is a saying that a thief does not come from far,
but from within so that one wants to exploit the in and outs that one knows. Therefore, today,
connotations of “liberation” related to race, ethnicity, language, territory are predominantly
sectarian and serve only marginalized nationalist dictators.

No claim or blame of the past can change the life of the people now; it is rather wise to see
forward and have sound vision of our peoples’ destiny. We need to learn how fellow Africans
under the leadership of Nelson Mandela healed apartheid injuries through the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission.10 We should not conform ourselves to the standards of the past
while we learn that there was something wrong in the past; we cannot live and think in the past
and we cannot afford to be slaves of the past by repeating the mistakes of our ancestors; if we
repeat their mistakes, we cannot help truth and justice to stand right. By repeating the wrong
way of the past, we only justify the wrong method to continue. However, by learning from the
past and correcting shortcomings of our forebears and building on their legacies and values

10 http://www.justice.gov.za/trc/

15

they inherited us, we have to make the future environment livable for all of us and the
generations to come. Today, the world has advanced to the stage where multinational
corporations dominate world leaders, while in culturally lagging societies, ethnicity drags its own
peoples backwards far behind the progressive world. Ethnicity also carries elements that
advance individualism undermining a unified nation that was built through priceless human and
material sacrifices of the very victim people who are told to go to war and die more. However, in
order to destroy tyranny all democratic organizations belonging to different ethnic groups stand
in unison only when they have a common forum. It cannot rather be easier to destroy tyranny of
any sort separately. To stand in unison, the challenge is to compromise individual and local
interests that should also respect minorities.

The whole dynamics of secession that should be dealt with:
Revenging the present generation for any conceivable oppressive rule their forebears
conducted without taking into consideration the benefits of keeping friendship or union and
potential common resources.
Planning to break away from a bigger nation in response to oppressive system of any kind
without consideration of tearing down an integrated social being by overlooking consequences.
A sense of liberation irrespective of social, cultural, geographical and economic advantages and
disadvantages of the all peoples in a country, like running away from home and trying to find a
new shelter.
Planning to seclude an ethnic group from the rest of the people and the country in order to
secure authority.
Deciding on the fate of the coming generation by compromising security, local and regional
peace.
As a traditional saying goes,” a man should not use a heavy weapon to kill a fly that sits on the
nose of his wife”. The sacrifices of struggling for democracy are unmatched with the sacrifices of
secession. Secession affects different sectors of the people while democratization of the whole
country secures cooperation of the all peoples by any parameters. A project of secession
engenders many conflicts that can be measured in human and material losses, while a project
of democracy creates a bond among all peoples by isolating only oppressors. Secession results
in social, political, cultural, and isolation of the people of a region which limits growth in all
aspects.

Proponents of democratic nationalists do not seek a self-determination that alienates them from
the rest of the people that are spread in most territories and integrated with the rest of Ethiopian
folks through social, cultural, and economic interdependence. The same thing is true for the
Oromo people. The style of oppression did not make any difference between the Oromo people
and the other oppressed peoples of Ethiopia. All the past Ethiopian regimes were oppressive to
all its peoples. That was why the student movement from different sector of the people struggled
in unison from Karora to Moyale from Jijiga to Assosa and Mettu in the dream of equality and
democracy for all Ethiopians. All Ethiopians were equally oppressed indiscriminately. However,
if we see all the cash crop producing and cattle breeding fertile lands rather indicate that the
Oromo people are not in the worst position, if not better, as compared to the economic life of the
rest of Ethiopian peoples. One needs to know why Waqo Gutto first picked up arms against the
Haile Selassie regime. We all like self determination and independence of our peoples, but not
in a secessionist and sectarian model; people need independence from all types of oppressive
yokes. However, independence that has a covert or open goal of cessation is not a wise goal for
Ethiopians. If politicians do not fear democracy and have confidence in the masses of the
people and genuinely see as to how much democracy benefits our peoples in general, and if
they really have the devotion and gut to sacrifice for it, that mainly means to empower all the
peoples of Ethiopia instead of dreaming for power through a sectarian hole, they will have much

16

more potentials in building Ethiopia together with these African brothers and sisters. The fate of
Ethiopia is in the hands of all Ethiopians__ Oromos, Amaras, Wolaiytas, Hadiyas, Sidamas,
Afaris, etc. A struggle to free the whole country is more important than an agenda of blunt
isolated independence. This first of all retains the historical ties – social and cultural integration,
social and economic interdependence, and the advantage of geopolitical position in the region.
On the other side, creation of political borders hampers free mobility of people and socio-
economic developments. Maintaining the union helps to develop mutual cooperation among
local governments in the use of common resources; it builds the economic viability and mutual
capacity; it creates favorable situation for domestic and regional security. Building a nation
would entail the partnership of different nationalities in a system of democracy and justice; it
means standing together under a big national umbrella; whereas secession comes from fear of
loss of an individual’s role in the society. Hence the best solution would be federation of
independent states where states exercise sovereignty in general that builds common
infrastructure, defense, security, and socio-economic developments.

Alienating an ethnic group from the rest of the Ethiopians rather widens the sectarian wall
created by the Weyane regime and prevents any alliance among popular organizations and
aborts democracy from its womb. Today when incidents of Beddeno, Arba Guugugu, Assosa, and
other places are tolerated, phrases like “… OLF is mainly targeted… the only force that is a real
threat to the regime” ignore all other Ethiopian peoples and tempts to put Oromo citizens aloof
from the rest of the people. Encouraging Oromo students to form a separate student union
within a nationwide university also seems to create a national identity; however, its
disadvantages outweigh since segregating them from the rest of Ethiopians has consequences
like creating Bantustanism within an integrated society and averts the youth from creating
solidarity against abuse of universal human rights. The more nationalists give Utopian promises,
and the more the Oromo people are alienated from the rest of Ethiopians, the far worse that
these people remain behind history and economic development, the less likely condition of
peace, a predicament the politicians fall in, for which they become responsible. By being causes
of dissent, marginalized nationalists can only exacerbate conflicts that weaken each other to
see us all together remain in the abyss of backwardness, poverty and being slaves of neo-
despotic rulers. Change is also needed in the method and strategy of the struggle itself for a
final goal of justice and equality. Where are the people who held the quotation, “United we
stand divided we fall" more than 200 years ago? But where are we and why? There is no
solution by tit-for-tat cyclical endless action and reaction. When the World is coming together as
a family, it is suicidal to tear down our common heritages and potential capacities. Whether you
believe it or not, we are in same ship. Demarcating and creating ethnic/nationality borders does
not take us anywhere except to the abyss of failure of all of us.
So, it is much better to struggle hand in hand with the rest of Ethiopians to first overcome the
Weyane regime and create a democratic system of state government to mutually exploit
common natural, geographical, human, social, and cultural resources. By unity, we do not lose
anything. The Oromo people do not lose anything. Some personalities may lose the chance of
getting uncontested power; even so, such leaderships have temporary lives as learnt from
history especially since weak economic situations do not allow stability. Otherwise joining our
hands will help us build culture of democracy and a great country. See India, Brazil, China, etc.
They are not worried about localized issues. They are far ahead thinking about how to advance
in technology and global issues.

The other point is that it is questionable as to how Ginbot 7 creates alliance with the Eritrean
People’s Liberation Front – Shaebia. “The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend.” We
know that EPLF does not want a strong unified Ethiopian state government. Because such a
state that would have integrity will have to seek its national interests and will stand to correct

17

mistakes that the Weyane regime has committed in ceding the nation’s lands to Eritrea,
especially parts of Badme and Aseb Port. The Eritrean regime knows this. Hence, since the
alliance of political organizations that Ginbot 7 creates is expected to aim at meeting Ethiopia’s
national interests, the Eritrean state government does not support this; because, when conflicts
of interest arise, it prefers to meet its own national interests. Therefore, it is unlikely that the
alliance will have a safe haven in Eritrea. So, needless to repeat the mistake that the Patriotic
Front of Ethiopia has made by sacrificing its leaders and compromising its assumed objectives
so far.

Our people are fading up with localized issues. They never want to replace a dictator for another
smart dictator. They seek to stand in unison to do away with all types of suppression in which
they become a master of their destiny. They dream and long for days in which they can see a
life of tranquility, peace, equality, justice, and prosperity. These come only if we stand united for
democracy. So, let’s not divert the people from their genuine and sacred popular causes. We
cannot reap the fruits of democracy without working for it and without individual sacrifices for the
common good. So, let’s stand for the development of the culture of democracy that the time
dictates us to do, and let’s progress together according to the needs of the people. We have to
abide by with the popular need to change the course of the struggle for a common goal through
universal truth for which we need to change our political attitudes.

Tefera Dinberu

References
Bender, Lionel M. The Nilo-Saharan Languages: a Comparative Essay. Munich: Lincom
Europa, 1996.
Beckingham and Huntingford, translators, The Prester John of the Indies by Francisco Alvarez.
Cambridge: Hakluyt
Society, 1961, p. 14 n.3
Gates, Henry Louis. Wonders of the African World. Alfred A. KNOPF (publishers), New
York, 1999.
Fikre Tolossa. Ethiopian Review. February. 1997
http://www.ethiopic.com/Fikre l er.htm
Getachew Haile (Dr). Yeabba Bahriy Dirsetoch, Collegeville, Avon (Minnesota), 2002. G. W. B.
Huntingford. The
Glorious Victories of Ameda Syon, King of Ethiopia. Ford: Oxford University Press, 1965.
Harold C. Marcus. A History of Ethiopia. Berkley: University of California Press, 2002.
Hudson, Grover. 75 Ethiopian Languages Michigan Michigan: Michigan State University Press,
2004.
Hudson, Grover. ―Linguistic Analysis of the 1994 Ethiopian Census‖, Northeast African Studies
2003
6.3 (1999)
Huntingford, G. W. B. The Galla of Ethiopia: The Kingdom of Kafa and Janjero. Ethnographic
Survey
of Africa part II. Ed. Daryll Forde. London: International African Institute, 1955.
Markakis, John. Ethiopia - Anatomy of a Traditional Polity Addis Ababa: Oxford
University Press: 1975.
Lenin, Vladimir I. On the National Question and Proletarian Internationalism. (Later edition),
Moscow:
Novosti Press Agency Publishing House, 1970.

18

Lewis S. Herbert. A Galla Monarchy: Jimma Abba Jifar, Ethiopia 1830-1932. Madison and
Milwaukee:
The University of Wisconsin Press, 1965.
Marcus, Harold G. A History of Ethiopia, Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002
Melvern, Linda R. A People Betrayed - The Role of the West in the Rwanda‘s
Genocide. Museum Press: 2002.Nardo, Don, Editor. The Rise of Nazi Germany. San Diego:
Greenhaven Press, Inc., 1999.
Office of Population and Housing Census Commission: 1998-1994 Population and
Housing Census of Ethiopia, Results at Country Level Volume I,
Pankhurst, Richard. The Ethiopian Borderlands: Essays in Regional History from Ancient Times
to the
End of the 18th Century, Asmara: Red Sea Press Inc., 1997.
Pankhurst, Richard. The Ethiopian Borderlands. Lawrenceville: Red Sea Press, 1977.
Pankhurst, Alula & Freeman, Dena. The Excluded Minorities of Ethiopia: peripheral people.
Asmara: The
Red Sea Press Inc., 2002.
Pankhurst, Sylvia. Ethiopia: A Cultural History. London: Lalibela
House, 1955.
Sergew Hable Silassie. Ancient and Medieval History of Ethiopia to 1270. Addis Abeba: United
Publishers, 1972.
Taddesse Tamrat. Church and State in Ethiopia (1270- 1527). London: Oxford at the Caledon
Press,
1972.
Tesfaye Habbiso. A Short History of the Hadiya People of Southern Ethiopia
http://www.aigaforum.com/A_Short_History_of_theHadiya.htm
Zwedie Reta. The Eritrean Case 1941-1963(in Amharic), Canada: Library of Congress, 1993.

http://ethiomedia.com/broad/3225.html

www.ethiopianreview.com/content/33587

www.ethiomedia.com – December 21, 2011