Comments on Enset: The attack dogs of “Dedebit”

Ephrem, thanks! Of course the opinions are mine an...

2009-06-03T11:18:41.200-04:00

Ephrem,
thanks! Of course the opinions are mine and yours. If G-7 and OLF accept the opinions and work accordingly, that will be fine.

Anyways the common ground/purpose for our UNITY must be an attempt of forging Independent Oromia, Independent Tigrai, Independent Amhara...etc in an Integrated Africa. That meanse we need to forge Independent Oromia in an Integrated Africa with Finfinne being the capital of both Oromia and Africa. Oromia being at the center, all languages (nations) in Africa can forge their mononational or multinational states. Africa will be the Language based Federation (Union) of these states with national freedom. Then we can ask the question: which level politician are we? Continental? National? Provincial? District? or Local?

The reason why we dare to ask this question is the following. We nations in Africa suffer from conflicts based on colonial borders and because of disregarding national rights as some thing "ethnic". This desigantion "ethnic" instead of nation/nationality/people is used by both European colonizers and their puppet African colonizers aka Abyssinians. In reality Africa was borderless, all being called as Ethiopia (meanse black faced in Greek) or Sudan (also meanse black faced in Arab), both refer to land of blacks. It is true all of Africa is land of blacks.

To tackle the problems of nations in Africa and to deal with the present global challenge, Africans are trying to come together and forge an AUG (African Union Government). We are looking at USA or EU as an example. But both can not be good examples. USA is the melting pot for all nations around the world migrating to America and learning english. EU is the Union of well developed and independent mono-national-states, all with their own respective languages good developed and used.

Africa can be neither a melting pot nor a union of well developed only mono-national-states. The nations in Africa are diverse in development and size. What is good for Africa is to build a union (federation) with autonomous national areas for all nations aka "ethnies".

Based on their size and development, some nations can forge mono-national-state like Oromia. The others, which are too small to have their own state can forge multi-national-state like SNNP of Ethiopia, with all nations having their own Province/Zone, District/Wereda or Community/Qebele as autonomous natonal areas based on their size. Relatively bigger nations like Sidama can have their own autonomous Province, nations smaller than this like Alaba can have autonomous District and the smallest nations like Dorze can have their own Community. Based on their geographical position, certain small nations like Agew and Harari can join the bigger neighbour nations like Amhara or Oromia, but have their own autonomy, be it as province, district or community. Such 5 tier organization (African Federation --- Mono-/Multinational States --- Mono-/Multinational Provinces --- Mono-/Multionational Districts and Mono-/Multinational Communities) is the best way of adiministrative Organization for Africa.

In Short Ethiopian model can be used as that of African, just changing its fake status under Weyane to a very genuine one, for which OLF and the likes are struggling!! Then we will have not only an Integrated region named Ethiopia/HoAfrica, but also an Integrated continent Africa build on the center called Oromia with Finfinne as a capital. The only question we people need to ask our selves is that, at which level are we thinking, talking and walking when we try to deal with politics?? Language Based Federalism (LBF), rather than Geography Based Federalism (GBF)which you seem to support, is the panacea for regional integration of Ethiopia/HoAfrica and continental integration of Africa.

Fayyis, As long as this is clear you and me have ...

2009-06-02T13:26:35.626-04:00

Fayyis,

As long as this is clear you and me have agreed on something. My opinion is mine as your is yours. OLF and Ginbot 7 are not involved here. It is our and ours only opinion!

Ephrem, thanks! Slowly you are becoming clear: - y...

2009-06-02T12:01:54.951-04:00

Ephrem,
thanks! Slowly you are becoming clear:
- you are not for dismantling Oromia
- you are for self-rule of all nations in the "political space called Ethiopia"
- "Whether we go alone, or together, we need to start from the current Ethiopia, and any one who comes to the table should accept that there is current Ethiopia."

Now I can see where our misunderstanding was: you are talking about the present CURRENT Ethiopia as a political space to be accepted to start the dialog. I and may be some others understood that as if you are talking about the coming future NEW Ethiopia to be accepted unconditionally.

Now coming to the two conditions g-7 is talking about, I do have no problem with "The people are the source of political power be it at the national, state, or local level (one person one vote)". Regarding the "there should be a space for the political order that we are fighting to establish, and that space is nothing else, but Ethiopia.", if you mean about the present CURRENT Ethiopia, I do agree.

But if we are talking about the future NEW Ethiopia, I just take in to consideration what you said: "Whether we go alone, or together, we need to start from the current Ethiopia." Did I understand you right that you do accept also the possibility of GOING ALONE, if certain public wants so? If this being open for going alone or going together is your and G-7's position, I think we do have common ground. That common ground is: let's accept the CURRENT Ethiopia as a common political space to start the process and then leave the fate of the future NEW Ethiopia to the verdict of the public in democratic process. Am I right??

Fayyis, There is much difference. When one says y...

2009-06-02T11:35:24.526-04:00

Fayyis,

There is much difference. When one says you must accept Ethiopian unity unconditionally, he/ she has already defined the unity and he/she is inviting you to come to this already defined unity, which basically means, all others have no say in the unity. In my opinion, one of the main thing to be decided by the Oromos, Amharas, … is the form of the future unity of Ethiopia. In the other side, when we talk about democracy, federation (with all of its mixes), justice, peace and prosperity we are talking about attributes. As far as I am concerned, attributes are things that describe an entity. In our case, the biggest question comes here! Which entity, and where the entity exits. An entity exists in space and time. Let’s assume time is eternal. If so, then what is the space? To me the entity that you, I and others fight (so that they can have all the attributes mentioned above) is the Ethiopian people which include the Amharas, Oromos, Tigreans, Sidmas….. This collective entity exits in the space called “Ethiopia”, not Sudan, Kenya, or any other undefined thing that you may want to call. How do you discuss about a country without calling the country by its name. You may not like the current form of unity, so do I. Let me bring one of your options: Nation based federalism in the integrated Ethiopian context. If we avoid the space Ethiopia, where does the concept of integration come, or integration with what? Whether we go alone, or together, we need to start from the current Ethiopia, and any one who comes to the table should accept that there is current Ethiopia. Otherwise, there will be no starting point!

Ephrem, just tell me the difference between: "Ther...

2009-06-02T10:46:40.369-04:00

Ephrem,
just tell me the difference between:
"There should be a space for the political order that we are fighting to establish, and that space is nothing else, but Ethiopia"
AND
"acceptance of Ethiopian Unity unconditionally”

Fayyis, Why would we dismantle Oromia? We don’t g...

2009-06-02T10:34:13.503-04:00

Fayyis,

Why would we dismantle Oromia? We don’t get rid off what has already been achieved. We just make it better. There is the Oromia federal state now, but are the Oromos administering themselves? I don’t think so! The Oromos and other nationalities must be able to administer themselves! I stand for the kind of federation where all nations or nationalities take the governing activities of themselves with no interference from the center. The relationship between the federal government and the sates must be defined in the constitution. We just can’t have a federal form of government where the federal government dominates sate activities, no! I don’t care what Esays says for he has no say in the future of Ethiopia. Berhanu said: Ginbot 7 works with any group that agrees in the following two conditions: 1. The people are the source of political power be it at the national, state, or local level (one person one vote). 2. There should be a space for the political order that we are fighting to establish, and that space is nothing else, but Ethiopia. So we have to agree in the sovereignty of Ethiopia. The following phrase is added by you: “acceptance of Ethiopian Unity unconditionally”. The reason Ginbot 7 is trying to reach the Oromo orgs and the Oromo orgs trying to reach Ginbot 7 is that there is something common between us. That common thing is the name and country called ‘Ethiopia’ that currently is the place the Oromos and many other nationalities call home. All Berhanu said is let’s start everything from this home. Please don’t add your own phrase on what he said. Ethiopian sovereignty continues as long as a country called Ethiopia continues to exist. It didn’t cease when Eritrea separated from Ethiopia!

No one is bragging to be most righteous persons morally; I think it is your imagination, or may be it is you who is trying to impose your righteousness on others. Please save it for your own salvation. Let’s just discuss issues without attaching our own adjective on others. Peace!

Ephrem, thanks for the opinion! I think I have giv...

2009-06-02T09:28:28.368-04:00

Ephrem,
thanks for the opinion! I think I have given my idea, not only wrote what Oromo organizations think. In short the difference between you and me is that you talk about Ethiopian INTEGRATION with out Oromian INDEPENDENCE, i.e in short get rid of Oromia. I am not against Ethiopian Integration, but I do say, it should not happen at the cost of Oromian Independence.

As an independent thinking person, I am just curious to see if any Oromo organization, leave alone OLF, will take your (G-7) opinion as a common ground! As far as I am concerned, the least what Oromos can accept is: genuine "ethnic" federalism = national self-rule with regional shared rule = national self-determination with multinational democracy = Union of Independent Nations = Independent Oromia in an Integrated Ethiopia. Any effort to dismantle Oromia, be it in the name of CUD or G-7 will have no chance as far as Oromos are concerned.

I just tried to reason with Abeshas and some of you pro UNITY southerners and I could observe that you people want only the Integration of the IMIYE at any cost. Such far right position of yours leads Oromos to the other side of the extreme, which you actually fear, aka no compromise on the Independent Gadaa Republic of Oromia.

By the way it is interesting to listen to Aite Isayas of Eritrea and Dr. Berihanu of G-7 now a days. Aite Isayas, who vehmently fights against the double standard of the WEST revealed his own double standard position: he talks about his non compromising position on Eritrean sovereignity and at the same time denies Oromia's right to the same fate of soverignity. Dr. Berhanu tells us that his organization has now taken no position on the type of federalism Ethiopia should have, but preachs about the precondition of the alliance he wants to build aka acceptance of Ethiopian Unity unconditionally. I am eager to hear or read from OLF regarding these two politicians of the Horn who just brag to be the most rightous persons morally, but deny the God-given right of Oromos and other oppressed nations to self-determination.

Anyways, I now do have an impression that we can never have the common ground we seek. Only time and power balance will show us which vision of the two views will prevail: your wish to dismantle Oromia or my wish to decolonize Oromia (be it with in Ethiopian UNION or with out the Union)!! Thanks for the discussion!!

Fayyis, I didn’t like your answer. My question wa...

2009-06-02T08:46:05.937-04:00

Fayyis,

I didn’t like your answer. My question was very specific. How do Ginbot 7, OLF, and the other Oromo organizations work together? Working together needs give and take (compromising). What will the Oromos give and what do they expect from Ginbot 7 and other non-Oromo organizations? What each party takes depends on what it’s willing to give. The main idea here is to bring the different organizations to the discussion table and decide on the future of Ethiopia. What are your preconditions for this discussion? All in all, what should each party do to begin the talk and end up forging a coalition? I’m tired of the answer you gave me because this is the same answer you’ve been giving us every time you make a comment. My question is different, I need a different answer. Besides, there are many other topics and issues that we can discuss. Here, I see a trend that what ever the topic is, this forum is always dragged to the same Oromo issue. As important as the Oromo issue is, I don’t see this as a positive development. You have to tell us your opinion on other Ethiopian issues too.

Now to comment on your answer, I do believe there are many options and combinations of options that can solve the current politician impasse in Ethiopia. Menilk’s integration of the Oromos with the rest of Ethiopia is not the cause of the current Oromo independence movement. The movement started because the Oromos were treated second class citizens in Ethiopia. Mind you, if the language, humans’ right, culture and democratic right of the Oromos and other nationalities were equality respected, there would have been no reason to ask for independence, even for the Eritreans who were colonized by the Italians. Big Ethiopia would have given more sense than going it alone. Most countries of the world got their current shape through expansion, including the US. I do believe in the inalienable right of people to determine their fate, I also believe in the people’s right to secede. Though I support this basic right, it doesn’t mean I support each and every instance of secession movement. I see the cause and the reason behind it. I do believe in the limitless freedom of people as long as people limit themselves from harming others while exercising their freedom. Here in the US, I support “gay right” in every aspect of life, but I strongly oppose gay marriage because it is against my Christian values and my definition of marriage. In the Ethiopian condition, I do oppose secession of the Oromos because it is against the interest of my own nationality which currently is included in the map of Oromia. The entire Sidama, Gedeo, Koira, Wolita, Kembata, Hadya, Kefficho, and Yem region is included in the map of Oromia. Besides, the region of Shewa is equally inhabited by the Amharas. In Arsi, the second largest population is Amahara. This brings the people of non-Oromo in Oromia region more than 12 million. How do we deal with this people? The good solution is that the Oromos and non-Oromos have to sit together and design a lasting constitution and write a perpetual contract that makes everyone happy in the Ethiopia that will be equal to all. It is the elite that mobilized the Oromos for independence; can’t these same elite convince the Oromos that integration is a better alternative? Without telling us what the Oromo organizations think about this alterative, you tell us what you think. What is the negative part of this alternative? Whether independence or integration, the ultimate wish of people is peace, freedom, justice, and prosperity. If we can deliver these 4 things to people, people prefer to live together even in hell. After all, isn’t hell the absence of freedom?

Hallo Ephrem, where are you? You asked my take on ...

2009-06-02T06:08:35.456-04:00

Hallo Ephrem,
where are you? You asked my take on the possible common ground of ALL oppositions against Weyane, but you showed no response! What about your take?? Can you accept mine or are you against mine and do you have your own???

AyaNayzgi, it is good that we are confusing you!!T...

2009-05-31T15:12:20.695-04:00

AyaNayzgi,
it is good that we are confusing you!!That is part of our strategy. At the END we will have what we want, be it this way or that way, slowly but surely!!

Fayyis said, "That is why I do dare to say that a...

2009-05-31T09:47:10.845-04:00

Fayyis said,

"That is why I do dare to say that achieving INDEPENDENT Oromia in an INTEGRATED Ethiopia now is the only feasible option." Now that people and organizations of Obbo Bulcha are at their growing political influence inside Ethiopia.

But back then when the OLF was at its peak people like Fayyis used to say the only and only option is: "the struggle for INDEPENDENT Gadaa Republic of Oromia (EXTERNAL self-determination of Oromos) without any compromise, which is represented by Ob Galaasa of OLF and Ob Jaarra of ULFO."

Before we know it people such as Fayyis will end up being in the first group which is the most logical and viable cause to fight and sacrifice for - "the struggle for individual FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY in Ethiopia disregarding the national self-determination of Oromos. People like Ad. Birtukan in UDJ and Dr. Berihanu in G7M belong to this group."

So to Fayyis and people alike, I say please be consistent I am already getting confused with your ever revolving positions.

Regarding the common ground/purpose, let's conside...

2009-05-30T16:25:31.791-04:00

Regarding the common ground/purpose, let's consider the following in to our political calculation.
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. People like Ad. Birtukan in UDJ and Dr. Berihanu in G7M belong to this group.
2) the struggle for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY including INTERNAL self-determination of Oromos in Ethiopian context. Ob. Bulcha of OFDM and Dr. Mararaa of OPC seem to belong to this categorie.
3) the struggle for INDEPENDENT Gadaa Republic of Oromia (EXTERNAL self-determination of Oromos) without any compromise, which is represented by Ob Galaasa of OLF and Ob Jaarra of ULFO.
After many years of struggle, now the trend tends to consolidate in favour of the 2nd option. 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 third group still heisitate to accept the 2nd option, but the feasibility of their goal with in the current international geo-political condition in a near future is minimal, so that many of their supporters also tend to accept the 2nd option as the temporary COMPROMISE solution.

That is why I do dare to say that achieving INDEPENDENT Oromia in an INTEGRATED Ethiopia now is the only feasible option. Therefore the move of G7M and OLF to struggle together for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY in Ethiopia is very smart and timely. It is a middle way compromise solution to the apparently irreconcilable goals of these two political organizations (OLF struggles for INDEPENDENT Oromia and G7M wants to achieve an INTEGRATED Ethiopia). Any alliance similar to AFD is the best way to internal self-determination of Oromos and to the democratization as well integration of Ethiopia. The result will be INDEPENDENT Oromia in an INTEGRATED Ethiopia. It is not just a fancy, but a fact to be realized. This project is part and parcel of realizing national freedom of all nations aka "ethnies" in Africa with continental UNION of all nations to be independent from both old and neo-colonialists.

Other wise we all need to think which level politician we are? Continental? National? Provincial? District? or Local? Here is the reason why I dare to ask this question:

To tackle the present global challenge, Africans are trying to come together and forge an AUG (African Union Government).
Africa can be neither a melting pot nor a union of well developed only mono-national-states. The nations in Africa are diverse in development and size. What is good for Africa is to build a union with autonomous national areas for all nations aka "ethnies"
The 5 tier organization (African Federation --- Mono-/Multinational States --- Mono-/Multinational Provinces --- Mono-/Multionational Districts and Mono-/Multinational Communities) is the best way of adiministrative Organization for Africa.

In Short Ethiopian model can be used as that of African, just changing its fake status under Weyane to a very genuine one, for which OLF and the likes are struggling!! The only question you people need to ask your self is that, at which level are you thinking, talking and walking??

In short the common ground is every thing which promotes National Liberty of all nations ("ethnies") and regional/continental Unity of all liberated nations in Africa. Is there any sound minded African opposing this???

Dessalegn, thanks again! First of all the word sec...

2009-05-30T12:05:47.267-04:00

Dessalegn,
thanks again! First of all the word secession you used is wrong! Secession is only to be applied to a territory which was part of the country before and wants to separate lately. Oromia has never been part of the empire based on Oromos will. It was conquered and conolized 100 years back. Now the Oromo people ask for the legitimate LIBERTY from this domination/colonization. As far as I am concerned, I have never advocated for "secession", but for self-dtermination of Oromo nation which can result to Independent Oromia with in Ethiopian Union or with out Ethiopian Union based on the verdict of the public involved. No one can stop this movement for liberty, but you people can only delay the process through all sorts of manipulation, force and saboutage.

Regarding the freedom of the minority (49%) you raised, it depends on the territory they occupy. If it is the people of certain territory who do say no to the independence, they can claim their own way to go. E.g. if it is Wallo Oromos who are against Oromian Independence, they can join Abyssinia or....

To answer the question you raised at last, I do believe in the principle of Self-determination of nations, be it they are big or small. You use the word secession just to give a negative connotation to this God-given right of nations.

Habtu,
just have a patience! This "village idiot" can have some thing to teach you. Your labeling me like that doesn't make you an "intelligent" scholar and make me an "idiot" peasant, but it simply shows who you are and how you think!

As far as the minority/majority vote in referendum is concerned, nothing can block the right of nations to self-determination. You again parrot the word "secession" you just read with out analysing what it means in comparision to self-determination.

Leaving all your blubbers by side, every national group with a territorial continuity it claims to have can demand self-determination be it in America, Africa or Asia. The feasibility, practicallity and techinicality differs from case to case. Other wise, be it you are a canning fox from the north Ethiopia or the programmed mind from the south, I am 100% sure you will learn slowly but surely to accept and respect the right of Oromos to self-determination to live with in or with out the Union you and your likes dare to call NEW Ethiopia.

It's interesting that Ephrem's piece and the earli...

2009-05-30T04:48:50.028-04:00

It's interesting that Ephrem's piece and the earlier part of the discussion was more about the obvious Tigrean domination, how and how not to talk about it, etc., until Eskedar took Fayis' bait and the two of them hijacked the discussion
in the direction of never-ending topic of secession. Later on Dessalegn joined the fray, and of course, as Dessalegn goes ...

We should all hold a candle to Dessalegn and stand on the sidelines enjoying his informed analysis and precise logic, a la Dr. Spock. But an occasional idea or two from the rest of us should help the discussion forward.

Fayis is like a village idiot who opens his mouth with his ever-ready, inflexible, unquestioned opinions formed a long time ago in a different reality. Before you get worked up, Fayis, you should know that I mean this only as a banter. Not a personal slight or anything like that. I know, I know. Here we
like to keep things civilized, which is as it should be. But go back and read how unreasonable is what you wrote. Suppose the hypothetical referendum discussed above came out 51-49 in favor of unity, do you think secessionist forces should (or would) abandon their ambition for their own unitary ethnic enclave because the 'majority' have rejected them? Of course not. You are clearly a secessionist, what would you do in such cases? Neither would this be a time for the people in the rest of the union to rejoice. For all practical purposes, the vote came right down the middle. As people in the trade say, there
is no significant statistical difference favoring either. A happy day for you would be 80/90 - 20/10 against unity in which case nothing short of separation would resolve the issue. An even more dramatic result would be obtained if the choice is as clear as day and night: slavery v. freedom - and you'll end up
getting both (as in you know who).

By the way, a call for secession pops up in impractical and unexpected places. You might be surprised to learn that even in America there are pockets of black communities who want to withdraw from the Union (imagine a few southern states
of racially pure blacks with a shore on the Atlantic ocean). I remember a few years ago watching on C-SPAN a Newsweek editor, an African American, arguing for a separate nation for blacks. You can imagine indignant calls from both races, contending, I think correctly, that for better or worse history has bonded the two people inseparably, however ugly that history was. So an elite speaks for separation (it's always the elites!), but ordinary folk don't breathe such things every waking day. Incidentally, Fayis, assuming that you live in America or in any other multi-ethnic nation, in the event of separation, would you prefer to move to the "pristine purity" of rigid Sparta leaving the bustling and humane Athens? May be I shouldn't ask this question.

All this is to ask you to be receptive to others, to open up your mind; understand that there are people outside of your world and outside of your mind. Real people, and the good majority of them may identify with the ethnic group
you call your own. To leave you with a quote: "As facts change, I change my opinions. What do you do?"

Eskedar, yes, that's exactly what I meant by a str...

2009-05-29T21:44:27.955-04:00

Eskedar, yes, that's exactly what I meant by a strong centre. The main reason the EPLF succeeded was because of a weak centre - because Ethiopia became such an unpleasant place in which to live.

Fayyis,

Remember, the principle is that people are free to leave. In the 51/49 scenario, you have a situation where 49% of the people do not want secession. That's a large number of people to have who do not agree with the very basis of the new nation. They probably live in smaller areas in which they are the majority. These people may group together and ask for their own secession. As a person who believes in freedom and democracy, you must acknowledge their rights.

By the way, I am not saying this would be the case in Oromia. We have no idea what will happen there. Maybe in Oromia, 90% would vote for secession, which would result in less 're-secession'. But what's important is the principle - that's the basis on which there can be dialogue and mutual understanding.

So I believe that you should ask yourself the question - do I believe in the freedom to secede for everyone, or just for those whom I want. Do I believe in real freedom and democracy, or only so long as it achieves my goals?

Dessaleng, thanks! Regarding the 1st point you men...

2009-05-29T15:03:02.066-04:00

Dessaleng,
thanks! Regarding the 1st point you mentioned, I do agree absolutely with your opinion. As far as the 2nd point is concerned, referendum is where the simple majority (51%) will be the winner and the minority will conform to the majority. Go back and refer to the very simple majority with which some nations in ex Yugoslvia achieved their independence. That is the rule of the game in referendum. It is absurd to suggest that the minority (49%) can demand its own territory. If this was the case, the game REFERENDUM is simply senseless!!

Desalegn, you put it perfectly fine…I agree with w...

2009-05-29T14:55:24.992-04:00

Desalegn, you put it perfectly fine…I agree with what you said and with your historical evidence from Canada you gave the issue a real sense.

As I have said it above, I don’t have a problem with the idea of a referendum as long as we start it from a United Ethiopia where the individual and group rights of all are well respected. This is what, I think, you referred as a “strong center” and Fayyis wrongly took it as a force that stops independence. As I understood you, a strong center is important not in terms of force as such but in terms of respecting the human rights of all which intern makes independence less interesting. Force is also important to discipline the group which looses the vote.

I think the likes of Fayyis are small in number and will diminish dramatically with democratization and most importantly with URBANIZATION.

The colonization staff is I think very hard to swallow. Most countries are formed by application of force. People do not normally make agreements to form a state. The important thing is what you have after the formation of the union. If everybody is treated equal in the union, then the thing is not colonization but simply a state formation.

Fayyis, Like I said, I believe in freedom and dem...

2009-05-29T14:44:20.280-04:00

Fayyis,

Like I said, I believe in freedom and democracy, and one freedom is the freedom to leave the existing social contract. I think that's clear.

Two points I think you're not clear on:

1. If you believe in democracy, please understand that I have the freedom not to support secession. I support the right to secession, but I don't support secession. Like I support the right of John McCain to run for president, but I don't support him.

2. There are other conflicting rights. Democracy is all about balancing rights. If 51% of Oromia votes for independence, what about the 49%? A real believer in freedom would understand that they in turn have the right to separate and take 49% of Oromia. That's what happens when you just talk about absolute rights only without understanding the mitigating factors. In the end, you have to negotiate. Negotiations differ depending upon the context. For example, most would say that 51% is not really a vote for independence, but just more group rights/privileges under the current system. It would also indicate significant divisions. But if you go up to 80-90%, then that's a strong sign of identity dominating and a really strong mandate for independence. The negotiating positions would be different. It depends on the context.

Hey Fayyis Pay attention now. You’ve completely mi...

2009-05-29T12:55:54.622-04:00

Hey Fayyis Pay attention now. You’ve completely missed me. I did not mention a squat about your Oromo federation, Independence, Union or regional Africa --- GELEMELE? Or central government this that. O! Heck no!
First you need to come down from your LaLa land.
If uncle dessalegn assfaw can't put some sense in you nobody can. That’s all!
Good Luck Buddy!
“mengedun cherq yargeleh”

Wro. Akalu, Ok! Then no need of saboutaging the "d...

2009-05-29T11:58:49.675-04:00

Wro. Akalu,
Ok! Then no need of saboutaging the "democracy" by trying to build a strong centeral government to hinder nations like Oromo from deciding for Independence with out Union. Just give the "majority" of Oromos like Birtukan to decide for the Union per referendum!! Just be honest and practice what you preach. Talking democracy and walking dictatorship is what Weyane is doing, and people like Dessaleng want just to replace Weyanes, but continue with the same mechanism. As Dr. Berihanu once said, it is simply a change of Tigaru dictators by Amhara dictators!! Does this make sense???

“If there is genuine freedom and democracy, Oromos...

2009-05-29T11:50:04.289-04:00

“If there is genuine freedom and democracy, Oromos have nothing to fear in united Ethiopia. As a majority”
Majority of Oromos also comprised the likes of Birtukan Medeksa. Let’s not forget that.
It’s just common sense! Hey Fayyis! Use it. It works wonders!

Dessaleng, well said! But interesting is that you ...

2009-05-29T11:30:56.578-04:00

Dessaleng,
well said! But interesting is that you preach referendum under STRONG centeral government to hinder self-determination of nations! Is it not a saboutage? What makes you more "democrat" than Weyane, who also did the same: it talkes right of nations to self-determination, but walks "revolutionary" centeralism. Is this not a prototype of all Abeshas giving only lip service to Freedom and Democracy? Fact on the ground is that you Abeshas can never be genuine democrats for you fear that Oromos get our independence. If there is genuine freedom and democracy, Oromos have nothing to fear in united Ethiopia. As a majority, we can either opt for our independence or for union in which we do have the leading status. I hope Oromos learn a lot from such attitude of Abesha "democrats" like you!!!

Eskedar, If I may... I think most political theo...

2009-05-29T09:18:50.459-04:00

Eskedar,

If I may...

I think most political theorists would say that ethnic nationalism is mostly a question of _identity_, not practicality. An Oromo nationalist wants an independent Oromia not because it will make him rich, but because it will make him proud of himself and his group (in this case, Oromos).

Why? Imagine that the British colonized Ethiopia in 1880, and by 1960, they were subsidizing the country, had built roads and schools, established institutions, had ended discrimination, provided university education to locals, and were running the country efficiently. You would still want independence, even though independence would probably harm the economy and may even result in political instability. Why? That's what identity is all about.

It's a feeling, not a rational thought. So you can't deal with it by rational arguments only. Telling an Oromo nationalist that independence will be an economic and political disaster to the whole region has little impact! Identity trumps everything. So you have to address the identity issues.

That's how countries like Canada have dealt with their ethnic issues. When the Quebecois nationalist movement was gaining strength, the federal government announced that French would join English as Canada's national (federal) language, even though only 25% (at the time) of the population spoke French. The federal government also granted the province of Quebec autonomy in certain areas that the other provinces did not have, and to this day subsidizes the Quebec provincial government disproportionately! Essentially, it's paying them off.

At the same time, Quebec was allowed to hold referenda on separation, empowering the population of Quebec, allowing them to express their ethnic pride, making them think their destiny was in their own hands, and essentially making them feel better about themselves. This was important - not allowing referenda would have probably made for more Quebec nationalism. Incidentally, if they had voted for independence, they would not have got it automatically since the referenda were not legal binding. However, it would have begun a process of negotiation.

And that's another important aspect of the handling. Canada being a democratic country, people understood that if a sufficiently large group of people wanted to separate, they couldn't be stopped by force. Democracy means freedom, and part of freedom is the freedom to leave. Of course, freedoms can collide, and in this case, they would. For example, if 55% of Quebecers had vote for separation, what about the other 45%? What about their rights? What about the rest of the population of Canada and their rights over Quebec? That's why negotiation is necessary. There is no absolute right to separation on your own terms. It can only be a negotiation. But, there is a relative right, and that has to be absolutely acknowledged. The very acknowledgement reduces ethnic nationalistm.

These strategies have worked so far. By the way, it's also helped that the original Quebecois, descendants of French immigrants, are shrinking in population! So it looks like the problem will slowly go away.

All this to say that we have to learn from the masters when it comes to dealing with ethnic nationalism. Let's acknowledge their rights, such as they are. Acknowledge their identity and feelings, and deal with them tactfully.

Of course, to do so requires a strong centre, cohesive and able to represent the individual rights of the people of Ethiopia. Those representing 'Ethiopia' have to get their act together, for everyone's sake. To me, the weakness of the centre is a far greater threat to everyone than ethnic nationalism will ever be.

Eskedar, I think the social tie was more strong be...

2009-05-29T04:18:59.816-04:00

Eskedar,
I think the social tie was more strong between Eritreans and their cousins (Tigarus and Amharas) than the tie between Oromos and Abeshas. Eritrea was part and parcel of your 3000 years old Ethiopia, whereas Oromia became the part only 100 years ago. If Eritreans, the brothers/sisters of Tigarus, got "legitimacy" to be independent, then Oromia should have 100x legitimacy to be free. The fact that Finfinne is the capital of Oromia doesn't make any hinderance to liberation for it is not either Bahirdar or Meqele to be claimed by Amharas or Tigarus. Finfinne was/is land of Oromos and stays to be so.

The consequences seen in Eritrea's independence can not be the reason to compell Oromos give up their God-given right to self-determination. It is better to live in freedom with all "negative" consequences than live under slavery with "prosperity". Freedom comes fist to all other political and social values.

Yes I don't have problem with GENUINE "ethnic" federalism if it is the result of Oromos' free will expressed in referendum. To adress your concerns and to answer your questions:

- it is only the concerned people of specific national area who is eligible to vote in referendum. To put it clearly, self-determination of Oromos is the business of only Oromos. It is not the duty of Amharas, Eritreans or Tigarus to determine/vote on the fate of Oromos.

- you wanting to live in Finfinne as Ethiopian, not as Oromian is your God-given right. Then you live like a foreigner with residence permission as long as Finfinne adminstration allows you. It is just as you can also live in Djibouti as Ethiopian as far as you do have the permission. That is your choice.

- your attempt to intimidate Oromos by just painting the negative senario like that of Israel and Palestine can't hinder us from pushing for our Freedom. If it will be like you described here, then let it be!!

- if you mean Oromos will not vote for independence, given individual and group rights are respected, then why do you afraid to allow Oromos to go for referendum. Just try it and see for what Oromos vote. I know you thinking that the struggle of OLF is futile gives you a compfort and I don't want to take away this illusion from you, just enjoy it. But the fact on the ground is that Oromo Liberation movement being lead by OLF has gone a very long distance towards its END. Your heart knows this very well!

- your hope for a common ground is also my hope! But you and your likes dreaming that Oromos give up our struggle and accept your WAY is not the probable happening! You want the Integration of the empire, and Oromos want the Independence of our nation. Then the common ground is Independent Oromia in an Integrated Ethiopia!! Can you imagine this be realized?? This is the challenge you need to deal with!!

Fayyis, You said, “…don't forget that it was also...

2009-05-28T18:15:08.654-04:00

Fayyis,

You said, “…don't forget that it was also very difficult for you to think about that of Eritrea [independence] 20 years back”. I thought it was very easy to understand the difference between these two cases…

- the social tie between Eritreans and the rest of Ethiopians was not as strong as the one we have between Oromos and the rest of Ethiopia.
- Eritrean independence can be (to some extent) justified based on history, unlike that of Oromia which has always been part (building block) of Ethiopia.
- the geographical setting is I think obvious especially when you take into account the fact that Eritrean independence didn’t include Ethiopian capital city.

Most of all, we have seen the consequence of Eritrean independence in terms of: family breakdowns, border conflict, economic disadvantages for both nations, and most importantly in its failure to answer the quest for freedom. These consequences will obviously be catastrophic in the case of Oromian’s independence.

You also said “[e]thnic federalism (if it is genuine) is almost the other version of a Union of Autonomous Nations. The only thing that lacks is referendum” and by this I guessed that you are fine with a genuine application of the current system given that there is a referendum on unity vs independence. For me this is not problematic as we are going to start from a united Ethiopia. But some issues that make me curious:

- who is eligible to vote for the referendum? I am born and raised in Addis (I am Addis Abebie not Oromo), can I vote?
(By the way, I want to live in Addis but not as an Oromo but as an Ethiopian. So, for me to live in an Independent Oromia or to leave to a country of my choice is not a choice at all). We will end up being like Israel and Palestine and I think you don’t want that to happen.
- given an Ethiopia where the individual and group rights of all are respected, do you think the majority of Oromos will vote for independence? How will you vote?
- I think independence is not a question of the majority of Oromos. Then why the fuss about it? Why don’t you guys follow a strategy that will be supported by the majority of Oromos and the rest of Ethiopia? That is why OLF’s struggle remained futile!

I still hope for a hope of a common ground! I believe this is very important for the fight against TPLF and for peace, stability and development afterwards.