Yonas Biru and the Politics of Manufactured Outrage

 

Yonas Biru and the Politics of Manufactured Outrage

How an economist became the loudest microphone for Ethiopianist anti-federalism

By :Shumet Nigus Mengist

In Ethiopia’s toxic political arena, there is no shortage of loud voices. But few have reinvented themselves as dramatically—or as opportunistically—as Dr. Yonas Biru. Once known as a World Bank technocrat with modest influence, Biru has transformed into the diaspora’s most aggressive attack dog against Oromummaa, multinational federalism, and any political arrangement that threatens the old unitary Ethiopian idea.

Today, his commentaries circulate like scripture across Ethiopianist and Amhara-dominated social media spaces. Yet behind the performance lies a deeper political story—one that ties Biru to the ideological ambitions of the former ADP (now Amhara Prosperity Party) and the anti-federalist diaspora.

Let us be clear: this is not a personal story. This is a political ecosystem.

A Useful Technocrat at a Critical Moment

When Abiy Ahmed came to power in 2018, the ADP leadership—Demeke Mekonnen, Gedu Andargachew, and their diaspora echo chambers—were already campaigning against the 1995 Constitution. Their narrative was simple: the Amhara never endorsed the constitution; therefore, the federal system is illegitimate.

Their deeper goal was even clearer: dismantle multinational federalism and delegitimize Oromo political consciousness.

Enter Yonas Biru—a Western-based economist hungry for relevance and eager to speak the language of “national unity” in a way palatable to Washington and Brussels. He became, for lack of a better term, a useful intermediary. A polished voice to sanitize the raw nationalism of Amhara elites.

Even Biru’s own admissions confirm his proximity to power. He negotiated for two years to join an Independent Economic Advisory Council. He exchanged regular communications with policy heavyweights like Mamo Mihretu and Girma Biru. He received invitations from Billene Seyoum to write analyses for international media. He drafted diplomatic letters for Demeke Mekonnen and Gedu Andargachew.

These are not the footprints of an outsider. They are the fingerprints of an insider who operated quietly within the political architecture of the Prosperity Party.

The Turning Point: Ambition Denied

Then came the disappointment.

Biru did not secure the position he desperately wanted—the governorship of the National Bank of Ethiopia. The position went elsewhere, and Biru’s tone shifted sharply.

He now claims principled independence, insisting he resigned from the Economic Council because the government wanted to turn it into a political appendage. Maybe. But his transformation from a quiet technocrat to a full-time cultural warrior was too dramatic, too convenient, and too perfectly aligned with the agenda of anti-Oromo Ethiopianists.

When his political hopes faded, Biru redirected his critique—not at Abiy Ahmed, the man who denied him influence, but at the Oromo identity itself. This is not coincidence; it is political substitution.

When some cannot confront power directly, they attack the community associated with it.

The Anti-Oromo Crusade Disguised as Analysis

Since 2020, Biru has reinvented himself as the philosopher-king of Ethiopianist resentment. His commentary is predictable, repetitive, and serves one core purpose:

Delegitimize Oromummaa and weaken multinational federalism.

His claims:

Oromummaa is a “lie.”

Gadaa is “half democracy, half apartheid.”

Oromo identity politics are “the cancer of Ethiopia.”

Oromo intellectuals are extremists or frauds.

This is not analysis. It is propaganda with an academic accent.

Amhara elites and Ethiopianist activists use his work as intellectual cover to justify their broader assault on federalism and on Oromo political legitimacy. His writing functions exactly as it is intended: to injure the dignity of a people and to re-center the old imperial narrative as the only acceptable Ethiopian identity.

A Convenient Selective Memory

Biru wants the world to believe that his fierce opposition to the government began with the Tigray conflict. He says he supported the initial operation but opposed the “civil war” that followed.

But his writings tell a different story: his sharpest attacks have always targeted Oromo identity, not state policy. He critiques “Oromummaa” far more than he critiques war crimes, corruption, or authoritarianism.

Why?

Because his audience—Amhara elites and Ethiopianist diaspora networks—reward him for attacking Oromo identity, not for challenging centralized power.

The Legacy of Manufactured Outrage

In the end, Yonas Biru’s political relevance does not come from his economics degree, his brief advisory roles, or his abandoned Council seat. It comes from something much simpler:

He says out loud what Ethiopianist centralists want to hear, in English, with confidence.

He became their microphone.

Their translator.

Their intellectual veneer.

But loudness is not wisdom.

Insults are not analysis.

And no amount of academic vocabulary can hide the political truth:

For seven years, Yonas Biru has fueled an ideological crusade against Oromo identity—because attacking Oromummaa became the easiest substitute for confronting the failures of Ethiopia’s ruling elites.

History will not remember him as the economist who changed Ethiopia.

It will remember him as the man who mistook bitterness for principle and propaganda for scholarship.