http://free-oromia-free-oromia.blogspot.com

Oromia bordered in the East by Somali and Afar lands and Djibouti, in the West by the Sudan, in the South by Somalia, Kenya and in the North by Abyssinia.The Oromo were colonised during the last quarter of the nineteenth century by a black African nation - Abyssinia - with the help of the European colonial powers.

http://free-oromia-free-oromia.blogspot.com/2010/02/ethiopia-onlf-forces-captured-yucub.html

===============

The dreadful mess of negation of negation in Oromo politics: when will it end? | Opinion

February 20, 2010

By Gumaa Guddaa*

The law of negation of the negation, which is unconsciously operative in nature and history, until it is recognized, was first formulated by Hegel. The Hegelian negation of the negation suggests that the natural course of all things is for there to be an original idea or entity (thesis), which comes to be replaced by its opposite (antithesis), which in turn is replaced by a combining of both concepts (synthesis). The synthesis then itself goes on to become the next thesis and the cycle continues.

The Thesis in Oromo Politics

This essay, in an attempt to shade some light on the prevailing endless negation in the Oromo political arena, will consider the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) – the original idea – as an entity (thesis) and will attempt to analyze what has been happening since the formation of the OLF by employing the Hegelian concept of negation. The original idea is that the OLF will struggle for the formation of independent democratic republic of Oromia (The OLF Political Program, p 7, 1974).

In addition, there are three sacrosanct pillars of the thesis, including nationalism, Oromo unity and self-reliance. The thesis is clearer and better than anything else put forward so far. It is clear because it formulates a goal and the norms required to be observed to achieve that goal. It is superior because it proposes to struggle for the maximum possible natural goal of sovereignty – complete freedom and independence – a cause worthy of sacrificing lives and precious resources – reclaiming what was lost.

Having looked at the original idea, it would be necessary asking how it came about. There was a serious and profound political debate among the Oromo elite class around the end of the 60s and the beginning of the 70s before the original idea was formulated. There were two theses that were put forward as to the solution for the Oromo question at the time. These included (1)-national liberation and (2)-system change within the Ethiopian framework.

The outcome of the debate hinged largely upon the definition of the “Oromo question” itself; a colonial question or not. At the end, the only rational convincing argument that stood the rigor of intellectual scrutiny was that the correct historical interpretation of the relationship between Oromia and Ethiopia was nothing but to conclude that Oromia was colonized by Abyssinia and needed to regain her sovereignty, which subsequently became the perceived wisdom. Hence, the birth of the OLF as a modern national liberation force, above all as an ideology. There has been no alternative convincing counter argument articulated until now against this interpretation.

The First Antithesis in Oromo Politics

Shortly after the creation of the OLF in 1973, an antithesis, the opposing position (negation) of the original thesis, was presented by the All-Ethiopia Socialist Movement (MEISON) and the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Party (EPRP), among others. The MEISON and EPRP position was that the Oromo question was predominantly a class struggle and national question to a lesser degree, but never a colonial question and, therefore, the solution was never to be independence, but socialist revolution. This antithesis anticipated both questions of class and national struggle would be answered by socialism, and later on, communism and stateless utopian society. Thus, it argued that there was no need to aspire to create a democratic republic of Oromia. Since socialism advocated for ‘international proletarianism’ struggling for the Oromo alone was caricatured as narrow nationalism. The antithesis did not survive for completely different reason all together in that the proponents made an error of judgment of the first principle, misinterpreting the reality of Ethiopian politics.

The Second Antithesis in Oromo Politics

The collapse of the Dreg military junta in 1991 ushered another era of negation. The first antithesis to the original idea within the OLF itself appeared in the early 90s. The main political antithesis put forward at the time was that, since the Wayane regime hijacked the opportunity for a peaceful resolution and invited us to fight to get what is rightfully ours, the only viable way forward was to downgrade the objective from independence to some sort of self-rule within federal or another form of arrangement within Ethiopia. This is in direct contrast to the original thesis of republic or Oromia. The promoters of the antithesis have made it clear that they have concluded that there is no need to shed blood and now transmogrified to become believers of the antithesis and attempt to convince the Oromo, on the one hand, and the Abyssinians, on the other, that they can live together in harmony.

More recently, the latest antithesis to the original idea has been presented in a similar fashion as its predecessor. The advocates of globalization argued that, because of the financial powers of the trans-national global companies i.e. neo-capitalist, the sovereignty of the existing nations has already weakened and will inevitably be consigned to history sooner or later and, henceforth, no need to form a democratic republic of Oromia. How absurd such a proposition looks now after the debacle of the global financial crisis, moral collapse and the plague of greed the free market of capitalism finds itself in?

The emergence of the antithesis within the organization has and continues to cause a serious political pain. Ottaway argued a central weakness of the OLF has been their lack of definition regarding their overall objective: “the OLF wavered between the ideal of an independent Oromia, the desire for a large degree of autonomy, and the dream of supplanting the TPLF as the dominant political organization in the country” (Ottaway 1999, 70). Many serious observers of Oromo politics would agree with this analysis. “Dubartiin waa lama jaallattu gaba hin bahin.”

The idea of dream of ‘Ethiopianizing’ the OLF was evident shortly after the OLF withdrew from the Transitional Government in 1992. For instance, Alex de Waal reported as far back as 1994, “evidence of a split in the OLF between the more conciliatory Deputy Secretary General Lencho Lata and the Secretary General Galassa Dilbo” (de Waal 1994, 27-28) along the lines of the antithesis and the thesis, respectively.

In 1997 there were reports that: “… informal negotiations between OLF and government broke down in the spring after splitting the OLF into two positions: that of its secretary-general Galassa Dilbo who wanted to continue the struggle against the regime and that of his deputy Lencho Lata who was more in favor of legalizing the OLF” (Minorities at Risk Project June 1998, 21). Subsequently, the OLF split into two factions of TA OLF and Asmara Group formally in 2001 along the line of the thesis and the antithesis, respectively.

The First Synthesis in Oromo Politics

What is more, the Asmara Group tried to present the two separate ideas to two different sets of audience. The Asmara Group, for instance, as a whole, embrace in different forms and at different levels both the thesis and the antithesis. Some foot soldiers, supporters and low level members of the Asmara Group do support the original idea (thesis) of liberation. However, the top echelon of the Asmara group believes and promotes the direct opposite idea against independence. They say ‘democratization of Ethiopia’ should replace the struggle for liberation. When challenged the leadership of the Asmara group argues that there is no difference between the two. As a consequence, they say the OLF does not have a political program, and there is no need to declare what it stands for. They abdicate the decision to the Oromo people. Such an ideological position is that of synthesis replacing the antithesis.

The Second Synthesis in Oromo Politics

The ‘Change’ faction of the Asmara Group is another classic example of combining the original idea with its direct opposite. The ‘Change’ faction is an amalgam of the ‘Oromo People’s Democratic Organization’ (OPDO) and members of the Asmara group. The Asmara Group has already formed the Alliance for Freedom and Democracy (AFD), itself another synthesis, by making a pact with the hardliner Amhara party, namely Coalition for Unity and Democracy Party (CUDP).

The ‘Change’ faction is also calling for reintegration with others who declare independence as their goal. How they can reconcile the OPDOs with the others remains unclear. The Oromo populace has rejected the OPDO precisely because it is the antithesis to the OLF (the original idea). Even the newly formed ‘Change’ wing of the Asmara Group is already divided due to precisely the same problem. The recent defection in the Oromo Liberation Army Southern Command is just that. It was less than 6 months ago since the ‘Change’ Group paraded the Southern Command as the flagship of their strategy of gaining credibility. Alas! it was short lived. It would appear that there will be more to come. It is a vicious circle.

Oromo Unity As Thesis, Dividing Along the Lines of Regions and Religions As Antithesis

The original thesis on the Oromo unity advocates that guarding the unity of 40 million strong Oromos is a sacred principle. In particular, Oromos of similar political persuasion should not divide along the line of region or religion. ‘United we stand, divided we fall,’ is one of the most recited slogans by Oromo nationalists. For instance, whatever internal disquiets there were within the OLF camp, before the 2001 official split, the leaders always presented a united front to the outside world. The Oromo public embraced the value of Oromo unity religiously and continues to regard dividing the Oromo nation to be the highest possible sin.

Although in the minority, over the years, sadly some have openly embraced the forbidden idea and advocated to organize Oromos along the religious divide. Others have called for Oromos to organize themselves along region and then come together to form a confederation. These notions are clearly antithesis to the original idea of Oromo unity. One wonders how long it may take us to realize the danger of ongoing negation because of what has been manifestly obvious over the past few months. Yet again, some groups believe that it is fine to be a regionalist and a pan-Oromo at the same time. These groups think it would be possible to rally the Oromo nation by first forming hegemony of certain grouping at its core. For example, there is a serious charge against the ‘Change’ faction of being regionalists in the public court based on the behavior of some of their supporters.

The original idea is that pan-Oromo movement diametrically opposes regionalism. The strategy for the antithetical thinking appears to be that you can organize a particular region as far as you have a pan-Oromo name. They consider it to be possible to run regionalism and pan-Oromo movement at the same time or as far as it gives you the opportunity to oppose others. It is not only regionalism, but also the leadership style as well as that some Oromo ‘leaders’ adopting the Amharic language in making public speeches and comfortably sitting under the Ethiopian flag are all clear examples of synthesis. You can embrace Oromo nationalism and ‘Ethiopianess’ is the synthesis which attempts to replace Oromo nationalism.

It would be lack of farsightedness not to be aware of the possibility of a religious antithesis emerging in Oromo politics. Previous attempts were unsuccessful. But that alone is no guarantee that new one will not appear. The fabric of Oromo unity between Oromos of different religious persuasion was woven by the blood and bones of members of the OLF who paid the ultimate sacrifice in fighting for freedom against the enemy. Nevertheless, the reality is we live in a world increasingly sharply divided along religious lines. There are those who are willing to fund the radical elements of both religions in order to control our society, and there are early warning signs already on the ground more so inside Oromia. Vigilance is in order.
Restoring to the Original Kaayyoo, the Thesis

Overall, neither the antithesis nor the synthesis has yet replaced the thesis. The thesis is based on reality and has been tested from within and without, and it has survived a number of challenges for the past four decades. There is no fear that the synthesis will replace it. For instance, the TA OLF, who are widely considered to be the bastions of the original “kaayyoo,” insist they stand for the thesis and have dug in their heels and stood by it for the last one decade. The great majority of the Oromo people also stand for the original idea with regards to independence, nationalism, unity and self-reliance. All available evidence indicates that the Oromo public is firmly supportive of the thesis. The Oromo people hold the OLF in a messianic position because of the original idea. The OLF has become an ideology in its own right.

Attempts by different factions to replace OLF either by forming different organizations or change its political program from within have not been successful so far. The enemy is frightened of its potential. Nevertheless, the process of synthesis (combining both concepts) is already underway, and we should be aware of it. We are better advised to be conscious of the process of the negation of the negation itself, which actually is endless unless an active conscious effort is made to end it.

In conclusion, you can eternally split and regroup how many times you would like, but you will not stop the process unless you fully understand the reason for the split and the underlying process in the first instance. The only viable solution to the endless negation is to return to the original idea and restore the thesis based on the original idea, norms and values. A serious debate is required. The conspicuous absence of the Oromo intellectual class, the descendents of those who started the struggle, from the debate and analysis of the situation is extraordinary. A serious intellectual analysis and problem solving is required. We have to separate ideas (thesis, antithesis, and synthesis) from the people who hold them. We all have to recognize the mess and take collective responsibility to clean it.

Gumaa Guddaa blogs for Oromo Affairs, a blog that endeavors to bring Oromo related issues to the attention of its audience, to provide analysis and to solicit comments from its readers. Read more articles at Oromo Affairs @ OromoAffairs.blogspot.com

http://gadaa.com/oduu/?p=2494&page=2

=======================

Oromo: To Unlock The Gridlock, Take Independence As The Core-Kaayyoo!

One article titled as "the dreadful mess of negation of negation in Oromo politics: when will it end?" was puplished on the website Gadaa.com. Then the website asked a legitimate question: "the Oromo national liberation movement in a self-imposed gridlock, how can Oromo movement unlock this gridlock?" At the same time the website showed us a very discriptive picture of a trafic jam as an illustration for the gridlock. What a challenging question from Gadaa.com? What a confusing article from Gumaa Guddaa, the author of the article? Should I take time to respond to the two? I just try here in short!

I read the article from Gumaa Guddaa and his "thesis", i.e only independent Oromia as a kaayyoo-ganamaa. It is almost the antithesis to my hitherto opinions regarding kaayyoo-Oromo (One kaayyoo with three terms) which I do consider as "the current thesis or synthesis" of Oromo liberation movement. It is not bad that he did stress the necessity of walabummaa Oromia (forging an independent democratic republic of Oromia). The problem I saw in his assertion was that he does think with “parallel mind frame work” on the contrary to my line of thinking, which is a “series frame work”. Parallel and series here are the metaphors taken from the two kinds of electrical circuits (parallel circuit or series circuit). He is the classical example of those who had the hitherto “parallel way” of thinking, which was applied by many members of Oromo polity, including those who produced conflicts, where actually there is no conflict. That is why he ended up accusing and blaming Oromo nationalists, who do emphasize the other two terms of the kaayyoo-Oromo, other than the independence-term as a kaayyoo. According to his “parallel frame work”, the following three kaayyoos (three terms of ONE kaayyoo) are in an irreconcilable conflict for he and his likes think that the following three terms of the kaayyoo-Oromo lead us from the status quo to three different directions:

- OFC's/MEDREK’s plan to forge the true Oromian autonomy in a federated democratic Ethiopia

- ULFO’s/OLF-QC’s "kaayyoo-ganamaa" to establish independent gadaa republic of Oromia

- AFD’s/OLF-SG’s vision to achieve self-determination of Oromo people with the end-kaayyoo of fostering a union of independent nations in the region, be it in a form of the SMALLER Ethiopia (excluding our colonizer Abyssinia), in a form of the existing current Ethiopia i.e including all free nations in the empire or in a form of GREATER Ethiopia, including even neighbour nations in the Horn, such as Eritrea, Djibouti and Somalia.

If we think with “parallel frame of mind” like Gumaa Guddaa, we just end up to think that these three terms of the kaayyoo are exclusive to each other so that the conflict between the groups fighting for these terms of the kayyoo respectively is already programmed. Nowadays there are two groups of people in the empire who do want to convince and influence us so that we do start to think in this frame-work. Some do it unkowingly, like Gumaa Guddaa seems to do here and the others do it knowingly to exploit this “conflicting situation” in order to sow a further discord among these three groups of Oromo nationalists. Specially it is good to know that Weyane cadres do love this frame of thinking for they know how effective it is when applied to devide Oromo nationalists in the camp of Oromo liberation.

I believe, the antithesis to the unconstructive frame of thinking revealed in the article of Gumaa Guddaa is my way of thinking in a form of a “series frame of mind”. According to my line of thinking, the above three terms of the kaayyoo are not contradictory, but complementary, to each other. Eventhough ethiopianist Oromos’ kaayyoo doesn’t include the right of Oromia to exist as an independent country at all, the merits like justice, democracy and individual freedom for which the members of the Ethiopianist Oromo parties do struggle are not against our liberation movement. It seems that is why for example UDJ, the party in which most of the Ethiopianist Oromos are organized, is now part of MEDREK.

Coming to the other three important kaayyoos, which he tried to present as if they are the thesis, anti-thesis and the synthesis to each other, those which my line of thinking put them in a series circuit for they are three terms of the same only ONE kaayyoo-Oromo, the terms which we can achieve one after another by struggling together, I think MEDREK’s kaayyoo is the I-kaayyoo (immediate/short-term), OLF-QC/ULFO’s kaayyoo is the M-kaayyoo (middle term) and OLF-SG's/AFD’s kaayyoo is the E-kaayyoo (end/long-term). I believe these three terms of the only one kaayyoo are supported by most of the Oromo nationalists.

But Gadaa.com's poll project in relation to the article from Gumaa Guddaa seems to be misleading. The question raised was, ”what is the Oromo cause for you?” and of course that is not bad.

Neverthless, the alternative answers given there as listed below are not actually exclusive options, among which we should choose. They are complemantary options, which we can have at different situations and which we do support at different steps of our liberation journey. The alternatives given as the answer in the poll were:

- liberating Oromia to form a union of free nations in the Horn of Africa (combination of sovereign Oromia & self-rule)

- liberating Oromia to form an independent sovereign country (Republic of Oromia)

- establishing the self-rule of Oromia in a democratically federated Ethiopia

- winning the class struggle first and foremost, and last

Gadaa.com would have asked better, e.g the question like: “what should be the end-kaayyoo or end-cause” of Oromo people for you? Then we can know how many people really want to have as their end-kaayyoo the "only winning class struggle”, or the "only self-rule of Oromia” or the "only republic of Oromia”, instead of pushing step by step towards the “union of independent nations in the Horn”, which surely will be the end-goal of all the citizens and the nations in the future in this globalized world, where we do now see that even the whole of Africa is trying to come together to forge the African federation.

According to Gumaa Guddaa's article and according to the diagram added from Gadaa.com, in short, the thesis of Oromo liberation movement is independence (liberation), the antithesis is federation and the synthesis is self-determination (referendum). But, we could ask: where is the contradiction between these three concepts? Oromo liberation movement is the movement for self-determination to decide on our own future destiny. Then we can all together fight to achieve national liberty to be in a position to excercise our right for referendum, after which we can vote on the issue: independent Oromia within Ethiopian union vs independent Oromia without Ethiopian union (Ethiopia being either a union of only oppressed nations excluding Abyssinia, or inclusive of the only nations in the present Ethiopian geography or including all nations in the Horn of Africa). Federation can be a mid-goal leading us to the liberation as an end-goal. Why do then Gumaa Guddaa and his likes try to creat a conflict among Oromo nationalists, where actually there is no viable conflict?

According to the actual result of the poll in Gadaa.com, the kaayyoo of "only winning class struggle” is not the option for Oromo people and the kaayyoo of "only self-rule in a federation” seems to be a transitional solution, but can not be a prefered part of the referendum. The "referendum" in the website is still going on as it would be expected between the two concepts: the kaayyoo of “independent Oromian republic without a necessary union” and the kaayyoo of “independent Oromia within a future union of liberated nations in the region”. It seems to be a nice referendum indeed, but is the timing OK, to argue now on this two possible end-goals? Is this not what our enemies do want, that we do fight on them now instead of fighting together against our enemy for our common national liberty, first to come to the position of making referendum, then to leave the decision for the Oromo people and try to live according to the result of the public verdict? I personally do accept and respect the position of Gumaa Guddaa and that of others to persue and realize their goal, which is the “gadaa republic of Oromia without any possible union” established. But the Oromian unionists do have also their God-given right to advocate for an “independent Oromia within a union of independent nations”. To see which of the two would be our final destination, let’s learn to leave the decision for the public at large when the right time comes for a democratic referendum to take place.

The very interesting message from the diagram of Gadaa.com is the attempt to show that Ethiopian nationalism = Oromian nationalism in the “synthesis” part of the diagram. Is this right/wrong? Or is it conditional? For Oromo nationalists who are fighting for the “only isolated independence of Oromia”, it is principally wrong. For those who do have federation as their end-goal, it is absolutely right. For the Oromian unionists, I am sure it is only conditionally false/right. It can be right as long as the Ethiopiansts also can accept and respect Oromo nationalism. After all, Oromo nationalism is national issue, whereas Ethiopian nationalism is regional issue. It is just like being Italian and European at the same time. Being Italian is national issue, whereas being European is regional issue. If it is in this sense of the unionists, then Oromian nationalism is not in contradiction with Ethiopian nationalism. We need to differentiate the Ethiopian nationalism according to the unitarist Habesha elites from this form of Oromian unionists’s version of Ethiopian nationalism.

Another ilustration was an attempt to show as if the democratization of Ethiopia = liberation of Oromia. Is this fact or fiction? It can be fact only if we take democratization of Ethiopia as a MEANS to the liberation of Oromia, which is an END. Whether this means will be effective to lead us to the required end or not is another question. We can raise similar question regarding armed struggle, whether it is more effective than the democratization way to come to our goal. Otherwise democratization of Ethiopia as a goal, disregarding liberation of Oromia, the same view to that of the Ethiopianist Oromos in the parties like UDJ, is not what Oromo nationalists should accept. Oromian unionists look at the democratization of Ethiopia (if the democratization at all really can take place) as a possible good tool to help us move to our kaayyoo, on the contrary to the view of the ethiopianist Oromos.

Further more, it is really good to differentiate and to try to understand the position of the ethiopianist/unitatrist Oromos like those in AEUP and EDP, the position of the federalist Oromos like those in OFC/MEDREK, the position of the liberator/“secessionist” Oromos like those in OLF-QC/ULFO and the position of unionist Oromos rallying behind OLF-SG/AFD. But for God’s sake, where is the contradiction and why should there be an animosity between them, as far as all of them do accept and respect the future public verdict of Oromo people at large, when we get a chance to vote on their different options or on their different end-goals (if at all they do have different end-goals)? The question we need to answer is, how should we approach and manage the parties? Here is my suggestion, taking the present Ethiopian political spectrum in to consideration:

- let's ignore, but always check, the unitarists like AEUP and EDP

- let's fight unconditionally against the hegemonist TPLF and it’s slave OPDO

- let's accept and support the federalists like OFC/MEDREK to move one step forward in our liberation journey; we know that Oromo nationalists did opt to take this term of the kaayyoo as their own "end-goal" based on the current objective reality in the empire.

- let's respect and take the kaayyoo of the liberators like OLF-QC/ULFO as a CORE-kayyoo to move two steps forward; this group used to say the spade is spade, even if it does not sound deplomatic.

- let's look at the unionists like OLF-SG/AFD as farsighted, who are ready to move beyond only achieving national Oromian independence (the CORE-kayyoo) to a regional union of independent nations for a common benefit; this view is very mature and deplomatic without neglecting the CORE-kaayyoo.

Then I do hope that we will come slowly, but surely to the position of clarity as far as the Oromo cause, Oromo-Kaayyoo or the Oromo question is concerned. The metaphor I brought here, puting the different terms of Kaayyoo-Oromo in a form of either “parallel circuit” or “series circuit” can make immense difference in our way of thinking and may make big effect on our contribution to Oromo liberation movement. Puting the three terms of the kaayyoo (federation, independence and union of independent nations) in a “parallel circuit” makes the three terms of the Kaayoo to be seen as if they are very contradictory goals to each other from which we must choose one. Puting them in a “series circuit" as if we can achieve them one after another (first achieve the federation, then an independence and then further a union if we want), makes it clear, so we can see that there is no conflict between the three terms of the only ONE kaayyoo. I hope in due time all of the concerned Oromo nationalists will start to think in this form of “series frame work” instead of thinking in the “parallel frame work”. It is also good to remember here again the metaphor I used previously (liberation journey from Djibouti = garbummaa -----through Diredhawa = federation -----and through Adaama = independence -----to Finfinne = union of independent nations). These two metaphors (electric circuit and train journey) may work a wonder to heal the percieved and/or real conflict produced and transimitted by those thinking with the “parallel frame work” intentionally or unintentionally. For further clarity, I would like to put my own version of the thesis, antithesis and synthesis of the hitherto effective political concepts in short as follows:

- Thesis (”kaayyoo-ganamaa”): unconditional and exclusive independent republic of Oromia (OLF-QC’s/ULFO’s position)

- Antithesis: unconditional and only unitary Ethiopia (ethiopianist Oromos’ position like those in AEUP and EDP)

- Synthesis: kaayyoo-Oromo with its three terms (short-term is federation, OFC’s/MEDREK’s position; middle-term is independence, OLF-QC’s/ULFO’s position; and the long-term is a union of independent nations, OLF-SG’s/AFD’S position)

Now it will be the good time for all Oromo nationalists to agree on accepting the above mentioned synthesis part of our liberation movement as our common ground, rather than opting to still cry about the possibility of rallying only behind the "kaayyoo-ganamaa" and with this to continously lament and confuse the Oromo mass. So our brother Gumaa guddaa needs to come to mental clarity himself instead of just confusing others with his own confusion about the kaayyoo of Oromo liberation movement.

Otherwise the poll in Gadaa.com is designed based on the thinking with “parallel frame work”, so that we are all obliged to choose between the federation, independence and the union as the only Oromo cause. Actually most of the Oromo nationalists seem to support all the three terms of the kaayyoo as our short-term, middle-term and long-term goals respectively, when we do think in a “series frame work”. It is not bad to observe in the poll that the majority of the voters are concentrating on and voting for the "independent republic of Oromia" as a preferable Oromo cause, which I also do think is the CORE and the very secure form of our sovereignity.

We know that federation is only the temporary solution and of course a union of independent nations will happen only after the securing of our independence, when we give our verdict based on our free will to achieve a better benefit in the future, that is why such a union is a long-term project. The only bad thing is, when we start to look at these three terms of our kaayyoo as if they are contradictory to each other, which is actually the way of thinking we do observe in the article written by Obbo Gumaa Guddaa. Otherwise it is good to know and to keep in mind that nowadays there are four groups of Oromo politicians:

- ethiopianist/unitarist Oromos, who do still support the project of ONE Ethiopia, disregarding the existence of Oromia as a country (e.g Oromo of AEUP and EDP)

- federailst Oromos, who do have an autonomous Oromia in a federated democratic Ethiopia as their end-goal of struggle (e.g Oromo of OFC/MEDREK)

- liberator Oromos, who do struggle for the CORE-kayyoo, an independent republic of Oromia, as their end-goal (e.g Oromo of OLF-QC/ULFO)

- unionist Oromos, who do struggle for a union of independent nations in the region as their end-goal, based on the Oromo public verdict (e.g OLF-SG/AFD)

But the only two questions yet to be answered are:

- are there really many Oromos who want to limit the only ONE Oromo-kaayyoo to the "only unitary Ethiopia", to the "only federal Ethiopia" or to the "only independent Oromia"?

- are really the above mentioned ethiopianist Oromos, federalist Oromos and liberator Oromos against the NOBLE cause of the unionists?

Last but not least, the picture of the cars in gridlock (the Oromo national liberation movement in self-imposed gridlock) shown on the front page of Gadaa.com is very wonderful picture. It describes well the chaotic situation of our real and current political movement. It made me to feel and to be really surprised by thinking how passive we are at least not to discuss the issue to get out of the gridlock. May Waaqayyoo help us at least to talk and to write, even if we do lack a sort of stamina to act and to behave in order to promote Oromo liberation movement. Finally I would like to say that kaayyoo-Oromo is in Short: only ONE kaayyoo-Oromo with three terms, i.e a short-term to achieve federation——-a mid-term to forge INDEPENDENCE (the CORE-kaayyoo)———and a long-term to foster a union of independent nations. The emphasis here in the kaayyoo is on walabuummaa Oromia (independence), for it is the CORE of the Kaayyoo. Federation is only the mid-goal to the CORE-Kaayyoo. Union is the post-CORE-Kaayyoo arrangement for the sake of a possible mutual benefit, based on the future Oromo public verdict. So, we need to have no illusion and no confusion on the only ONE kaayyoo-Oromo. I believe, hope and love to see that this will be the beginning of our effort to get out of the self-imposed-gridlock! Let Rabbii/Waaqayyoo bless and help us!

Galatooma!!
http://www.ethiopianreview.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18216

=====================

Ethiopia: ONLF forces captured Yucub town

Ogaden Online

Reports reaching us from Yucub town, Dolo province say that Ethiopian troops based there have fled their camps after they could not cope with constant nocturnal attacks by Ogaden National Liberation Front [ONLF] forces.

In response to the myriad troubles Woyanel troops have been visiting upon civilians, ONLF forces pounded the two camps housing Ethiopian soldiers and their puppet militiamen with heavy artillery guns every night, with the heaviest attack on the camps occurring on the night of 3 February. Our reporter in the area said Ethiopian troops were eventually forced to flee to Warder town after incurring massive personnel losses and destruction of the camps

http://free-oromia-free-oromia.blogspot.com/2010/02/ethiopia-onlf-forces-captured-yucub.html

=========================

Ogaden, The Hidden War

Posted by SaveOgaden On February - 21 - 2010
As a part of this blogging project, I was asking some friends of mine who I know are very active when it comes to issues of injustice. One of my good friends has many topics of interest (which I will slowly incorporate into my blogs), but the first one she spoke about was the Ogaden region of Ethiopia.

The Ogaden War was a conventional conflict between Somalia and Ethiopia in 1977 and 1978 over the Ogaden region of Ethiopia. In a notable illustration of the nature of Cold War alliances, the Soviet Union switched from supplying aid to Somalia to supporting Ethiopia, which had previously been backed by the United States, prompting the U.S. to start supporting Somalia. The war ended when Somali forces retreated back across the border and a truce was declared.

Some info from my friend: “More death, more tortures, rapes and body mutilation has been happening here than it has in Darfur. The Ogaden people are of Somali origin who reside in Ethiopia because the European colonial “awarded” that part of Somalia to the Ethiopians. When Somalia had government they tried to get back the land numerous times, however the Ethiopians always had the support of the west. Ethiopia, as you know, as never been colonialist mainly because it adopted Christianity way before many Western countries.”

From what I know about Ethiopia, aside from it being the land from where many of you caffeine-junkies should be grateful for since it is where coffee originated from (the word coffee came from “kafa” and they realized its potential as a stimulant when the goats that were eating the kafa got “really excited” when they got it), it is the only country in Africa that was never colonized by any colonist (okay, there was a five-year occupation by Italy, but 5 yrs is nothing compared to the hundred years that the other colonies were under colonist rule). Therefore, it is the pride of Africa in many ways. However, I think it is unfortunate when a country who is supported by the West continues to wage a war that has gone on for years and years and no one in the West gives a damn about who it is affecting.

Here is an article about an event about the Ogaden region from the friend that brought about this topic: http://www.wardheernews.com/Articles_09/Sept/28_crocodile_tears_halima.html
Here’s a video about the event:

The way that the ongoing war is being hidden from the public reminds me of how it was with the Holocaust, the Ukrainian famine or the Rwandan genocide.

I’ve never heard of the conflict before, but this is because of the lack of media. Even my friend who proposed this topic admits that she didn’t know about it even though she herself lived in Somalia. It is frightening that because there is no media covering the event (all forms of media have been expunged), no one knows what is going on and the people living there are living in fear, violence and authentic daily threats to their lives.

By: Daniela Pila
Date: 2/20/2010

Popularity: 8% [?]

http://www.saveogaden.org/2010/02/21/ogaden-the-hidden-war/