የአጥንት ቆጠራ ወይንም የአድሎ ማስተካከያ?

ጃዋር መሃመድ የኢትዮጵያ አየር መንገድ ለሱ እና ለሌሎች ያቀረበለት የሠራተኞቹ ጎሳ ሰነድ (https://www.facebook.com/Jawarmd/posts/10104092557488783) አሳይቶናል።

ጥሩ ነው። ይህ ጉዳይ በኢትዮጵያ ፖለቲካ መነሳቱ አይቀርም እና መወያየቱ ጠቃሚ ነው።

ሆኖም ይህ ሰነድ የተሟላ አይደለም። የሠራተኞቹ ብሄርን ነው ወይንም የትውልድ ወይንም የመኖርያ ክልልን ነው የሚያሳየው ግልጽ አይደለም። የተጻፉት ክልሎች ናቸው፤ «ሌላ»፤ «ደቡብ ክልል»፤ «ኦሮሞ ክልል»፤ «አማራ ክልል» እና «ትግራይ ክልል» ነው።

ግን ይህን አይተን ሠራተኞቹን በመጡበት ክልል ነው ያስቀመጧቸው ለማለት ይከብደናል ሌሎች ክልሎች በተለይ አዲስ አበባ ክልል ስለሌሉበት! «ክልል» ብለው ጻፉት እንጂ «ብሄር» ማለታቸው ነው ከሆነ ደግሞ ለምን እንደዛ አላሉትም ማለት ይቻላል። አየር መንገዱ ሠራተኛ ሲቀጥር ብሄሩን እንደ መረጃ ያስቀምጠዋል ወይ የሚለው ጥያቄም ይነሳል።

ስለዚህ ስለዚህ ሰነድ ከመወያየታችን በፊት ሙሉ መረጃ ያስፈልጋል። ያንን ከአየር መንገዱ ወይንም ከአቶ ጃዋር (ነግረውት ከሆነ) ካላገኘን ዋጋ የለውም።

ግን በጠቅለል ያለ መልኩ ስለ «ኮታ» (በጎሳ፤ በጾታ ወይንም በመደብ የሥራ ወይንም የትምሕርት እድል መመደብ) ያለኝን አመለካከት ልግለጽ… ጠቃሚ ከሆነ። ይህ አካሄድ አደገኛ እና ህዝብን የሚያከፋፍል መሆኑ ምንም ጥያቄ የለውም። የግጭት ምንጭ መሆኑ ኢትዮጵያም የትም የታየ ነው።

ሆኖም አድሎ የትም ቦታ ያለ ነገር ነው። ኦሮምያ ያደገች አማርኛ በደምብ የማትችል ሴት ለአየር መንገድ የአስተናጋጅ ስራ ስትወዳደር በአማርኛ ጉድለቷ ትቸገራለች። ብቁመቷም ልትቸር ትችላለች። ምናልባት በተፈጥሮ ሳቂታ ከሰው ጋር በቀላሉ የምትግባባ ላትሆን ትችላለች። መልኳም «እስከዚህ» ሊሆን ይችላል። ወዘተ። ብዚህ ዓለም «እኩልነት» የለም። የሰው ልጅ አብዛኛውን ማንነቱን ይወርሳል በትንሹ ነው የራሱ ሚና ያለበት።

እንዲህ ሆኖ መንግስት ወይንም ሌላ ተቋማት እኩልነት ውየን "fairness" ለማምጣት ጣልክቃ ገብተው ኮታ ቢጠቀሙ ይጠቅማል ወይ? እኔ የሚሻለኝ መሰረታዊ ችግሮቹ ላይ ብናተኩር ነው። የቋንቋ ችግር ካለ ይፈታ። የአድሎ ችግር ካለ ይፈታ። ቁጥር ላይ ማተኮሩ ወይንም ኮታ እንዳ አንድ መሳርያ መጠቀሙ ጉዳቱ ከጥቅሙ ያይላል ብዬ ነው የምገምተው።

ይህን ለማየት ለጀዋር ጽሁፍ የቀረቡትን አስተያየቶችን ማየት ይበቃል! ጉድ ነው ግን ያልተጠበቀ አይደለም። እስቲ ጉዳዩን ሰክን ብለን እናስብበት። በደመነፍስ አንግባበት።

በመጨረሻ ስለ ኢትዮጵያ አየር መንገድ ትግሬ ብቻ ሆኗል የሚለው ዘፈን አንድ ነገር ብል ደስ ይለኛል። ትግሬዎች አላግባብ ተቀጥረው ይሆናል ቢሆንም አይገርምም እንደማንኛውም መስሪያቤት አየር መንገዱም ብዙ ሰው የሚቀጥረው በትውውቅ ነው። በህወሓት አገዛዝ ዘመን ይህ የትውውቅ ድር (network) ወደ ትግሬዎች ማዳላቱ ምንም አይገርምም። መሰረታዊ ችግሩ የህወሓት አገዛዝ ነው እንጂ ትግሬዎች አለአግባብ መቀጠራቸው አይደለም። መሰረታዊው ችግር ከተፈታ ሌላውም ይፈታል።

እኔ የትግሬ አድሎ አለ ብዬ ማልቀስ ድሮም ወድጄ አላውቅም (https://asfawdarguemeshal.blogspot.com/2018/04/blog-post_16.html)። ማልቀስ እና ማማረር ሽንፈት ነው የበታችነት እና የዝቅተኝነት ስሜትን (inferiority complex) ያዳብራሉ። ሃላፊነት-ቢስ ያደርጋሉ። ሰውን ተግባራዊ ስራ ከመስራት ወሬ ብቻ እንዲሆን ያደርጋል። Empower ከማድረግ disempower ያደርጋል። ይህን ችግር አንድ በደንብ የሚያሳየን ነበር አሁንም ህወሓት ከስልጣን ከወረደ በኋላ ሰዎች ስለ ትግሬ አድሎ በማሰብ ጊዜአቸውን ሲያባክኑ ነው። ወይንም ስለ በረከት ስምዖን ሲያወሩ። አዎ ሰው ቅስለኛ ነው ግን ክብሩንም ያጣ ይመስለኛል።

ከኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች (አንድነት ኃይሎች) የእርስ በርስ መጠፋፋት ታሪክ እንማር!

ኢትዮጵያዊነትን የምናራምድ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች ባለፉት 60 ዓመታት በተደጋጋሚ እርስ በርስ መጣላት ሀገራችንን አደጋ ላይ መጣላችን ይታወቃል (http://asfawdarguemeshal.blogspot.com/2018/07/blog-post_15.html)። መቼም በዚህ እፍረታችን ምክንያት የሀገራችንን ችግሮች በሌሎች (ጎሳ ብሄርተኞች፤ የውጭ ኃይሎች ወዘተ) ማሳበብ ሱስ ቢሆብንም እውነቱ የኛ ጥፋት መሆኑን መቀበል ግዴታችን ነው። ለሀገራችን ችግሮች ዘላቂ መፍትሄ የኛ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች አንድነት እና ታላቅ ተሳትፎ አስፈላጊ መሆኑ የታወቀ ነው።

ከዚህ ጽሁፍ ትምሕርት እንዲሆነን እና ወደ ፊት ስህተቶቻችንን እንዳንደግም ዘንድ ወደ ኋላ ሄጄ እኛ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች እርስ በርስ የተፋጀንበት ታሪኮችን ማስታወስ እወዳለሁ። ዛሬ በሀገራችን ፖለቲካ ታላቁ ጉዳይ የጎሳ ብሄርተኝነት ስለሆነ እኛ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች ከታሪካችን ተምረን ለሚመጣው የፖለቲካ ሂደት በደምብ መዘጋጀት አለብን። አሁን ያለንን የታሪክ እድል መጠቀም ግድ ነው። እግዚአብሔር ከዚ በኋላ ሌላ እድል ላይሰጠን ይችላልና።

እንሆ ላለፉት 60 ዓመታት የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች እርስ በርስ መጣላት ታሪክ ዝርዝር፤

1. የነ መንግስቱ ነዋይ እና ግርማሜ ነዋይ የመንግስት ግልበጣ ሙከራ (1953)፤ አስፈላጊ ለውጦችን ለማምጣት ባለው መዋቀር ውስጥ በትእግስት ከመስራት ፋንታ ግርማሜ በውጭ ሀገር በተማረው «ማርክሲዝም» ፍልስፍና ተመስርቶ ወደ «ስር ነቀል ለውጥ» ወይንም አብዮት አመራ። ይህ የተከሰተው ኃይለ ሥላሴ ወደ ሀገራቸው ከተመለሱ ገና 18 ዓመት ካላፈ በኋላ ነው። ኢትዮጵያ ገና አቅም የሌላት ደሃ ሀገር ነበረች። ግርማሜ እና ደጋፊዎቹ ኃይለ ሥላሴ ወደ ውጭ ሀገር እንዲማሩ ከላኳቸው ተማሪዎች ነበሩ። ይህ ነበር የመጀመርያው ጊዜ የኃይለ ሥላሴ የፈረንጅ ትምሕርት ፖሊሲ በራሳቸው ላይ ጥቃት ያመጣባቸው። የኃይለ ሥላሴ መንግስት ከዚህ ተምሮ አስፈላጊ ለውጦችን ከማድረግ ፋንታ ስልጣንን ይበልት ሰበሰባ ለሰላማዊ የፖለቲካ መፍትሄ ከፍተቶችን ዘጋ።

2. የተማሪዎች ንቅናቄ፤ ከነመንግስቱ ነዋይ ግልበጣ ሙከራ በኋላም የኃይለ ሥላሴ መንግስት ተማሪዎችን ለትምሕርት ወደ ውጭ ሀገር መላክ አላቆመም። የኢትዮጵያን ባህል እና ትውፊት ከማስተማር ፋንታ የምዕራባዊ ፍልስፍና እና ሶሺያል ሳየንስ እንዲማሩ አደረገ። እነዚህ ተማሪዎች ኢ-ኢትዮጵያዊ አስተሳሰቦች ይዘው ወደ ኢትዮጵያ መንግስት እና ሌሎች መስርያቤቶች ገቡ። የቀለም ትምሕርት አለአግባብ በመደነቁ ምክንያት «የተማረ ይግደለኝ» የሚለው አባባል ተፈጠረ (http://asfawdarguemeshal.blogspot.com/2016/12/blog-post_7.html)። ይህ እሳት እየተለኮሰም መንግስት በትምሕርትም ደረጃ በፍትህ በተለይም በመሬት ፍትህ ዘርፍ ምንም አላደረገም። የኃይለ ሥላሴ መንግስት የኢትዮጵያ ለረዥም ዓመታት መርዝ የሚሆናት ትውልድ እና ባህል ፈጠረ። የ«ጨቋኝ ተጨቋኝ» አስተሳሰብ እንዲሰፍን አደረገ። የመደብ እና የጎሳ ጦርነት እንዲጀምር አደረገ። ዛሬ የዚህን "legacy" ነው የወረስነው።

3. የደርግ አብዮት፤ በኃይለ ሥላሴ መንግስት ተሃድሶ የሚፈልጉ በርካቶች ነበሩ ግን እድሉ ሳይደርሳቸው የተማሪዎች ንቅናቄ የሚፈልገው ስር ነቀል አብዮት መጣ እና ሀገሪቷን አፈነዳ። በርካታ ልሂቃን ተገደሉ ተሰደዱ። ለኢትዮጵያ ብቻ ስያሆን ለማንም ሀገር የማይሆን የፖለቲካ ፍልስፍና ሰፈነ። መሰረታዊ ነገር እንደ «መሬት ለአራሹ» ወደ «መሬት ለመንግስቱ» ሆኖ ቀረ። ኢትዮጵያ በደምብ ቁልቁል መውረድ ጀመረች። የደርግ በኃይል የተመሰረተ ጨቋኝ አገዛዝ ለጎሳ ብሄርተኞች በንዚን ሆናቸው እና በደምብ መንቀሳቀስ ጀመሩ። ድሮ በቀላሉ በትናንሽ ሰላማዊ ለውጦች መስተካከል የሚችሉት የጎሳ ጉዳዮች ወደ ጦር ሜዳ ገቡ።

4. የኢዲዩ መፈራረስ፤ ማርክሲስት ያልሆኑት የደርግ ተቃዋሚዎች በኢዲዩ ድርጅት ስር ለመታገል ወደ ሱዳን ገቡ። ከሞላ ጎደል አንድ አቋም እና አንድ አመጣጥ ኖሯቸውም እርስ በርስ መስማማት ባለመቻላቸው ከትንሽ ጊዜ በኋላ ተበታተኑ። ይህ በአንድ አቋም ያላቸው ኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች መካከል እርስ በርስ መጣላት ታሪክ እስካሁን እየተደጋገመ ነው።

5. የኢህአፓ፤ መኢሶን፤ ደርግ ግጭት፤ እንዴ ማንኛውም የማርክሲስት አብዮት አብዮተኞ የፍልስፍና፤ የጥቅም እና የስልጣን ልዩነቶቻቸውን በተብ መንጃ ነው እነ ኢህአፓ፤ መኢሶን፤ ደርግ እና ሌሎች የተወጡት። የእነዚህ ድርጅቶች አብዛኛው አባላት በ«አንድ ኢትዮጵያ» የሚያምኑ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች ነበሩ። እነ ኢህአፓ በመገንጠል እናምናለን ቢሉም ብዙ ኤርትራ እና ትግራይ ብሄርተኞች ቢኖሯቸውም አብዛኞቻቸው ኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች ነበሩ። መኢሶንም የኦሮሞ ብሄርተኞች ቢኖሩትም አብዛኛው በአንድነት ያሚያምን ነበር። ደርግም እንዲሁም የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች ስፍራ ነበር። ሆኖም የነዚህ ድርጅቶች መፋጃጀት ለጎሳ ብሄርተኞች ታላቅ ድል ሆነ። የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛው እርስ በርስ ሲተላለቅ የጎሳ ብሄርተኛ እየቀረ ሄደ ካስፈለገ ወደ ሻዕብያ፤ ህወሓት እና ኦነግ ገባ። ቀይ ሽብሩ ካበቃ በኋላ የተቆሳሰለች ኢትዮጵያ ናት የቀረችው። በጎሳ ብሄርተኞች ለመገዛት ዝግዱ የሆነች ደካማ ኢትዮጵያ ናት የቀረችው። ደርግ ከስልጣን ሲወርድ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛ ልሂቃን ራሱን አጥፍቶ ርዝራዡ ብቻ ነው የቅረው። ብዙሃኑም የፖለቲካ ልቡ ተስብሮ እየተንገዳገደ ነበር። የኢትዮጵያ የወደፊት የጎሰኝነት ዘመን ተወሰነላት።

6. የመላው አማራ እና መላው ኢትዮጵያ ፓርቲዎች ግጭት፤ ደርግ ኤኮኖሚውን ገድሎ፤ ህዝቡን አጥፍቶ፤ የሶቪየት ህብረት ሲፈርስ ገንዘብ አጥቶ እነ ሻዕብያ እና ህወሓትን ወደ መንግስት አስገባ። የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛው ጎራ እራሱን አትፍቶ ሜዳውን ሙሉ በሙሉ ለጎሳ ብሄርተኞቹ ተወ። እነሱም ደንግጠውም ቢሆን ያልጠበቁትም ቢሆን ሜዳውን ለመቆጣጠር ቶሎ ስራ ጀመሩ። የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛ ጎራው ከድንጋጤው በኋላ ልደራጅ ሲል የለመደው አብሮ መስራት አለመቻል እርስ በርስ መጣላት በሽታው እንደገና ተነሳበት። «መላው ኢትዮጵያ» ይህን ወይንም «መላው አማራ» ይሁን አውራ ፓርቲአችን በሚለው ጥያቄ የኛ «ወታደሮች» በ«ጠላት ሜዳ» ላይ እርስ በርስ መጣላት ጀመሩ! ላለመስማማት መስማማት እና በጋራ ጥቅም አብሮ መስራት ፋንታ አንዳችን ብቻ ነው የሚቀረው ብለው እርስ በርስ ተፋጁ እና ሁለቱንም ድርጅቶች («መላው ኢትዮጵያም» «መላው አማራም») አደከሙ። የጎሳ ብሄርተኞች ከዳር ሆነው በሳቅ ሞቱ። ግን አሁንም እኛ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች ጥፋታችንን ከማመን እነ ከመፍታት ፋንታ የጎሳ ብሄርተኞች ጥፋት ነው እነሱ ናቸው ያከፋፈሉን ብለን እንደ ህጻናት አሳበብን። እንሆ ችግራችንን ስላላመንን አልፈታነውም። አልፎ ተርፎ ይህን ስህተትን ወደፊት ለመድገም እራሳችንን አዘጋደን!

7. የቅንጅት ግጭት፤ ወደ ምርጫ 97 ስንገባ ጠ/ሚ መለስ ዘናዊ በተለያዩ ምክንያቶች ነጻ ምርጫ እናሸንፋለን ዓለም ያከብረናል ብለው ነጻ ምርጫ አወጁ። ድንቅ ውሳኔ ነበር አሁንም ይደንቃል። ግን በዛን ግዜ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛ ጎራው በራሱ ካመጣው ቁስሎቹ ገና አልዳነም ነበር። ጠንካራ ድርጅት ከሀገር ውስጥም ውጭም አልነበረም። የእርስ በርስ ጥሉ እንዳለ ነበር። በዚህም ምክንያት ነው የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛው ወደ አንድ ስምምነት (ቅንጅት) የገባው በመጨራሻው ደቂቃ ከምርጫው ሶስት ወር በፊት! ግን አርፍዶ ቢዘጋጅም እንደምንም አድርጎ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛው ጎራ በምርጫው ተሳትፎ በሚደንቅ ሁኔታ አሸነፈ። ካሸነፈ ብኋላ የምናውቀው ፈተናዎች አጋጠሙት። እነዚህን ፈተናዎች በደምብ አድርጎ ወደቀ። በሰው የተፈጥሮ ባህሪ ጓዶች አብረው ሲታሰሩ ፍቅራቸው እና ትብብራቸው ይጨምራል። የቅንጅት መሪዎች ሲታሰሩ ጭራሽ እርስ በርስ ተጣሉ!ድርጅቱም ምን ያህል ባዶ እንደነበረ ታየ። ከላይ የተወሰኑ መሪዎች በ100 የሚቆጠሩ ነበሩ ከዛ በታች ግን መዋቅር የሚባል ነገር አልነበረም። መዋቅር ስል በይፋ ብቻ ሳይሆን በልብም አልነበረም። ስለዚህ መንግስት ቅንጅትን ሲያጠቃ በምርጫው 70% እንዳሸነፈ ድርጅት ጥቃቱን ጠንክሮ ከመቋቋም ይልቅ እንደ ምንም ድጋፍ የሌለው ድርጅት ቀለጠ። ቅንጅት አሸዋ ላይ የተገነባ ቤት መሆኑን አየን። ግን ለዚህ ሽንፈት ምክንያት እንደነበረ እንገንዘብ። የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች ልሂቃን ከዛ በፊት ለ30 ዓመታት እርስ በርስ መፋጀት ታሪክ ምክንያት በጣም ሳስቶ ነበር። ለዚህም ነው ቅንጅት በተንሽ ግፊት የፈራረሰው። መሪዎቹ "cream of the crop" ሳይሆኑ ካለፈው 30 ዓመት የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች ጎራ እርስ በርስ መጨራረስ የተራረፉ ነበሩ። ታሪካችን ምን ያህል እንደ ጎዳን አየን።

8. ዛሬ፤ አሁንም የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች ጎራ እጅግ ደካማ ነው። አሁንም ሀገር ውስጥም ውጭም ብዙሀኑን በሚገባው የሚወክል ድርጅት የለውም። ግን ብዙሃኑ አለ ልሂቃን እየታገለ እንደሆነ የሚያሳየው እንደ ጠ/ሚ አብይ አህመድ አይነቱን ሰዎች ከዚህ ብዙሃን መውለዳቸው ነው።  እንጂ ከ27 ዓመት የጎሳ ብሄርተኝነት በኋላ ኢትዮጵያ እውነትም የብሄር ብሄረሰቦች እስር ቤት ብትሆን እና በርካታ የሀገር ብሄርተኛ ባይኖራት እንደ አብይ አይነቱ አይፈጠርም ነበር እንቋን ወደ ስልጣን መግባት። ግን ይህ ብዙሃን ልሂቃን ያስፈልገዋል። እነ ጠ/ሚ አብይ በርካታ እገዛ ያስፈልጋቸዋል። ቢያንስ እንቅፋት አያስፈልጋቸውም!

አንድ እንቅፋት ሊሆን የሚችለው አዲሱ የ«አማራ ብሄርተኝነት» (https://asfawdarguemeshal.blogspot.com/2018/06/blog-post_14.html) ነው። የአማራ ብሄርተኝነት በኢትዮጵያዊነት አምናለው ይላል ግን  የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛውን ጎራ የመከፋፈል እና የማድከም አዝማምያ አለው። የአስተያየት ልዩነት መልካም ነው በአንድ አንድ ነገር ሳይስማሙ አብሮ መስራት ይቻላል። ግን አሁን የሚታየው የአብሮ መስራት አዝማምያ ሳይሆን የጥሎ ማለፍ መንፈስ ነው። የአማራ ብሄርተኛው ጎራ አንዱ መፈከሩ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኝነት ድርጅቶች ዋጋ የላቸውም ነው። ከኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛ ድርጅቶች ጋር አብሮ ከመስራት ያጣጥልዋቸዋል። ያው የነ ሻዕብያ፤ ህወሓት፤ ኦነግ ፎቶኮፕይ ማለት ነው። የህዝብን ብሶት በጎሳ ቤንዚን ለኩሶ የፖለቲካ ኃይል ማግኘት ነው። ልክ ህወሓት በመጀመርያ ነባር የጥግራይ ልሂቃንን እንዳጠፋ አንድ አንድ የአማራ ብሄርተኞች የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኝነት ድርጅቶችን ማጥፋት ይፈልጋሉ። እንደነ ኢህአፓ/መኢሶን/ደርግ የማርክሲስት ዜሮ ድምር ፖለቲካ ማለት ነው።

ይህ የሚመስልኝ ታሪክን መድገም ነው። የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኞች እንደገና እርስ በርስ ሲፋጁ የጎሳ ብሄርተኖች ስልጣን ይቆጣጠራሉ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛ ብዙሃን እንደገና መሪ አልባ ሆኖ ይጠቃል። ከታሪካችን ብንማር ይበጀናል። በዛሬው የፖለቲካ ለውጥ እግዚአብሔር የማይገባንን እድል ሰጥቶናል። እኛ የኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኛ ልሂቃን ምንም የሚጠቅም ነገር ሳናደርግ ከኢህአዴግ መሃል የለማ ቡድን ተነስቶ ለአንድነት መንፈስ ቆሟል። ታላቁ «ኢትዮጵያዊ» ዶናልድ ለቪን ደጋግመው እንዳሉት በርካታ እድሎቻችንን አበላሽተናል (https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/ijad/vol1/iss1/3/)። ይህን እድል ደግሞ ካበላሽን ታሪክ ለዘለዓለም ይወቅሰናል።

የብሄር ጥያቄ ዛሬ

ዛሬ የኢትዮጵያ ፖለቲካዊ ሁኔታ ተገለባብጦ ቢሆንም አሁንም «የብሄር ብሄረሰብ ጥያቄ» ዋና ጉዳያችን ነው። በዚህ ዙርያ ያሉት ጥያቄዎች ናቸው ዋና የሀገራችን የክፍፍል እና የግጭት ምንጭ። ይህ አሳዛኝ ሁኔታ በዋናነት የተፈጠረው በጎሳ ብሄርተኞች ሚና ሳይሆን በሀገር ብሄርተኛ ጎራው ነው። እኛ የኢትዮጵያ ሀገራዊ ብሄርተኞች ደጋግመን በሰራናቸው ስህተቶች እና ሀገራችንን በሚገባው ማስተዳደእር ስላልቻልን ነው የብሄር ጥያቄው እንደዚህ የሰፈነው። ለምሳሌ ያህል ጠቅላይ ሚኒስቴር አብይ አህመድ በማያሻማ አገላለጽ አስቀምጠውታል፤ ኢህአዴግ ደርግን አላሸነፍም፤ ደርግ እራሱን አሸነፈ እንጂ። እኛ የሀገር ብሄርተኞች አድሃሪ፤ ተራማጅ፤ ኢህአፓ፤ ምኤሶን ወዘተ እየተባባልን አሳፋሪው ደርግን ፈጠርን ደርግ ሀገሪቷን አጥፍቶ ለኢህአዴግ፤ ኦነግ እና ሻዕብያ ስልጣን አስረከበ።

ለምንድነው ይህ ነጥብ ላይ የማተኩረው? ለምንድነው ለኢትዮጵያ የፖለቲካ ችግሮች እንደ ኢህአዴግ አይነቱ የጎሳ ብሄርተኞችን ጥፋተኛ ከማድረግ የአንድነቱን ጎራ የሀገር ብሄርተኞችን ጥፋተኛ የማደርገው?

1. ሁለት አይነት ሰዎች አሉ። አንዱ ችግር ሲደርስበት ማንነው ይህን ያመጣብኝ ብሎ የሚአማርር
ሌላውን አድራጊ እራሱን ሰለባ በማድረግ እራሱን አቅሜ ቢስ ያደርጋል። ሌላው ሰው ምን አድርጌ ነው ይህ የደረሰብኝ ብሎ እራሱን በመገምገም እና ሃላፊነት በመውሰድ እራሱን አቅም እንዲኖረው ችግሩን መፍታት እንዲችል የሚያደርግ ነው። እኔ በአንድነት የማምን የሀገር ብሄርትኛ ነኝ እና ጥፋቴን ማምን ሃላፊነቴን መቀበል እፈልጋለሁ። ጣቴን በሌሎች ላይ በማተቆር የራሴን ጥፋቶች መካድ አልፈልግም። በተጨማሪ ሃላፊነት በመውሰዴ የችግሩ ምንጭ እኔ ነኝ በማለት የመፍትሄው ምንጭም እኔው ነኝ ማለት ነው። መፍትሄውን ከሌላ ሰው አልጠብቅም። ይህ ተመልካች ሳይሆን አስፈጻሚ ያደርገኛል። ይህ አቅሜን ከመመንመን ያጎለብተዋል።

2. እውነት ነው፤ እኛ የሀገር ብሄርተኞች ነን የኢትጵያ የፖለቲካዊ ችግሮች ያመጣነው። በጃንሆይ አገዛዝ ሀገሪቷን በተቆጣጠርን ጊዜ አስፈላጊ ለውጦች ባለማድረግ የመደብ እና የጎሳ ጥያቄዎችን አስነሳን። የሀገሩን ትውፊት የሚንቅ የተማሪ እንቅስቃሴን ወለድን። ደርግ የኃይለ ሥላሴን መንግስት አልገለበጠም የኃይለ ሥላሴ መንግስት ነው አስፈላጊ ለውጦች ባለማድረግ እራሱን ለአብዮት ያጋለተው። አብዮቱን የአንድነት ጎራውን ለሁለት ለ«አድሃሪ» እና «ተራማጅ» ከፋፈከው ተራማጁ አድሃሪውን አጠፋ። ከዛ ደግሞ ተራማጆቹ እርስ በርስ ተጨራረሱ። አልፎ ተርፎ ደርግ በ«ኢትዮጵያ ብሄርተኝነት» ስም «ነግዶ» ህዝብን ጭቆነ እና ለሀገር ብሄርተኝነት መጥፎ ስም ሰጠ። ይህ መጥፎ ስም የጎሳ ብሄርተኞችን እንቅስቃሴን አበረታታ። ደርግ ሲወድቅ የሀገር ብሄርተኝነት ጎራ እራሱን አጥፍቶ አልቋል። የጎሳ ብሄርተኞቹ ሙሉ በሙሉ ስልጣን ተቆጣጠሩ። በኃይለ ሥላሴ ምንም አቅም ያልነበርው የጎሳ ብሄርትኝነት አሁን ሀገራችንን ገዝቶ ኤርትራን አስገነጠለ። ይህ በአጭሩ እኛ የሀገር ብሄርተኞች ዛሬ ያለብንን የጎሰኝነት ችግር እንዴት እንዳመጣን ይገልጻል።

3. አሁንም ዋናው የሚያሳስበኝ የኢትዮጵያ ፖለቲካ ጎራ የሀገር ብሄርተኛው ነው። በህዝብ ደረጃ ይህ ጎራ ቢንገዳገድም ደህና ነው። እንደ አብይ አህመድ አይነቱን መሪዎች እየወለደ ነው። ገን በልሂቃን (elite) ደረጃ ችግር እንዳለ ነው። አንድ ሆነን ሀገራችንን ማዳን እንችላለን ወይንም እንዳለፉት 50 ዓመት እርስ በርስ ተከፋፍለን እንደገና የጎሳ ብሄርተኝነት እንዲሰፍን እናደርጋለን? ዋና ጥያቄ ነው። የቅርብ ታሪካችን ጥሩ አይደለም። ይሄው ለኢህአዴግ የ27 ዓመት አገዛዝ አንድ ጠንካራ የፖለቲካ ድርጅት ሀገር ውስጥም ውጭም ማቋቋም አልቻልንም። አሁንስ አንድ ሆነን ከ«ለማ ቡድን» ጋር እየሰራን ሀገራችንን ማዳን እንችላከን? ወይንስ እንደልማዳችን እንከፋፈላለን እና ሀገራችንን ለቀውስ እና ግጭት የሚፈጥረው ጎሰኝነት እንደገና አሳልፈን እንሰአለን? ቁም ነገር ከማድረግ አቅሙ አለን ትያቄ የለውም። ግን ፍላጎቱ አለን ወይ ነው ጥያቄው።

በነዚህ ምክንያቶች ነው በዚህ ወቅት ከሁሉም የፖለቲካ ጎራዎች የሀገር ብሄርተኛ ጎራው የሚያሳስበኝ። እንደ ህወሓት ምናልባትም ኦፌኮ አይነቱ የጎሳ ብሄርተኞች ምንም አያሳስቡኝም። የታወቁ ናቸው በልመና ልንቀይራቸው አንችልም። በስልት፤ በዘዴ እና በውይይት ከነሱ ጋር እንደራደራለን። ግን ለመደራደር እና ውጤታማ ለመሆን የአንድነት ጎራው አንድ እና ጠንካራ መሆን አለበት። ድርድር የሚሳካው እራስን መጀመርያ እራስን ጎልብቶ ነው አለበለዛ ደካማ ከሆንን አይሳካልንም። እርግጠኛ ነኝ የአንድነት ጎራው አንደና ተንካራ ከሆንን በነዚህ ድርድሮች እርግጥ ውጤታማ እንሆናለን የጎሳ ብሄርተኞችን በጥሩ መልክ እንይዛቸዋለን። ግን ከተከፋፈልን የበፊቱ 60 ዓመት ችግሮችን እንቀጥላለን።

ትግሬዎች እየተጠቁ ነው?

ይህንን ታሪክ ደጋግመን አይተነዋል ብቻ ሳይሆን አሳልፈነዋል። የጎሳ ፖለቲካ በአገራችን ጎልቶ መታየት ከጀመረ ወዲህ፤ ከነጀብሃ፤ ሻብያ፤ ህወሓትና ደርግ ዘመን ጀምሮ የተደጋገመ ታሪክ ነው። በነጻነት ወይም ፍትህ ወይም «መብት» ጥያቄ ይኖራል። የሚጣሉት ጎራዎች በጥያቄው ላይ ከማተኮር ጉዳዩን ወደ ጎሳን ወይም ዘርን ያዞሩታል። ለጎሳ ጥል ምክንያት ይጠቀሙበትና የነጻነት ወይም ፍትህ ወይም መብት ጥያቄው ቀርቶ የጎሳ ውግያ ይሆናል። ጎሰኝነትን እንደ መሳርያ ይጠቀሙበታል አገርን ያጠፉበታል። (ይህን ስል በመጀመሪያ የተነሱት ጥያቄዎች መሰረተ ቢስ ነበሩ ማለቴ አይደለም ወይም በጎሳ ወይም ቋንቋ ዙርያ ችግር አልበረም አልልም። ሆኖም ጎሳ እንደ መሳርያ መጠቀም አላስፈላጊና ጎጂ ነበር፤ አሁንም ነው።)

ዛሬ በኢትዮጵያዊያን ብዙሃን በትግራይ ቅሬታ መኖሩ የማይካድ ነገር ነው። ዲያስፖራ የሚኖር ካልሆነ የትም ኢትዮጵያ ውስጥ የሚኖር ይህን ሃቅ በየቀኑ የሚያየውና የሚኖረው ነው። ይህ በትግሬዎች ላይ ያለው ቅሬታ ደግሞ በተቃዋሚ ወይም «ፀረ ሰላም ሃይሎች» የተቀሰቀሰ አይደለም። (ተቀዋሚዎች ምንም ለመቀስቀስ አቅሙም ትብብሩም የላቸውምና።) ከሊስትሮው እስከ ሃብታም ነጋዴው እስከ የቤት እመቤቷ እስከ ካህኑ እስከ ተማሪው ይህንን የቅሬታ ስሜት አለው። ያሳዝናል ግን ያለ ነገር ነው። የጎሳ ጉዳይ ሳይሆን የፖለቲካ ጉዳይ ነው መሆን የነበረበት፤ ሰውዉ ስለትግሬ ሲአማርር «ተውዉ፤ ገዥ መንግስቱ ሌላ ፖለቲካ ስለማይፈቅድ ብቸኛ ስልጣን ስለያዘ ነው ግፍ የበዛው» ብዬ ለማስረዳት ብሞክር ማንም አይሰማም። ሰውዉ በትግሬ በላይነት አምኖ ሌላ ነገር አይሰማም።

መንግስትንም ያስጨነቀው ይህ ነው። ከመሪ ወይም ተቃዋሚ መደብ ሳይሆን የብዙሃኑ የህዝቡ ብሶት እንደሆነ ስለሚያውቅ ነው መንግስት ለውጥ ለህልውናው ግድ እንደሆነ አምኖ እርስ በርሱ የሚወያየው።

በዚህ ሁኔታ ትግሬዎች አለ አግባብ ተጥቅተዋል ገና ሊጠቁም ይችላሉ። ጥያቄ የለውም። (እዚህ መጥቀስ የምፈልገው ግን እድሜ ለብዙሃኑ ታሪካዊ ዝንባሌ ጎሰኝነት እንደ የ27 ዓመታት የኢህአዴግ ፕሮፓጋንዳ ያህል አያጠቃውም። ሆኖም ያለውም መጠን ችግር ነው።) ግን ይህ ፍግ መቆም አለበት፤ ትግሬ መጠቃት የለበትም ብሎ መጮህ ምን ዋጋ አለው? ማን ይሰማናል? ከላይ እንደጠቀስኩት ህዝቡ ትግሬዎች አንደኛ ዜጋ ናቸው ሌሎቻችን ሁለተኛ ዜጋ ነን ብሎ ደምድሟል። አይደለም የፖለቲካ ጉዳይ ነው፤ አማራ ክልል ጭቋኙ አማራ ነው ኦሮሚያ ጮቋኙ ኦሮሞ ነው ብንል አልሰሙንም አሁንም አይሰሙንም።

ስለዚህ መፍትሄው ከተቃዋሚ ወይም «ኢሳት» ወዘተ እጅ አይደለም። መፍትሄው ከመንግስት ብቻ ነው መምጣት የሚችለው። መንግስት ዙሪያ ያለነው በሙሉ ሃይላችን መንግስት የሚያስፈልገውን ለውጦች እንዲያመጣ መግፋት አለብን። በተለይ ለተጋሩ መጠቃት ዋናው መፍትሄ የመንግስት የጎሰኝነት አቋምና ፕሮፓጋንዳውን መቀየር ነው። በህዝቡ ልብ የ26 ዓመታት የጎሳ ስሜት በመሸርሸር ነው ያሉትን ቅሬቴዎች ከጎሳ ወደ ፖለቲካ መቀየር የሚቻለው።

አንድ ነገር መርሳት የለብንም። ይህንን ትጠንቅቃችሁ እንድታነቡ ብትህትና እጠይቃለሁ። የኢህአዴግ አቋም፤ በእርግጥ አብዛኛው የተማሪዎች የፖለቲካ ንቅናቄ አቋም፤ የኢትዮጵያ የፖለቲካ መሃበራዊና ኤኮኖሚ ቅሬታዎችና ችግሮች በጎሳ የተመሰረቱ ናቸው ነው። ይህ ነው የኢህአዴግ አቋም። ጭቆና አለ? የጎሳ ችግር ነው። እኩልነት የለም? የጎሳ ችግር ነው፡ ድህነት አለ? የጎሳ ችግር ነው። የጎሳውን ችግር ከፈታን ሁሉም ይፈታል። ታድያ ዛሬ ህዝቡ ችግራችን በሙሉ በትግሬ የበላይነት ምክንያት ነው ካለ በትክክል የኢህአዴግን አቋም ነው የሚያንጸባርቀው ማለት አይደለምን?! የጎሳ ፖለቲካ እንዴት አደገኛ እንደሆነው አያችሁ። ትግሬዎች ደግሞ መልሳቸው የምንጠቃው በኢህአዴግ ብቸኛ ስልጣን በመያዝ ሳይሆን በትሬነታችን ነው ብለው ይመልሳሉ። ምን ይደረግ፤ ችግሩን ወደ ጎሳ በማውረድ አብሮ ገደል መግባት ነው።

ስለዚህ ብእራችንንና ድምጻችንን አቅመ ቢስ የሆኑት ትቃዋሚና «አክቲቪስት» ላይ ከማባክን መንግስት አቋሙን እንዲቀይር ብለን እናሳምነው። መንግስት የሃሳብ እርዳታ ያስፈልገዋል። የ40 ዓመት ጣኦት የሆነ ርዕዮተ ዓለሙን መቀየር እጅግ ከባድ ነውና መንገዱም በጥንቃቄ የተአሰበበትና የታቀደ መሆን አለበት።

በትግሬ በትግሬነቱ የሚደርስበት ጭቆና ይውደም! የሚያወድመው ግን የኢህአዴግ የውስጥ ለውጥ ነው።

Catalonia - Another Lesson for Ethiopia

The first lesson, Ladies and Gentlemen, is that ethnic politics is not particular to Ethiopia. I make this obvious point because it seems that a lot of my fellow Ethiopianists - those of us who are wary of ethnic politics - continue to think that only Ethiopia is 'plagued' by ethnic politics. No, ethnicity is universal, nation-states have been for the past two hundred years at least universal, and therefore ethnic politics exists in all states to some extent or another, depending on their ethnic demographics and history.

The second is that the root of ethnic politics is ethnic identity, which has existed for the most part of the existence of this world! People naturally have and are fond of their ethnic or national identity, which, by the way, are fundamentally equivalent. If you ask someone who identifies as Spanish what it means to be Spanish, and if you ask someone who identifies as Catalan what it means to be Catalan, the answer will be the same. My language, my culture, my geography, my ancestry, etc.

What about exclusivism - that is, what about an ethnic or state identity that excludes others? Today's clever Catalan secessionist will say that anyone can be Catalan as long as they identify as Catalan and speak or want to speak the language. Quebec separatists have said the same for decades. Secessionists often adopt this position to ensure that they are not attacked as exclusivists or 'racists'. Anyone can become Catalan or Quebecois, as long as... At the end of the day, ethnicity (and nationalism) are fundamentally exclusivist of course. It is a particular language or culture or geography or way of thinking that one has to adopt. So an Ethiopian nationalist can also say that anyone who adopts Ethiopian language, culture, etc., can be an Ethiopian.

A fourth point is that although ethnic identity is natural and the root of ethnic nationalism, ethnic nationalism itself, that is, the need to politically assert ethnicity, can be manufactured. Latent ethnic sentiments can be stoked by clever politics on the part of ethnic nationalist politicians, and stupid politics by those opposing, and this is what we have seen in Spain. Catalans who only a few years ago would oppose secession today are all for it not because anything substantive has changed in Spanish politics, but because of clever and poor marketing.

The fifth lesson - another very important one - is that wealth, 'development', modernity, etc. do not mitigate ethnic identity. In fact they may amplify it. Catalonia, compared to Oromia, is quite rich. And 'educated'. And modern. Yet it is rife with ethnic politics driven by the need to assert ethnic identity. So the assumption by some in Ethiopia that with development ethnic nationalism, especially 'narrow nationalism', will decrease is a false and dangerous one.

The sixth lesson is nothing except demographics can stem the tide of ethnic nationalism. The problem in Catalonia, as was the problem in Quebec until 25 years ago, is that there are too many people who are today or are potential Catalan nationalists. So secession via referendum is always a threat and ethnic nationalism is always the main political issue. This situation exists because there has not been enough Spanish-Catalan assimilation to create a 'mixed-identity' population in Catalonia and, very imporantly, in the rest of Spain. If there were a sizeable mixed-identity population, then Catalan nationalism would be much weaker. So without sufficient assimilation, the threat of ethnic nationalism always exists, and the solution will end up being ethnic strife or, if possible, secession.

This last lesson is what, I believe, the policy of the Government of Ethiopia should be based on. It is what we Ethiopian nationalists have to advocate for. Assimilation is the key to reducing ethnic nationalism and tension in Ethiopia. Note here that assimilation is not one way - it does not mean everyone should assimilate towards one particular ethnicity - for example, 'Amhara'. It means that there should be assimilation towards some merged and mixed ethnicity. In Ethiopia, for example, if there were significant intermigration and intermarriage between Oromos and other Ethiopians, with Oromiffa being spoken in most parts of Ethiopia along with Amharic and a significant mixed population, such demographics would greatly reduce the power of ethnic nationalism and tension such as exists today. In my view, the Ethiopian government (and state governments) must seriously study and implement policies that promote such assimilation, such as for example teaching Afan Oromo in schools in Amhara State and promoting inter-state migration. Such policies will bring about the necessary assimilation that will mitigate ethnic tension.

Using Canada To Understand Ethiopian Ethnic Federalism Today

I am fortunate to have acquired a somewhat intimate knowledge of Canadian politics and have found that, unlike US politics for example, Canadian politics holds wonderful parallels and lessons for Ethiopia in the area of federalism and ethnic federalism. So in this article I will briefly describe the history and nature of Canadian politics and how it can help us understand the Ethiopian political reality today, especially concerning ethnic federalism.

Here’s the (very) brief history… Canada was settled by English and French colonists beginning in the 1600’s. Soonafter, the English and French began warring for control of Canada (and North America as a whole), and around 1770, the English won decisively. However, in order to avoid problems with the large French population that had already settled in what is today known as the province of Quebec, the English government allowed the French to use their own language, worship in their own religion (Catholic), and to keep their own system of law (civil law). Over the following decades and centuries, the English continued to grant Quebec various such levels of autonomy and self-governance, both official and unofficial. For example, Quebec had its own legislature and French and both provincial and federal government services were provided in French and English. Unofficially, almost every second Canadian Prime Minister from 1867 (the official formation of Canada) onwards was French.

Nevertheless, despite such increasing levels of autonomy and recognition of language rights (note that it was always refered to as ‘language’, not ‘ethnic’ rights), ethnic nationalism in the French province of Quebec did not go away. The idea that Quebec was different from the rest of Canada, to the extent that it should secede and be a different country, actually grew over the decades despite increasing political and economic fortunes. So much so that in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, there was a small armed resistance advocating for the separation of Quebec. This was followed by increasing support for even more autonomy and even secession among both the Quebec population and its French elite.

This resulted in two referendums on secession. In the first referendum of 1980, the ‘yes’ side – the secession side - lost by a significant margin. But, the fact that it was held at all and that it gained 40% support scared enough people that the federal government took even further steps to give Quebec more autonomy, to increase the prominence of French throughout the country, and to unofficially increase the amount of money Quebec got from the federal government. Yet, despite this, a second referendum was held 1995, strategically at a time when the economy was in recession and people were angry. This referendum was again won by the ‘no’ side, but by only one percentage point 50.5% to 49.5%! Significantly, 60% of native French speakers voted for secession, but almost 100% of English and other language speakers voted against secession. Thus, despite being a small minority, non-French speakers were the decisive voters in the referendum.

Today, there is little interest in secession in Quebec – or to put it more accurately, it seems impossible for the 40% of Quebec who still support secession to get enough support from the rest of the population to win a referendum.

What are the lessons to learn from this Canadian example for Ethiopia?

Modernization, rather than reducing ethnic nationalism, can actually increase it. As Quebec modernized, became less religious, more affluent, etc. support for ethnic nationalism, manifested in reduction in English and other (non-French) language rights, secession from Canada, etc. actually increased! Modernization and increased ethnic nationalism go hand in hand.

Canada over the centuries embarked on various policies aimed at accommodating and satisfying the demands of French Quebecers such as the granting of extensive language rights, allowing the suppression of English and other languages in Quebec, making French an official language of the entire country despite only a tiny French population outside Quebec, transfering large amounts of federal money to Quebec despite the wealth of Quebec, etc. The political calculation was that if the demands of French Quebecers were met, they would be less likely to manifest their ethnic nationalism in ways that would cause dramatic damage the rest of Canada, such as secession. This shows that ethnic nationalism cannot be defeated by a stick – it requires plenty of carrot.

However, all over the above policies may have slowed the pace of increasing ethnic nationalism, but did not stop it. The results of the 1995 referendum, which almost initiated a process of secession or at least more separated federal arrangement, shows that accommodating ethnic nationalism, though helpful for some time, will not at the end stop the movement.

Ethnic nationalism does not fundamentally mean secession. It is the desire of a certain group for special rights above the rights of the rest of the population, in recognition that this group is a nation, or a pseudo-nation. For hardline ethnic nationalists, this recognition can only be realized within a politically separate nation. For ‘softer’ nationalists, having asymmetric rights within one nation is enough. Having more autonomy than other provinces, having a French-only province, having the federal language use French equal to English, etc. is enough for them to express their nationhood. The common theme however is that it has to have special rights as a group, even though these rights impinge upon the rights of other citizens.

An immigrant to Quebec cannot send his child to English school. English has not official status as a language in Quebec. Anyone in Quebec who does not speak French is de facto a second class citizen. More so than someone who does not speak English and lives in the English parts of Canada. ‘Native’ Quebecers – those who trace their ancestry to the original French Quebecers – are a privileged class in Quebec, even more so that ‘native’ English are in the rest of Canada. These are the practical consequences of ethnic nationalism – asymmetric rights and privilege that impinge on others’ rights.

Quebec nationalists go out of their way to emphasize that theirs is not an ‘ethnic’ nationalism, but a geographic (Quebec) or language-based (French) nationalism. The reason is that ethnic nationalism is seen within Canadian politics as a whole as primitive and potentially discriminatory. Thus when after the failed 1995 referendum one of the leaders of the Quebec separatist movement (truthfully) said that they lost the vote because of English speakers and immigrants, he was roundly denounced by his own side. What he said was true but not the perception of Quebec separatism that separatists wanted to portray. They wanted to portray their side as open to all, especially immigrants, with the common goal of having an independent Quebec. Ethnic nationalism is in a mature political arena seen as too divisive and dangerous by all sides.

Ethnic nationalism is politically costly. Since its inception, Canada has an extraordinary amount of its political energy on this issue. This energy could have been better spend on the myriad of other matters, such as the economy, trade, government organization, etc. that are everyday political issues in any other nation. The cost has been not only to Canada as a whole, but particularly to Quebec. In Quebec, most issues are sign primarily or at least secondarily through ethnic nationalist implications. Even political parties are organized around this issue, instead of around other ideology or interest groups.

Ethnic nationalist is economically costly. Canada spends significant amounts of money implementing the asymmetrical rights and privileges to Quebec that I mentioned above. The Quebec economy, too, has long been held hostage to the ethnic nationalist movement’s desire to use the economy first and foremost as a tool to promote its ethnic nationalist agenda.

Ethnic nationalism can only be significantly weaked through demographics, including integration and assimilation with the rest of the population. As I said above, though accommodation is often necessary and helpful, at the end of the day, it will only slow the tide of ethnic nationalism, not stop it. If it were not for the changing demographics in Quebec resulting from increasing numbers of immigrants, today Quebec might be a separate country or a very separate province in Canada. Immigrants and their children have increased the population of those whose mother tongue is not French to over 20%, and This group is not only not part of Quebec nationalism, but against it. Whereas accommodation could not defeat ethnic nationalism, demographics has done the job. For now.

These lessons are, as far as I am concerned, very much applicable to today’s Ethiopia. For me, Quebec mirrors Oromia. Oromia, notwithstanding the policies of the EPRDF, is today the one and major Ethiopian state where ethnic nationalism has a significant political impact. Yes, there is ethnic nationalism in other states, but where it is strongest and has to be dealt with ‘specially’ is in Oromia. Oromia, because of history and EPRDF policies, is Ethiopia’s asymmetric state – the one that requires special political attention, the one that is most costly, and the one for whom policies of accommodation, but more importantly integration and assimilation have to  be especially targeted. I will address how I think this should be done in another article.

Some Basics on Interacting with Ethnic Nationalism

2009/2/24 (Ethiopian calendar)

2016/11/3 (European calendar)

(pdf)

[Note: An Amharic version of this post will appear sometime!]

In his recent interview with ESAT, Ato Abebe Bogale presents us with a text book lesson on how to interact with ethnic nationalism, specifically Oromo nationalism. In this article, I attempt to expand on some of the principles and lessons he presented.

The subject of the interview was a recent conference on Oromo nationalism in London, during which one speaker strongly advocated for the break up of Ethiopia in the name of freeing the imprisoned Oromo nation from Ethiopia. This speech raised a lot of hackle in the media and among Ethiopian nationalists, even though it was just a repetition of a decades old position of not only Oromo nationalists but all those Ethiopians who starting in the 1960's, imbibed with socialist theories, think of Ethiopia as a prison of nationalities which needed to be freed. Somehow this repetition of a well known political position appeared to create panic in a number of people.

This leads me to the first and most important lesson we can learn from Ato Abebe, which is to remain calm and avoid at all costs projecting any kind of fear or panic about ethnic nationalism. When ethnic nationalists, including moderates, perceive the other side as being hysterical, they tend to become offended and are pushed to take a more defensive and radical position. Why are our heartfelt ideas raising such emotion – why don't they even try to understand us – we just can't relate to them – these are the questions and sentiments raised. In the end, this ends up increasing the support for ethnic nationalism, making non-nationalists moderate nationalists and moderates into hardliners.

Every politician in every country that has had to deal with ethnic politics knows this. I will given an example: During the Quebec referendum, when the province of Quebec was voting on the question of seceding from Canada, one of the Quebec nationalist tactics in their campaign was to provoke anti-secessionists in the rest of Canada into saying something insulting about Quebecers. They would then use these incidents and have their media broadcast them repeatedly in order to fan ethnic sentiment and promote their agenda. Knowing this, most Canadian politicians would be very careful to prevent such incidents. Instead, they would organize various events to promote 'friendship propaganda'. One such event was sending via bus, train, and plane hundreds of thousands of Canadians to Quebec to hold a demonstration whose motto was to show how much Canadians love Quebec! This is the politics of dealing with ethnic nationalism.

Ethiopian nationalists must practice the same type of politics. We must avoid not only inflammatory statements, including equating ethnic nationalism with tribalism and other similar sentiments that could be interpreted as derogatory, but also statements that question people's right to choose their identity and deny the existence any sort of ethnic rights. All such statements and positions only serve to actually promote the desires ethnic nationalists, especially hardcore nationalists.

Note how Ato Abebe was careful in this regard during the interview. While the interviewer tried to impress upon him the impending danger of secession, Ato Abebe completely avoided saying anything inflammatory or anything that could be interpreted as being offensive to Oromo nationalism. Instead, he calmly explained that Oromo secession is not a new position at all. Further, he explained that today, even among Oromo nationalists, and even among those who in previous years advocated secession, secession is now the position of a small minority. This is a fact, and though it is a fact, many Ethiopian nationalists tend to forget it, become hysterical, and unintentionally promote the cause of radical ethnic nationalists.

The second, related, lesson is that there is a diversity of opinions on ethnic nationalism in Oromo politics, all the way from Ethiopian nationalism to soft Oromo nationalism to hardline Oromo nationalism. The fact there are multiple Oromo political organizations and that, even in today's charged political atmosphere, these organizations are holding several conferences to reach some kind of consensus shows that they are far from reaching consensus. They are even far from agreeing to disagree, from agreeing to tolerate each others' views. (Doesn't this remind us of Ethiopian nationalist politics!) This is another reason for Ethiopian nationalists to keep our reaction to ethnic politics proportional to its dangers.

Third, Ato Abebe shows us that we have to look all of reality in the face all the time instead of being distracted by the winds of the day. He reminds us that the Ethiopian constitution today supports the idea of secession! Have we forgotten this? It is a radical ethnic nationalist constitution, the most radical in the world, an 'experiment' according to the EPRDF. (Imagine conducting such an experiment in one of the poorest and at risk countries in the world!). This is the reality we have to deal with. Given that this is what we are living with every day, why do the comments of a single Oromo secessionist at a conference take so much of our time? Rather, Ethiopian nationalists should be focusing on getting their own house in order to as to be able to harness the power blunt the edge of this constitution, a constitution which is everyday proving to be more and more dangerous for the country.

The fourth point that Ato Abebe beautifully explains is that despite the constitution, despite the government putting up fences, so to speak, around the ethnic regions so as to minimize integration and assimilation, which is the key to creating any kind of shared destiny, Ethiopia remains to this day. This is perhaps the strongest testimony against the theory of Ethiopia as a prison of nations. Ethiopia is a country, a nation, where significant integration and assimilation has taken place in the past, and a significant portion of the population, from all ethnic groups, is Ethiopian nationalist.

I remind you that in 1991, the only forces with power (guns) in Ethiopia were ethnic liberation forces. The Ethiopian nationalist elite along was completely absent. The ethnic nationalists – EPLF, TPLF, OLF, etc – could have easily carved up the country in pieces, as per their ideologies. Eritrea seceded, but apart from that, the rest found that they could not, collectively, that is, disintegrate the country. Further, as the years went by, the EPRDF found itself discovering more and more the dangers of ethnic nationalism. TPLF members who in the 1990's would insist they were Tigrean first then Ethiopian today claim to be most 'Ethiopian' of all, much more Ethiopian than their 'anti-Ethiopian' opposition! As Ato Abebe pointed out in his interview, Prime Minister Meles, who would never miss an opportunity to belittle Ethiopian nationalism and who once called the Ethiopian flag but a rag, eventually ended up establishing a national holiday commemorating the flag! Thus, despite the decades long failings of the Ethiopian nationalist elite, the country has managed to remain alive. Ailing, but alive.

The final principle that Ato Abebe brought up and that I would like to emphasize is that healthy politics should always be related to reality on the ground, not ideology or fantasy. An example of this was, during the 2005 elections, Kinijit's position regarding the constitution, which was to accept it and if necessary change it only according to its provisions. This was an acknowledgement of changes in Ethiopia's political landscape with regard to ethnic nationalism, especially in Oromia. Kinijit did not adopt an ethnic nationalist position, but rather proposed to promote its Ethiopian nationalism agenda in another way, working within the constitution that many ethnic nationalists loved. This was very much a feasible proposition. Politics is the art of the possible, after all.

In conclusion, I do hope that we Ethiopian nationalists generally learn to become more nuanced in dealing with ethnic nationalism. We are a large constituency, the largest in Ethiopia, and we have a big responsibility to fix our failures over five decades. One of the ways of fixing our failures is to find the right way to interact with a major reality in today's Ethiopia, ethnic nationalism.

The Oromo Nation – A Fait Accompli?

2009/2/20 (Ethiopian calendar)

2016/10/20 (European calendar)

[Note: An Amharic version of this post will appear sometime!]

(pdf)

I've just read Dr Ezekiel Gebissa's reply to Dr Tedla Woldeyohannes' questions about the upcoming Oromo Leadership Convention in Atlanta. While answering the questions, Dr Ezekiel gives us some idea of his vision of the relationship between the Oromo nation and Ethiopia. In this article I'll take what I consider to be the best parts of his article – two major points – and expand on them.

The first is that Ethiopian history, in other words the story of Ethiopia, can be interpreted in various ways. It can be made to fit a story of a single nation albeit with different ethnic groups, or a nation of nations, or even prison of nations.

For what it's worth, I too agree that history and ethnic and national identity are to a large extent matters of interpretation. No one interpretation is the Gospel Truth. We can argue all we want about these, as we have done for decades, as laymen, as academicians, as politicians, in various contexts and within different paradigms; some of us might even change our minds; but at the end of the day, if we want live together in peace, we have to be able to agree to disagree.

Note that I say this as an ardent Ethiopian nationalist who considers the synthesis story of one multiethnic nation as the true story. Further, I consider the ethnic nationalist story not only untrue but that if it goes too far, it does not bode well for the nation as a whole. The mere fact that arguments for this story are often buttressed by claims of victimhood obviously makes for tensions, acrimony, and negative competition between ethnic groups. I would like to note that such claims are not at all necessary to build the ethnic nationalist story – it can be constructed quite well without them – but the fact that they are often used illustrates the risks that come with ethnic nationalism.

But I digress... There are valid differing opinions and they have to co-exist. In order to co-exist, I believe that we Ethiopian nationalists have not only to strive to understand these opinions, but beyond understanding we must try to empathize. Look, Oromo ethnic nationalism is not the first ethnic nationalism in the world! Plenty of other multiethnic nations are having to deal with ethnic nationalisms of different types. This alone should give one pause. We are not alone. As such I believe that humility requires that we Ethiopian nationalists step back re-assess our understanding and response to ethnic nationalism. Yes, we are right to stand and argue against it, but our position should not be as in the past, where we fought against the very right of ethnic nationalism to be politically expressed and advocated repressing it by force. That was then and is now not only an unwise but also, dare I say, an immoral course.

The second point of Dr Ezekiel's that I wish to discuss is the following: that all the arguments have been made and done, and today the Oromo nation, as part of an Ethiopian nation of nations, is a fait accompli. Ethnicity is enshrined in the Ethiopian constitution and a generation of Oromos have been taught, exclusively, ethnic nationalism. Again, this is true. Sad, for us Ethiopian nationalists, but true! We have to not only accept this new political reality, but we have to learn from how it came about so that we can avoid making the same mistakes as the past.

So, how did it come about? We Ethiopian nationalists played a huge role by mismanaging the country, by neglecting to make necessary accommodations, and perhaps worst of all, by committing political fratricide over the past half century. We managed to convert Eritrea from a region eager to join Ethiopia to a nation willing to sacrifice thousands to leave it. We made Ethiopia such an inhospitable and repressive country that some relatively few ethnic nationalist elites were able to leverage this into a vast expansion of ethnic nationalism. After the EPRDF gained power, rather than doing the obvious – conducting a self-examination to see how we could go so wrong as to leave the hands of the country in the hands of self-proclaimed ethnic nationalists – we concentrated on blaming the EPRDF for happening to fill a vacuum we created! And we bickered... Even after the EPRDF instituted today's radical ethnic nationalist constitution, we continued, in absentia, to argue amongst ourselves while the roots of ethnic nationalism spread!

Yet, despite the failures of the elite, Ethiopian nationalism still remained strong among the masses. You will recall that even just eleven years ago Kinijit demonstrated an unexpected amount of nation-wide support for at least some degree of de-ethnicization. However, our Ethiopian nationalist elites managed to make a right mess of that as well. Even today, there is no significant Ethiopian nationalist political movement – Ethiopian nationalism, as a story remains only in the hearts of the masses.

Now, we have to face Dr Ezekiel's fait accompli, not with denial, not by blaming others, and not with nostalgia, but by accepting reality and responding with a constructive agenda. Given the huge rise in Oromo ethnic nationalism and the confused state of the EPRDF, the nation of Ethiopia needs a strong Ethiopian nationalist movement to act as a counter-balance – to bring about a less risky equilibrium to the country's politics. The impediment to this is not the EPRDF nor Oromo ethnic nationalism, but the Ethiopian nationalist elite. It is time we pull ourselves up with our bootstraps before it is too late.