Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune conducted the
following interview with political analyst Mr. Jawar Mohammed to bring
the Horn of African communities up to speed about the ongoing affairs in
the Oromo Nation, and to also catch up with Mr. Jawar Mohammed since
our last conversation four years ago in 2008. On this latest interview,
we will discuss with Mr. Jawar Mohammed about the recent resurgency of
Oromo Nationalism; about the effectiveness of the Oromo Nationalism in
current conditions; about the Ethiopian regime’s policy of keeping Afan
Oromo from becoming a federal working language; and about other current
affairs, including the upcoming 2015 General Election in Ethiopia. In
addition, we’ll ask Mr. Jawar Mohammed a question we raised in our 2008
interview – that is, is he ready to join a political organization/party?
Here’s the full interview.
Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune: Four years ago, when you sat down with Gadaa.com
for an interview on current affairs, you said, the “Oromo movement has
achieved its objectives, but not concluded its journey.” Over the last
four years, a number of political events have taken place, including the
resurgence of Oromo Nationalism. In your view, has that Oromo journey
gotten anywhere near conclusion since then?
Political Analyst Mr. Jawar Mohammed
Jawar Mohammed (JM): Not yet, but we are on a better
speed & trajectory than we were then. 4 years ago, we had that
interview on the wake of the worst crisis in the movement’s history –
the OLF split of 2008; the split severely fractured our people in
Diaspora and dampened morale in Oromia. It was a time when the movement
was facing physical and ideological defections, including from among the
senior leadership, to the adversary camp.
«… to be honest, I didn’t think the movement would revive itself and resurge this quickly.»
Despite the gloomy socio-political environment, I believed that we
would soon get out of the parochial shenanigan and get back on the path
towards completing the journey. However, to be honest, I didn’t think
the movement would revive itself and resurge this quickly. What we have
observed over the last two years is a dramatic shift, which not only put
a stop to defections, but also reversed it. We are now in a situation
where the spirit of resistance is fully restored; damages caused by
factionalism gradually, but surely, being repaired; and the movement is
galloping forward with an acceptable speed. If we maintain the current
momentum and continue to institutionalize various aspects of the
movement, I believe we will complete the journey sooner than we think.
Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune: Speaking of the Oromo journey, three major Oromo movements of the last half century, namely, the Afran Qalloo Movement for Oromo Culture, the Bale Struggle for Oromia’s Freedom, and the Macha-Tulama Movement for Oromo Economic and Political Rights,
have recently celebrated their golden jubilees. In many ways, these
movements had been successful in galvanizing the Oromo Nation for the
changes that have taken place in Oromia in particular, and in Ethiopia
in general, over the last half-century. What is your outlook for the
Oromo journey of the next half-century? Have what these Oromo movements
initiated finalized yet?
JM: The Golden Jubilee commemorations (of Afran
Qalloo, Bale, Macha-Tulama Association/MTA and Dr. Ali Birra), in
conjunction with the constructions of memorial monuments (of Aanolee,
Bakri Saphalo, Calanqoo), and the death and befitting memorial service
for Jaarraa Abbaa Gadaa, all played crucial roles in kick-starting the
ongoing resurgence. These commemorations facilitated for the Oromo
community to take its head off the then depressing and demoralizing
paralysis, and nostalgically, look back to the past. Events showcasing
the past also created a mutually acceptable space for those fighting
over the present conditions to come together. For the younger
generation, hearing the gallantry of our forebears during those dark
days has inspired us into action. The projects and campaigns (such as
Oromo First, OMN,
Afaan Publications),
which have been launched over the last year, have given purpose to the
public, that was already reawakened by the commemorations – leading it
to a full-swing action-oriented resurgence mode.
Photo:
Mr. Jawar Mohammed speaking at the “Oromo First” Community Engagement
launched on the wake of the June 2013 Al-Jazeera interview
«We must double and quadruple hard work in the direction of victory.»
The next half-century carries a huge risk or opportunity for the
nation, depending on the actions we take and the decisions we make
today. On the risk side, if the current rate of land and other resource
expropriations by the regime is allowed to continue, in a decade or two,
the Oromo nation will be rendered a collection of homeless, landless
and aimless individuals – either wandering in refugee camps or being
totally dependent on Abyssinian- and transnational-owned corporations.
On the opportunity side, if the Oromo movement maintains the current
momentum; hinders and obstructs the regime from expropriating resources;
and weakens and depletes the regime’s sources of power so as to speed
up its downfall, the nation would be looking at a bright future. In
order to emerge victorious over its adversaries, first and foremost, the
nation needs to tap into the skills and knowledge of the growing
educated class. It can do this by aligning their individual interests
with the fate of the nation and institutionalizing their collective
human resources. We also need to end the unnecessary ideologically
driven doctrinaire debate that has occupied and frustrated the creative
mind of our intelligentsia. Instead, we have to articulate and rally
behind a pragmatic inclusive narrative. As usual, I am optimistic, more
than I was four years ago, that the nation will overcome the internal
and external challenges it is facing and will emerge victorious. But
this will not happen in the vacuum, by wishing for miracle or begging
our adversaries. We must double and quadruple hard work in the direction
of victory.
Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune: On the resurgence of
Oromo Nationalism and its effectiveness against the new adversary, some
pose doubts. The Oromo national liberation movement has been successful
in decolonizing Oromia and the Oromo Nation from a century of
Shewa-Amhara elites’ hegemony. However, as the decolonization from the
Shewa-Amhara elites’ hegemony nears the finishing line through Oromo
Nationalism, Oromia and the Oromo Nation are falling prey to the Tigrean
imperial ambitions through TPLF’s control of Oromian resources using
new colonial institutions. And, some question whether or not Oromo
Nationalism is adequate in combating the new type of colonization Oromia
and the Oromo Nation face today under the Tigrean hegemony. Is Oromo
Nationalism capable of rallying the Nation against the Tigrean
imperialism in Oromia?
JM: For any oppressed group, collective emancipation
is achieved only when they tap into what holds them together — their
shared identity. The oppressed have no one, but each other. Nationalism
has proven to be the one ideology of collective action that doesn’t get
outdated, and has outlived all rival ideologies, such as class-based
ones. This doesn’t mean a given national movement should use the same
narratives and talking points throughout time. It must fine-tune itself
as the natures, interests and strategies of the adversaries change, and
as the domestic and external environments change. However, this
fine-tuning must be done very carefully. Extra care must be made to
ensure adjustments do not negate the core foundational narrative of that
nationalism, i.e., the quest for the homeland, self-rule and
indivisible nationhood.
When we come to Oromo nationalism, it’s true that we were not able to
quickly adjust when the nature of the adversary changed in 1991, and
this contributed to the organizational paralysis we had later faced. Two
major changes happened due to the regime change in 1991. First, after
1991, the Oromo movement has faced two adversaries, instead of just one.
Although the old rulers lost state power, they did not vanish or become
friends of the Oromo struggle; they remained an active ideological
adversary — in fact, more vocal than the new one. Second, while the old
regime and the new one shared the same objective of expropriating Oromo
resources, the new power holders came with a different strategy when
going about it — exploitation via an indirect rule, and toleration and
exploitation of identity, instead of assimilation and suppression. The
Oromo nationalism needed to frame this new enemy in a different way than
relying on the same talking points used against the old one. While the
struggle against both adversaries takes place within the same political
space, Oromo nationalism needed to develop a language that can help
define and confront these two adversaries simultaneously.
«… you must use the powerful resource at your disposal: Oromo nationalism.»
The response to this need for reframing came in two ways: some pushed
for watering down Oromo nationalism while the other side argued for
sticking to the old narrative in order to remain firm in our stand and
maintaining ideological purity. Both approaches were problematic. The
water-down approach threatened to deplete the only source of fuel the
movement has – nationalism, without finding an alternative rallying
ideology for the movement, or standing any chance of winning alliance.
They failed to realize that an alliance comes only if you are strong
enough to induce incentive, not because you are softer or have chosen an
appeasement over a confrontation. And, in order to remain strong, you
must use the powerful resource at your disposal: Oromo nationalism. On
the other hand, the hardline approach of refusing to refresh the
narrative with newer talking points prevented us from defining the new
enemy in light of the changes that took place.
Is a pragmatically framed Oromo nationalism adequate to advance Oromo
interests in the era of Tigrean domination? Yes, definitely. That’s why
TPLF is so concerned and hyperactive at the sight of a slight commotion
in Oromia, even when Oromo political organizations were in paralysis.
We must also ask what other organizing ideological instruments Oromos
have at their disposal. Some have suggested jumping on the ‘human
rights’ bandwagon. While human rights is an appealing concept, it
doesn’t adequately address the Oromo cause (national question) for two
reasons. First, a collective action requires defining and demarcating
the ins and outs of the collective as to reduce the free rider problem
and strengthen cohesion. Human Rights movement is a ‘universalist’
concept which, in its application so far, has not contributed to the
effective and sustained collective action of a particular nation. The
collective right to self-determination in the UN Human Rights System
could go only as far counteracting classic colonial domination of so
called ‘third world peoples’ by the West. The principle of sovereignty
of member states (and non-intervention thereof) made it difficult for
international human rights law to deal with issues of what is often
called internal colonization. Similarly, the right of minority and
indigenous nations to existence, recognition, equality,
non-discrimination, representation, participation, and autonomy fell
short of addressing the concerns of collective groups because of the
state systems in which international human rights law operates.
Second, Human Rights movement is a reformist and internal critique of
oppression. As such, it falls short of tackling the structural
violence, oppression and exploitation faced by groups like Oromo. Human
rights based activism succeeds once questions of equal citizenship and
power are resolved, and an agreement is reached on the rule of the
political game. Until the power question is resolved, the language of
human rights, as a powerful moral imperative for governance, may be used
as a tool of resistance, as a language of delegitimizing oppressive use
of power. To put this in another way, the Oromo is facing structurally
designed and enforced oppression; hence, the Oromo question is a
structural question, not an internal reformist critique of the existing
system. Solution comes through dismantling and/or fundamentally
restructuring the system, i.e., changing the power balance, not through
simple facelift. For such a change to happen, the power holder must be
dislodged through an ideology that provides both rational and
sentimental attractions for the collective to bond together in a
sustained manner. Nationalism gives you both. Therefore, Oromo have to
rely on nationalism to engage in the collective action toward the
collective emancipation. In doing so, we must rely on pragmatic and
flexible strategic approaches over dogmatic rigidity.
Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune: In related topic, some
commentators advise Oromos to abandon the quest for group rights, and
instead join others in advocating for the protection of ‘individual
rights.’ What do you say to them?
JM: The Oromo movement does not oppose the promotion
of individual rights. Rather, the movement believes that, when the
rights deprivation targets a people as a group, respect and protection
of individual rights and privilege are achieved through collective
political emancipation of the nation as a whole. There are two reasons
for that. First, individuals are rarely deprived of their rights on a
personal basis. More often than not, they suffer because they belong to a
certain group that is targeted by the power holder. This is mostly the
case with Oromo individuals. Be it economic discrimination or cultural
and linguistic suppression, individuals become victimized as ‘a
collateral damage’ when the power holder wages the war of repression on
the group. For instance, we may not see a regime directly preventing a
person from speaking a language, but rather systematically suppressing
the language itself. The second important point is, once such collective
rights are violated, they can only be restored through a collective
action. Politics in general, and resistance politics in particular, is a
group affair, not an individual’s solo dance. To influence political
decision-makings, we march, fight, protest, boycott, etc. as a group.
Only when individuals join hands in an organized manner in pursuit of a
collective agenda can they impact the behavior of decision-makers, and
challenge and change the decision-making process.
«… with the national liberation of Oromia comes the emancipation of the Oromo people …»
Here, it is important to stress the centrality of power – either for
suppression or protection of rights. Rights are almost always violated
by those who control state power or monopolize the means of violence.
Hence, in order to prevent violations of rights, the ability of those in
control of power must be curtailed. This can be done either by making
violations of rights extremely costly or by removing them from power. An
individual in and of him/herself cannot muster such ability to either
curtail behavior of power holder or displace them. Only when individuals
engaged in a group-based action will they muster sufficient force to
make this happen. Therefore, for people like the Oromo who are subjected
to economic, political and cultural repressions, both individual rights
of the Oromo person and interests of the nation as whole are best
achieved when the question is framed and the struggle is waged on a
collective basis. In other words, with the national liberation of Oromia
comes the emancipation of the Oromo people, and the individual’s
ability to defend his/her personal rights against the intrusion by the
state.
Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune: How about the argument
that national liberation doesn’t necessarily guarantee the respect for
individual rights. Example of this can be listed from the
post-independence African states, and most recently, Eritrea.
Mr. Jawar Mohammed
JM: That is true. Although national liberation
removes repression and discrimination by an alien rule, it doesn’t
necessarily guarantee freedom of its citizens. This happens because
critical mistakes are often done during the course of the struggle. Most
of these liberation struggles were led by vanguard Fronts that
shouldered all responsibilities, and consequently, controlled all
resources. Civic societies, if ever allowed to exist, were made to
become ‘leagues’ that were subordinate to and dependent on the party or
Front. This created a totalitarian political culture and public control,
even before liberation.
Therefore, present-day liberation movements must learn lesson from
mistakes of their predecessors. The ground for post-liberation
democratic governance must be paved in advance. This can be done by
creating independent civic society organizations, such as media,
professional associations, think-tanks and advocacy groups, as integral
parts of the liberation movement. It’s important to note that any
established or aspiring democratic community must have two layers within
it:
political society and
civic society. Political
parties, liberation fronts and armies, whom they control, occupy the
political space while professional organizations, community service
associations, religious establishments and youth groups fall within the
civic society.
«… establishing and strengthening civic society is a remedy against liberation leaders turning into post-independence tyrants.»
For a liberation movement to successfully throw away an alien rule
and replace it with a democratic self-rule, both of these layers of
society (political and civic) must be allowed to exist as vibrant and
independent institutions, and even promoted to grow stronger during the
journey of the struggle. This is important both for speeding up the
struggle and transitioning to a democratic order afterwards. The
existence of various, active and autonomous civic society organizations
means they can share the tasks and burdens of the resistance from the
political organization. This enables the political organization to focus
on the major policy and strategic affairs, without being bogged down to
dealing with the numerous operational issues. Even more important is
that the existence of vibrant civic society that has accumulated
experience of autonomous activism during the struggle – which will later
provide citizens with readily available institutions that can be
utilized to prevent dictatorial temptations by the leadership on the
aftermath of liberation. Thus, establishing and strengthening civic
society is a remedy against liberation leaders turning into
post-independence tyrants.
Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune: Now, turning to the
upcoming General Election in Ethiopia – it seems the 2015 General
Election has failed to generate momentum from any one corner, even the
incumbent seems to have no talking points for the General Election,
given that it is only a few months away from today. Is everyone content
by now that elections do not work in Ethiopia? Is there any use for the
sole independent Oromo political organization in Ethiopia, the Oromo
Federalist Congress (OFC), to participate in an election whose results
are already known loud and clear?
JM: Before commenting on the upcoming Ethiopian
election, it’s important to clarify the role of elections in the
struggle for national liberation and/or democratization. Do elections
play the same strategic role under authoritarian regimes and democratic
ones? Should Oromos participate in elections, and if they do, for what
strategic and tactical objectives? Answering these questions require
clarifying what kind of political game is being played in Ethiopia, and
what kind of politics Oromos ought to engage in.
In general, we can classify politics into two main categories:
contentious/resistance politics, and
conventional/established/competitive politics. The later,
established/competitive/conventional politics refers to the kind of
politics where major issues of contentions (the rule of the political
game, the structure of the state, the division of power, etc.) among
constituent groups of the state have been resolved, and politics has
become a business where parties compete over alternative socio-economic
policies. On the other hand, resistance/contentious politics refers to a
polity whereby, the constituent groups have not reached a consensus on
the rule of the game, and the distribution of power and resources is
skewed. To put it in another way, resistance politics exists where a
significant portion of the polity contests, or rejects, the legitimacy
and/or the structure of the state, do not accept, or did not participate
in the making of the rule of the political game, and believes power and
resources are illegitimately and unfairly distributed. Ethiopian
politics currently is the latter type of politics. Legacy and legitimacy
of the state are extremely contested. The structure of governance is
highly disputed. The rule of the game (electoral, judicial, legislation
powers, etc.) are skewed in favor of the dominant group. Essential state
institutions (military, intelligence and foreign affairs) are not
multi-national/federal, but partisan.
Now, an election can take place under both types of politics:
contentious or conventional. It’s also good to participate in them.
However, it is crucial to have a very clear idea of what elections mean
under each condition. In conventional politics, the legitimacy of the
state is not contested; the structure of governance is accepted and the
rule of the electoral game has already been agreed up on. The strategic
objective of participating in an election is to present alternative
policy choices and leaders to the public. No matter whom the winner, the
nature of the state, its structure and composition are unlikely to
change. National institutions remain intact. Only limited policies and
few leaders are changed. The cost to those who stand to lose power is
not existential, but minimal. Ascendance to, or removal from power, is
not permanent, but temporary. There will be another election, and
another chance to regain it. Basically, changes are not revolutionary,
but incremental.
Photo: Voters cast during an election in Ethiopia.
-
“…
a resistance movement should participate in an election to use the
limited opening that is made available to advance certain limited goals
…”
- Mr. Jawar Mohammed
In contrast, in resistance politics, an election has a different
tactical role both for the dictatorship and the freedom fighters. For
the dictatorship, it is a means of buying fake legitimacy for itself,
and it’s a way of delegitimizing the claims of its critics about
repression. Hence, there cannot be an illusion of achieving your
objective, be it regime change or adjustment of structure of government.
Since rules of the game are highly contested and skewed, and
institutions conducting the election and enforcing the outcome are
clearly partisan; the results of the election are already known even
before campaign begins. Hence, for a resistance movement, an election is
just one instrument in a toolbox full of various instruments meant to
erode, weaken and dismantle the oppressive machinery of the ruling
group. That is, an election, just like other campaigns, is a tactical
tool meant to achieve limited gains. More specifically, a resistance
movement should participate in an election to use the limited opening
that is made available to advance certain limited goals, such as
recruiting membership, mobilizing public through rallies, and further
exposing and delegitimizing the system during public debates. In
themselves, these gains are too small and too contained to bring about a
systemic change, but when combined and coordinated with other means of
struggle, they can help advance the cause.
Therefore, the Oromo movement should participate in the upcoming and
other Ethiopian elections, but not with an illusion that we can achieve
our goal through elections. Moreover, when we participate, we must be
strategic, undertake advanced preparations, and utilize the opportunity
to the fullest. This requires preparing for at least two years in
advance, if not the whole five years prior to the election. This
preparation should entail identifying and training organizers,
recruiting reliable candidates, and devising a communication and public
relation strategy. Due to the absence of such preparations, in the past
elections, Oromo oppositions have not been able to field candidates for
more than two-third of the federal parliament and
Caffee seats.
With sufficient preparations, even if it’s not possible to ‘win,’ we
can make it way harder to cheat, and expose it when it happens. If we
participate, it has to be with a clear goal in mind, and with the full
commitment to fight for every seat and vote, even if we know it will be
stolen. “Play to the fullest or boycott completely!” is my advice.
Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune: What do we expect from
upcoming election? What do you see out of it if you have to compare it
in advance with the last two election?
«… the regime appears to be as scared as ever, if not more …»
JM: We cannot expect anything new from this
election. The difference between the past and this election is that the
public’s and the opposition’s enthusiasms are at the lowest point. The
2005 crackdown and the 99.6% victory in 2010 seem to have sapped any
interest in the process. Ironically, the regime appears to be as scared
as ever, if not more, which is demonstrated in the mass incarcerations
of students and bloggers, and closing down of the remaining newspapers.
The regime is taking such actions because, although the opposition
appears to be passive and the public disinterested in the election,
things could turn upside down quickly due to the extremely high
dissatisfaction and anger caused by economic inequality and political
repression.
Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune: Some activists are
urging Oromo opposition parties to put forward the agenda of making Afan
Oromo a federal working language as one of their election campaigns.
What’s your take on it?
Photo:
Childern work using books developed by ‘Afaan Publications,’ launched
last year to revoutionalize the way Afan Oromo is taught to children.
-
“It’s inevitable.” – Mr. Jawar Mohammed speaking on Afan Oromo becoming the federal working language in Ethiopia
JM: I think it should be placed on the top agenda
next to the ownership rights of the Oromo people over Finfinne. Making
Afan Oromo the federal working language is beneficial, not just to
Oromo, but even more to others. For Oromos, it will help enhance the
status of the language, and also help mitigate the cultural alienation
observed in federal institutions. For others, since Oromia is an engine
for over two-third of the country’s economy, learning Afan Oromo means
better access for the largest market for employments and other
opportunities. As the most widely spoken language across various states
of East Africa, Afan Oromo can contribute toward the socio-economic
integration of the region. Moreover, within the domestic media, Afan
Oromo can create a sense of productive and sustainable cultural
competitions triggering knowledge production and dissemination.
Therefore, I believe an agenda of making Afan Oromo the federal working
language will get multiparty support as no one stands to lose, but to
gain. In fact, even those parties who oppose or refuse to recognize the
existing federal structure have expressed support for making Afan Oromo a
federal working language. So it is a matter of now or a bit later, but
it will definitely get its place. It’s inevitable.
Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune: As we conclude our
conversation, we raise a question we posed to you last time. Four years
ago, during our interview with you, you were reluctant in forming a
political organization or joining an existing one. Have you made up your
mind about party politics yet?
«… my plan for now is to continue working with the civic society through my academic endeavors and advocacy.»
JM: No. As I said at that time, I will join a
political or any other organization if, and when, I am convinced that I
can add a significant value to it, and if it offers me an opportunity
and the means to do things I cannot do without joining. I joined OSA
[Oromo Studies Association] eight years ago and am currently leading it
because I have something practical to offer and do so directly.
Regarding establishing or joining a political organization, as we stand
now, I don’t see the need to so. Whatever I can offer, I can do it
without becoming a member. Joining them while I am abroad, or they are
in exile, doesn’t increase my contributions. Moreover, I am morally and
strategically opposed to establishing or joining a political
organization outside the battlefield of the struggle — Oromia. Morally,
it’s indefensible to sit far away from the battle and give orders to
others. Leaders and operatives must internalize the risk that comes with
their decisions and orders. I must be there to share the costs and
consequences of my decision. Strategically speaking, it’s just
operationally impractical to manage and lead political operations from
afar. Operations are time and place sensitive. You can play an advisory
role from afar, but not operational leadership. Therefore, my plan for
now is to continue working with the civic society through my academic
endeavors and advocacy. I would like to work towards developing the
capacity of our community organizations in Diaspora. I also plan to
engage in establishing strong think-tank that can convert knowledge
produced by our intellectuals into a utilizable packaged resource.
———————-
Gadaa.com / Finfinne Tribune thanks Mr. Jawar Mohammed for taking time to conduct this interview. Mr. Jawar Mohammed uses Facebook at Facebook.com/Jawarmd to provide commentaries on current affairs.
December
2, 2014 (Financial Times) — Every country tapping the global sovereign
bond market details the dangers investors face in its prospectus, often
in a boilerplate section enumerating possible problems – such as fiscal
deficits or taxation issues – that is largely ignored.
