June 6, 2025
In a speech marking the 34th anniversary of Eritrea’s independence, President Isaias Afwerki accused “external forces” of declaring war against Ethiopia, whose many “reckless agendas,” he went on to list, include “the ideology of Oromummaa,” which he claimed “does not represent the Oromo people.” This remark, which dangerously frames the Oromo people as a threat in the Horn of Africa and mischaracterizes their identity as a foreign ideology, colonial occupation, denial of agency and ongoing marginalization.
What Is Oromummaa?
Self-determination states that only a people can define its identity. Thus, the shaping of the identity of the Oromo people lies with the Oromo alone, which is born of their lived realities, cultures, traditions, and histories. Oromummaa is the common national identity of the Oromo people rooted in their language (Afaan Oromoo), cultural heritage, and history. It is neither the creation of the Oromo elites nor a foreign ideology. Oromummaa promotes peace (nagaa), justice (seeraa), and egalitarian governance, which has been practiced under the Gadaa system—a testament to an ancient democratic indigenous tradition.
The Colonial Construction of Ethiopia
Contrary to the legendary narrative about Ethiopia as an ancient, unified nation-state, history testifies that modern Ethiopia was forcefully cobbled together through imperial conquest. Emperor Menelik II subjugated southern nations through military and economic support from European powers such as Britain, France, Russia, and Italy in the late 19th century. The reversal of fortunes due to modern weaponry from European powers resulted in the violent colonization and occupation of Oromia.
The Oromo and other southerners were not assimilated peacefully but annexed, massacred, enslaved, driven off their lands, and their cultures obliterated. The Gadaa system was replaced by a feudal, hierarchical form of governance. Oromo culture was suppressed, and Afaan Oromoo excluded from education, government, and public life. This was not a process of nation-building—it was colonization. Their identity was demonized, their social institutions targeted, and their lands and resources exploited for the benefit of northern elites. Marginalization was built into the fabric of the Ethiopian state and continues today under the cover of modern politics.
Eritrea’s Role
President Isaias must not overlook his own country’s role in reinforcing Ethiopia’s exclusionary imperial order. During their struggle for liberation against the Derg regime, Eritrean nationalist movements (including EPLF) cooperated with Tigrayan and Amhara elites in pursuit of their respective nationalist agendas, actively undermining Southern nations’ quest for justice and self-determination.
After Eritrea’s independence in 1993, the Asmara administration on and off supported Ethiopian governments (including the TPLF-led EPRDF and Abiy’s administration) in their bid to deny and marginalize southern nations such as the Oromo. Accounts of Eritrean leaders’ control over exiled liberation fronts that were given shelter after the 1998 Ethio-Eritrea war illustrate a pattern of dominance rather than solidarity. Eritrean elites have perennially benefited from the continued marginalization of the Oromo because the maintenance of centralized power structures in Ethiopia has enabled Eritrea to entrench and exert regional power. Isaias’s propaganda targeting the Oromo people needs to be seen within this context.
The rise of the Oromo threatens the imperial Ethiopian state structure, which has a history of marginalizing the Oromo while privileging northern elites. Eritrea’s own strength and influence in the Horn of Africa is reliant on the status quo of a centralized Ethiopia that it can manipulate through elite alliances. An empowered Oromo political authority has the potential to shift regional power balances and otherwise undermine Eritrea’s position.
Isaias’s resistance is not out of regard for Ethiopian people’s well-being but due to the fear that Oromia’s sovereignty would dismantle the traditional imperial system that has benefited northern elites, including Eritreans.
A Vision for a Horn of Africa
A peaceful Horn of Africa can only be built on the basis of mutual respect, democratic governance, and decolonized international relations. Nations annexed by force must be granted the right to self-determination —whether it leads to sovereign independence or a genuine federal system.
Coexistence should not be opposed but must be voluntary and based on equality. In this vision, the Horn of Africa can become a region of cooperation, not coercion. Unity should arise from shared values, not military alliances or imposed political arrangements.
President Isaias must remember Eritrea’s own struggle for self-determination. The same yearning for freedom that drove the Eritrean people resonates in the Oromo struggle. To dismiss this shared aspiration is not only shortsighted but a betrayal of the ideals Eritrean freedom fighters once championed—and for which so many sacrificed their lives.
The path to lasting peace begins not with denial but with decolonization. The Oromo pursuit of liberty should not be feared but embraced—for it is a step toward a more just and inclusive Horn of Africa.