Saturday, July 20, 2013

Statement from OYSA/WWDO: We Are Oromos First Too!

OYSA/WWDO: We Are Oromos First Too! | July, 20, 2013
Oromummaa or Oromo nationalism has achieved successive victories and reached a higher level to mobilize the untapped Oromo human resources for a just cause – Oromo national movement that had been continuously and viciously attacked by successive Ethiopian regimes.
Even though Oromummaa has proved its maturity, firm stand, commitment and readiness to pay the necessary sacrifices back in Oromia, the recent minor retreat in the Oromo struggle has given the old empire builders in the Diaspora the courage not to accept the truth, just cause and strong Oromo nationalism. Instead they have wrongly convinced themselves that this would be a right time to rehabilitate and wage counter attack on Oromumma – which is altogether a futile attempt to begin with.
The recent multi-faceted audio-visual, oral and written media attack on Oromians and Oromummaa, although nothing of significance to deter us, is exceeding its limit and developing into physical attack on one of our members, who a few days ago produced and released a video clip declaring “I am Oromo First!” The attack happened on Tuesday July 16, 2013 in Silver Spring, Maryland in disguise. Firstly, such cowardly acts are indicators that some extremist Ethiopian immigrants, by infringing the law, have resorted to physical attack in a democratic country where they took refuge. Secondly, such unprecedented media and personal attacks on Oromumma are clear signs that Oromo nationalism has prevailed and unquestionably secured the upper hand in the political discourse in that old Empire.For Full Statment go to WWDO website, Washington.GaaddisaOromoo.com

The ‘Blue’ cannot mask the ‘Amhara’: Behind the propagation of ‘Individual Rights’

By Jilcha Hamid
Blue PartyIn early June of this year a major protest staged in Finfinne caught the attention of the international media, which described it as the first protests since the 2005 elections. I assume that they were talking specifically about political opposition protests. Stepping into the spotlight and reading a statement to the media on behalf of the political opposition was Yilikal Getnet , chairman of the ‘Blue Party’. In the statement the chairman called for the release of political prisoners while highlighting other political and economic problems. The call raised a lot of interest and support, most notably from the ‘Hear Our Voices’ movement which had been protesting and advocating for religious freedoms for Muslims in Ethiopia for well over a year by that time. So when the Blue Party took to the streets for their first protest, the ‘Hear Our Voices’ (HOV) movement mobilized its alongside them. The HOV movement had long been looking for a partner outside of the Muslim community, namely to counter the regimes ‘Jihadawi’ propaganda levelled against their movement. The Blue Party on the other hand was looking to gain wider support for its political program by appealing to the disenfranchised Muslims.
Not much information was available regarding the Blue Party at the time, but in an interview with a local Amharic paper, Life Magazine, Mr. Getnet explained his party platform which he characterized as being based on “individual rights” as opposed to “group rights”. His main issues appeared to be with the existence of regional states, and “ethnic politics”. He states:
“Individuals come before groups (individuals are primary to groups). And so, we believe that when individual rights are respected, group rights will be respected.”
A political party should in time correct itself rather than stick to its pre-commitments; it can’t do politics in this way. For example, you can be a tribal organization but not a tribal party. Because of the sensitivity, in this country, we don’t talk about it, but if someone starts by saying I am an Oromo organization, where else can he go other than [to] Oromo? Because it is limited from its very start. We believe that organizing oneself on a tribal basis is the cause of new issues. But we don’t have a view that in our Ethiopia everything should revolve around tribes.” There are no tribal organizations or political organizations. He then goes on to say:
 “Ethnicity comes with colonization. Colonizers exploited it to divide and rule. The English have walked a long way on this matter. However, as this belief is getting position and power, it is messing up the country. Even if the sort of ‘I am better’ … ‘I am better’ competition is putting our country on the verge of collapse, we are struggling to give individual right a priority. We Ethiopians used to be great, if you go and search on the Internet, you will find out that we are one of the oldest nations. Ethnicity is a new creation and we need to go back to the old greatness.”
I wonder which colonialist introduced ethnicity to Ethiopia? Was it Aba Bahrey, the 16th century Oromophobic monk? Or was it Aleka Taye the Oromophobic Ethiopian Court historian (father of the “Oromos from Madagascar” theory)? The irony here is that Mr. Getnet promoting his own brand of ethnic nationalism. The only difference is that he refers to Amhara nationalism as Ethiopian nationalism.  The old greatness that he refers to is the promotion of his own ethnic nationalism as the foundation of the Ethiopian state. When a single ethnic identity is promoted in such a way at the expense of other ethnicities, the members of the promoted ethnic group will naturally develop a sense of entitlement and attachment to the state. Mr. Getnet is exhbiting this sense of entitlement. When he dismisses ethnicity as a colonial tool, he’s not dismissing his own ethnic identity because his ethnic identity, as far as he is concerned, is inseperable from the state. His language is the language of the state. The ethnic identities that he’s dismissing are the ones which were not promoted and nurtured by the state.
“I don’t understand what was achieved. It is not new to speak in your language. If you go to south Ethiopia, you see people speaking Amharic. The number of Amharic speakers has not decreased. The number of books being written is much higher than that time. Then, there was not much magazine, now you will find a lot of them in Amharic. Except benefiting few ethnic elites, I don’t see anything new. Afan Oromo is not created in EPRDF time. It was there before. But to develop the language, it would have been better to use Geez instead of Latin alphabet. EPRDF deliberately used this issue like colonizers to rule over the people. There are people who become millionaires overnight just because they are in the EPRDF circle. The poor Ethiopian whether he speaks Amharic, Oromo, Sidama …is not their problem. There is nothing special; they are still living with their tiny plot of land. Afan Oromo used to be spoken in the rural area, and it is still there. No one prohibited it then, and it doesn’t have anything new now.”
His fundamental problem seems to be that when others promote their languages and identities he characterizes it as “narrow” and partisan, while his promotion of the Amharic hegemony via Ethiopian patriotism is somehow different, and is considered to be neutral.
But going back to his party platform, why does the Blue Party consider the existence of ethnicities to be an affront to individual rights? The reality seems to be that the issue has little to do with individual rights. What is being threatened is the hegemony and privilege that he believes should belong to his language, culture, history and ethnic identity as enshrined in the old system. He believes that Amharic is for the state, while Afan Oromo is to be confined to “the rural area”. This seems to be the mentality hiding behind the cloak of individual rights, and it just shows how persistent some groups are in continuing to promote failed ideologies through modern slogans of “liberalism” and “individual rights”.

Ethnicity in Ethiopia: The View From Below

- Summary of Article by Herbert S. Lewis
By Tolera Fikru Gemta
The modern empire of Ethiopia was created as a result of rapid military expansion of Amhara rulers of Shoa, to south ward. It is 110 age only. The empire was created during the European Power British and French established Empires in Africa. The creation of the empire was more brutal in south, especially those who did not submit peacefully faced massacre, expropriation, dislocation. The conquered people were not similar with the conquerors in all aspect of culture, (language, religion and etc). The territories conquered by Menelik military were autonomous people. The local administrations that forcibly built with gun (the neftegna) were so exploitative and oppressive. The indigenous political leaders appointed by the system also serve only as an instrument for Amhara rule; and the effect was the same.
As matter of fact, the Oromo Nationalism came through different developments. The most evident one was the Bale rebellion of (1960). This rebellion was so powerful that it successfully resounded at national level and creates awareness among Oromo. Then after, the Pan-Oromo consciousness was intensified among Oromo students, civil servants and NGO workers and others.
The flourishing of different government controlled associations by Derg regime resulted in more political awareness among the Oromo everywhere meanwhile Derg’s forced re-settlement program had disastrous effect on Oromo social economical and ecological life. As matter of fact, Oromo nationalism resembles with that of all colonized people.
On the other hand the present day Ethiopia which deemed to be established on the principles UDHR has not yet achieved the intended purpose. Two views are, however, occupied Ethiopian Political space. The view from Amhara elite (not all of them) that focus on the weakness of ethnic nationalism, and the pessimistic observers together make the first view; on the other side there are who claim that the present regime could not solve ethnic national questions (or implement the fundamental human rights principle) adequately.
As much as the similarities of Eritrea with Tigre did not keep Eritrea with Ethiopia, claiming objective similarity view of history only will not keep Ethiopian people together.  Thus, it is important and advisable not to deny that there are groups of peoples who have own identities as distinct peoples in Ethiopia. Obviously politics that based on domination of one’s identify is unthinkable in the today’s world.
Source: Herbert S. Lewis,“Ethnicity in Ethiopia: The View from Below (and from the South, East, and West).” 158–178 in Crawford Young (ed.), The Rising Tide of Cultural Pluralism (Madison:University of Wisconsin Press, 1993), 160.