It Is Not Just Who We Are, It Is How We Rise: Oromummaa!

It Is Not Just Who We Are, It Is How We Rise: Oromummaa!

In a world where identity is often used to define boundaries and draw lines of difference, the Oromo people have turned identity into a philosophy of unity, resistance, and progress. Oromummaa is not merely an ethnic label; it is a living force — an ethos that connects history to hope, culture to consciousness, and struggle to strength. It is not just who we are. It is how we rise.

Oromummaa: More Than Identity

Oromummaa is often translated as "Oromo-ness," but the concept reaches far deeper. It is a worldview, a moral compass, and a cultural foundation. Rooted in the principles of Safuu (moral integrity), nagaa (peace), and wal-qixxummaa (equality), Oromummaa defines the values that shape how Oromo people relate to one another and to the broader world.

This identity is not confined to language or lineage — it expresses belonging, duty, and pride in a heritage built on Gadaa. This democratic governance system predates modern political theory. It is a commitment to justice, community, and the survival of people who have too often been marginalised.

A Rising Identity

To rise through Oromummaa is to transform identity into agency. Across Oromia and the diaspora, generations of Oromo youth are reclaiming their roots not as a nostalgic gesture but as a forward-looking mission. They are artists, scholars, farmers, activists, and professionals who carry the torch of Oromummaa into every field — not just to be seen but to shape the future.

Rising with Oromummaa means rising with dignity and purpose, not in opposition to others, but in affirmation of the Oromo people's right to exist freely, speak their language proudly, and live according to their values.

Resistance and Renewal

The Oromo's history is marked by resilience. Colonial suppression, linguistic erasure, and political exclusion have all tried to silence Oromummaa, but each attempt to bury it has only deepened its roots.

Resistance is not merely protest; it is cultural preservation. It is teaching Afaan Oromo to your children in exile. It is singing traditional songs in the face of censorship. It is writing Oromo stories when publishers hesitate. Every act of survival is an act of revolution.

And from resistance comes renewal. Today, Oromo voices are rising in literature, academia, and politics, reshaping not only how the world sees the Oromo but also how the Oromo see themselves.

The Call of Our Time

This generation has a duty — to carry Oromummaa as an identity and a mission. It calls us to build, not just remember; to act, not just speak; to unite, not just name ourselves.

We must ask: what does Oromummaa demand of us today? It demands vision, unity, discipline, and the courage to lift others as we climb. It demands that we rise for ourselves and those whose voices have been silenced and whose dreams have been deferred.

Conclusion: The Oromo Future

Oromummaa is our inheritance, but more importantly, it is our launching point. It reminds us that we are more than our wounds — we are our will. And in a world that often pressures us to forget who we are, Oromummaa reminds us not just to remember — but to rise.

Because it is not just who we are. It is how we rise. Oromummaa!

 

Manufacturing Division: Isaias Afwerki’s Weaponization of Ethiopian Identities.

Manufacturing Division: Isaias Afwerki’s Weaponization of Ethiopian Identities

In a recent speech, Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki made reference to the “Oromummaa ideology,” a term central to contemporary Oromo political and cultural identity. While the term itself has been the subject of vibrant debate within Ethiopia, Afwerki’s invocation was anything but innocent. It continued its longstanding strategy: manipulating Ethiopia's complex ethno-political landscape to stoke division, weaken national unity, and maintain regional influence through disorder.

Isaias is not a passive observer of Ethiopia’s internal politics. His regime has consistently inserted itself into Ethiopian affairs—not for peace or regional solidarity, but to exploit fault lines and undermine collective sovereignty. His tactic is as old as authoritarian politics itself: divide and rule.

The Manipulation of “Oromummaa”

“Oromummaa” refers to a sense of Oromo identity, cultural revival, and political self-determination. It has multiple meanings and interpretations among Oromo scholars, activists, and citizens. Some have used it to push for equality and recognition in a historically centralised Ethiopian state. Others have co-opted it into exclusivist political rhetoric.

Referencing “Oromummaa ideology,” Afwerki is not contributing to intellectual dialogue; he is framing it as a threat to national unity or his preferred allies. This is a deliberate distortion. His goal is not to understand Oromummaa but to weaponise it: turning Oromo nationalism against Amhara interests and Oromweaponisealliances against Tigrayan identity—depending on what division serves him best at a given time.

Pitting Identities Against Each Other

Isaias’s broader strategy is built on triangulation. He encourages Oromo and Tigrayan nationalists to oppose a perceived “Amhara ideology”—a phrase that lacks clarity but is often used by critics to refer to centralist or imperial legacies. At the same time, he stokes fear of Tigrayan nationalism among Oromo and Amhara nationalists alike. This is not a strategy of peace or principled diplomacy but a cynical manipulation to keep Ethiopia fragmented and distracted.

This pattern was evident during the Tigray War when Eritrean forces actively participated in Ethiopia’s internal conflict. Rather than promoting stability, Afwerki used the chaos to settle scores with the TPLF and deepen Ethiopia’s internal fracture.

Undermining Regional Sovereignty

Isaias's interventions must be understood in the context of regional authoritarianism. Eritrea has become one of the world’s most repressive states, with no free press, no elections, and indefinite military conscription. Unable to project soft power or inspire regional leadership, Afwerki turns to brutal tactics—covert influence, militarised alliances, and rhetorical manipulation.

By exploiting Ethiopia’s ethnic politics, Isaias undermines the sovereignty of the Ethiopian people to solve their own problems through dialogue, reform, or democratic processes. His involvement does not lead to reconciliation but to more profound suspicion between groups—especially among youth who increasingly experience identity through exclusion rather than solidarity.

The Danger of Ethnic Triangulation

Ethnic identity in Ethiopia is complex, historical, and real—but it is also vulnerable to political abuse. When external actors like Isaias exploit these identities, they amplify distrust and polarise communities. Terms like "Amhara ideology," "Oromummaa," or "Tegaru nationalism" become caricatured and weaponised, stripped of their original meanings and reloaded with political toxicity.

This form of ethnic triangulation destabilises Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa. It disrupts efforts for peace, democratic reform, and economic integration. It also obscures the real issues—inequality, poverty, authoritarianism, and a lack of national reconciliation.

A Call for Ethical Leadership and Pan-Ethiopian Solidarity

Ethiopia must not allow its future to be shaped by those who thrive on division. The antidote to Isaias Afwerki’s strategy is not reactive ethnonationalism but principled unity rooted in justice, pluralism, and mutual respect. Oromummaa, Amhara identity, Tegaru pride—all must coexist within a framework that recognises difference as a strength, not a weakness.

Religious leaders, scholars, artists, youth movements, and political parties must resist the temptation to echo divisive rhetoric and promote dialogue transcending tribal lines. Ethiopia’s dignity will not be restored by foreign strongmen or internal scapegoating—it will be restored by Ethiopians together.

Either With Me or Against Me": The Erosion of Political Dialogue in Ethiopian Culture

---

  

"Either With Me or Against Me": The Erosion of Political Dialogue in Ethiopian Culture

The phrase “either with me or against me” epitomises a polarising mindset where neutral ground, compromise, or dissent is interpreted as betrayal. In many political settings, such an outlook breeds division stifles dialogue and weakens democratic culture. In the context of Ethiopian political culture, this binary thinking—rooted partially in historical, cultural, and social factors—has deeply influenced the behaviour of political elites and discouraged the development of constructive political dialogue.

Historical and Cultural Roots of Polarization

Ethiopian history is characterised by a long-standing tradition of centralised power and imperial rule. From the Solomonic dynasty to the Derg regime and beyond, loyalty to the ruler or the regime was often demanded in absolute terms. Opposition was not tolerated but punished. Over time, this cultivated a political culture where questioning authority or holding differing views could be interpreted as rebellion. This legacy still lingers in the political attitudes of elites who regard compromise or ideological diversity as weakness or disloyalty.

Moreover, Ethiopian cultures emphasise communal loyalty, collective identity, and respect for elders and authority figures. While these values have social benefits, they can also suppress individual expression and dissent. In the political realm, these values may lead to environments where political loyalty is expected without question and criticism—however constructive—is unwelcome.

The Suppression of Political Dialogue

In Ethiopia’s multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, and religiously diverse society, political dialogue should ideally bridge differences. However, when elites adopt an “either with me or against me” posture, they undermine this potential. Political parties become echo chambers, suppressing internal debate and sidelining moderate voices. Negotiations across party lines become difficult or impossible because compromise is viewed as a betrayal.

This mentality has played a significant role in Ethiopia’s recurrent political instability. Whether in federal-regional conflicts, ethnic tensions, or disputes among political parties, the unwillingness to engage in honest dialogue has led to stalemates, violence, and mutual destruction. Political elites often treat each other not as rivals in a democratic contest but as existential threats. As a result, elections become zero-sum games, and political transitions are marked by mistrust, vengeance, and exclusion rather than reconciliation and cooperation.

Discouraging Dissent and Critical Thinking

Another consequence of this binary thinking is the erosion of political innovation. When dissent is not tolerated, new ideas struggle to emerge. Young leaders, intellectuals, and civil society voices are silenced or co-opted, hindering political dialogue and national progress.

In Ethiopia, political parties often discourage internal criticism, fearing it may weaken their image or unity. Yet, a healthy democratic culture depends on the ability to self-reflect, correct course, and adapt to new realities. A political environment that cannot tolerate critique or compromise is bound to stagnate or implode.

Toward a Culture of Dialogue

To move beyond this impasse, Ethiopian political culture must evolve. Several steps are necessary:

1. Civic Education: Citizens must be taught the value of pluralism, dialogue, and tolerance. A robust democratic culture begins with an informed populace.

2. Institutional Reforms: Political parties, parliament, and other institutions must be structured to encourage dialogue and inclusivity rather than adversarial domination.

3. Leadership Accountability: Political leaders must be accountable for inflammatory rhetoric promoting division. They must be encouraged—and if necessary, pressured—to adopt inclusive and dialogic approaches.

4. Cultural Reinterpretation: Traditional values such as respect, consensus (Araaraa), and community harmony (Nagaa) can be reinterpreted to support political dialogue rather than suppress it.

Conclusion

The “either with me or against me” mentality may offer short-term political gain but ultimately erodes trust, dialogue, and national unity. For Ethiopia to achieve lasting peace and democratic governance, its political elites must transcend this binary mindset. They must learn to engage with opponents as enemies and partners in a shared national project. Only then can Ethiopia fulfil its promise as a diverse yet united nation.

---

 

The Implications of U.S. Ambassador Ervin Massinga’s Statement on Ethiopian Politics

The Implications of U.S. Ambassador Ervin Massinga’s Statement on Ethiopian Politics

The statement by U.S. Ambassador Ervin Massinga, issued during a critical period of internal strife in Ethiopia, carries significant domestic and international political weight. By calling for a peaceful resolution, negotiation, and the cessation of military operations—including drone strikes—against civilians, the United States has positioned itself as both a critic of ongoing government actions and a potential mediator in Ethiopia’s political crisis. This statement reflects a shift toward prioritising human rights, peace-building, and inclusive political dialogue in Ethiopia’s complex and fragile landscape.

1. Legitimizing Armed Political Groups as Negotiation Partners

One of the statement's most striking implications is the recognition of the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA) as a legitimate actor in the peace process. Historically labelled as a terrorist organisation by the Ethiopian government, the OLA’s inclusion in the ambassador’s call for negotiations challenges the government's narrative and pressures it to engage diplomatically rather than militarily. This may embolden the OLA and its supporters while opening space for a broader political solution in Oromia.

2. Pressure on the Ethiopian Federal Government

Ambassador Massinga’s direct criticism of the federal government’s use of drone strikes signals growing international concern over human rights violations. It reflects a broader shift in U.S. foreign policy prioritising civilian protection and conflict de-escalation. The U.S. urges the Ethiopian government to alter its counterinsurgency strategy and pursue a political solution by calling for an end to such military tactics. This could place the federal administration under pressure from both internal opposition and international donors and allies.

3. A Call for Inclusivity and Civilian-Centered Governance

The ambassador’s statement emphasises the need to “put people first,” referring to the internally displaced, children, and access to essential services. This focus on humanitarian concerns implicitly critiques the government’s priorities and calls for a reorientation of governance toward inclusivity, public service delivery, and civil rights. Such a message may strengthen civil society voices advocating for democratic reform and accountability in Ethiopia.

4. Implications for Regional Stability and Foreign Relations

The mention of Fano, an Amhara militia group, underscores the ethnic complexity of Ethiopia’s conflicts. By calling on Fano to adopt peaceful objectives, the U.S. acknowledges the multi-front nature of the crisis while pushing all parties toward dialogue. This could help de-escalate ethnic tensions and signal to regional governments that the U.S. supports a unified but federal Ethiopia responsive to its diverse populations.

Moreover, this diplomatic posture may recalibrate Ethiopia-U.S. relations. The Ethiopian government may view the statement as interference or support for insurgent groups, potentially straining ties. However, it also presents an opportunity for Ethiopia to regain international trust by committing to inclusive peace talks and reforms.

5. Encouraging a New Political Culture

Finally, the ambassador’s message calls for a political culture rooted in negotiation, realism, and peace. It promotes the idea that sustainable governance in Ethiopia must move away from zero-sum politics and militarised conflict toward pluralism and accountability. This could strengthen institutions like the National Dialogue Commission and inclusive transitional justice mechanisms if embraced.

Conclusion

Ambassador Massinga’s statement is a diplomatic gesture and a powerful signal that Ethiopia’s internal conflicts require urgent and inclusive political solutions. By advocating for peace, dialogue, and protection of civilians, the U.S. lays the groundwork for potential mediation efforts and a broader realignment of Ethiopian politics. Its implications are profound: they challenge the current militarised approaches, recognise the legitimacy of marginalised voices, and call for a politics centred on the well-being of all Ethiopians.

U.S. Embassy Addis Ababa

Diplomatic and Economic Analysis: South Africa vs. Ethiopia in France (May 2025)

Diplomatic and Economic Analysis: South Africa vs. Ethiopia in France (May 2025)

Context Overview

On Wednesday, 22 May 2025, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and South African Deputy President Paul Mashatile were in France for separate diplomatic engagements with President Emmanuel Macron. These meetings reflect both nations’ efforts to deepen economic and diplomatic cooperation with one of Europe’s most influential powers.

Economic Advantage: South Africa vs. Ethiopia

1. South Africa’s Diplomatic and Economic Position

Strong Business Ties: Over 400 French companies currently operate in South Africa, employing over 65,000 South Africans. This signals a deep and structured economic relationship built over time.

Institutionalised Economic Forums: The SA–France Investment Conference has succeeded and is now set to become a biennial institutional mechanism—showcasing South Africa as a reliable, long-term partner.

Macron’s Upcoming Visit: President Macron's planned visit to South Africa for the G20 Summit underscores the country’s importance in global diplomacy and Africa’s economic agenda.

Mature Diplomatic Channel: The conversation involved high-level multilateral cooperation, showing that France and South Africa view each other as partners in bilateral terms and broader international frameworks.

2. Ethiopia’s Diplomatic and Economic Engagement

Warm Political Ties: Prime Minister Abiy emphasised the continuity and positivity of discussions with Macron, reflecting a growing diplomatic warmth.

Focus on Trade Enhancement: Abiy clearly stated that enhancing commercial ties is a central priority, which shows intent to deepen economic relations. However, it suggests that the existing economic linkage may not yet match South Africa’s depth.

Follow-Up from Addis Ababa Talks: The visit continues discussions held in December 2024, indicating consistent engagement. However, no clear institutional outcome or investment figure has been shared from this engagement.

Strategic Aspirations: Ethiopia is clearly positioning itself for expanded investment and commercial engagement, but this remains aspirational compared to South Africa’s already active portfolio of French investment.

Comparative Summary

Aspect South Africa, Ethiopia

French companies on the ground 400+ companies Not specified

Jobs linked to French investment 65,000+ Not specified

Institutional mechanisms SA–France Investment Conference Not established yet

Economic relationship status Established and mature Growing and aspirational

Diplomatic depth Bilateral and multilateral (G20, etc.) Strong but more bilateral for now

Macron's travel plans Visiting South Africa No reciprocal visit announced

Conclusion

South Africa has a greater diplomatic and economic advantage in its relationship with France than Ethiopia. The presence of hundreds of French companies, high employment impact, institutional investment frameworks, and Macron’s upcoming visit all point to a deeper and more structured relationship.

However, Ethiopia is making strong diplomatic strides, and Prime Minister Abiy’s emphasis on trade and continuity in discussions indicates a strategic move to elevate Ethiopia’s economic profile with France. If Ethiopia manages to institutionalise economic dialogues and attract concrete investments, it could close the gap shortly.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1HmqQYLwwR/

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1Y7BnTGuYe/

 @highlight

Hawaasa Safuun Kufe Rippabiliika Distoopiyaa Keessatti: Calaqqee Itoophiyaa Yeroo Ammaa

Hawaasa Safuun Kufe Rippabiliika Distoopiyaa Keessatti: Calaqqee Itoophiyaa Yeroo Ammaa

  Waggoota dhiyoo asitti Itiyoophiyaan huccuun naamusaa ishee gadi fageenyaan akka manca’u kan argite yoo ta’u, namoonni hedduun hawaasa akka kiisa naamusaa bu’uura rippabiliika diistoopiyaa keessa jiruutti akka ibsan taasiseera.   Seenaan badhaadhaa saba kanaa, aadaan adda addaa, fi duudhaan falaasama boolla ogummaa fi qajeelfama naamusaa gadi fagoo kan dhiyeessan yoo ta’u, mootummaan Itoophiyaa ammayyaa gatiiwwan sana irraa haalaan kan adda ba’e fakkaata.   Barreeffamni kun agarsiistota manca’iinsa naamusaa, amala dhugaa hawaas-siyaasaa diistoopiyaa Itiyoophiyaa, fi dhiibbaa egeree ishee irratti qabu qorata.

  Kufaatii Dhaabbilee Safuu

  Hawaasa kamiyyuu wiirtuun koompaasii naamusaa isaa kan maatii, amantii, aadaa fi barnootaan bocame jira.   Itoophiyaa keessatti dhaabbileen kunneen sirnaan laaffifamaniiru.   Maatiin yeroo tokko bu’uura guddina naamusaa fi walitti hidhamiinsa hawaasaa kan turan yoo ta’u, yeroo baay’ee hiyyummaa, waraana, buqqa’iinsaafi rakkina dinagdeetiin gargar caccabaniiru.   Dhaabbileen amantii, seenaa keessatti gara laafinaafi haqaa guddisuu keessatti dhiibbaa guddaa qaban, siyaasa ta’uun amantaa ummata bal’aa dhabuun isaanii dabalaa dhufeera.   Gama biraatiin sirni barnootaa yaada qeeqaa fi itti gaafatamummaa lammummaa guddisuu mannaa yeroo baay’ee akka meeshaa olola mootummaatti tajaajila ykn dargaggoota qajeelfama naamusaa hiika qabuun hidhachiisuu dadhaba.

  Bu’aan isaas dhaloota guddachaa jiruu fi seera bu’uuraa gara laafina, amanamummaa fi itti gaafatamummaa irraa adda ba’eedha.   Amanamummaa dhabuun, firummaa fi jeequmsi jireenya hawaasaa keessatti waanuma jiru ta’eera.   Hoggantoonni tajaajila mootummaa irratti faayidaa dhuunfaa kan hordofan yoo ta’u, malaammaltummaan damee hunda jechuun ni danda’ama, damee haqaa irraa kaasee hanga eegumsa fayyaatti seeneera.   Seerri naamusaa yeroo tokko hariiroo namoota gidduu jiruu fi gocha mootummaa bulchu, ethos daldalaa, lubbuun jiraachuuf bakka kenneera.

  Itoophiyaan akka Rippabiliika Diistoopiyaatti

  Yaad-rimeen rippabiliika distoopiyaa sirna siyaasaa bifa alaa rippabiliikaa kan akka heera mootummaa, filannoo fi dhaabbilee seeraa qabate, garuu dhugaa jiru keessatti akka mootummaa abbaa irree ykn kufeetti hojjetu agarsiisa.   Itiyoophiyaan har’a qaamolee diistoopiyaa hedduu calaqqisiisti:

  Abbaa irree dimokiraasii fakkeessee: Filannoon osoo gaggeeffamu yeroo baay’ee bilisaas ta’e haqa qabeessa miti.   Sagaleen mormitootaa jeequmsa, saaxiluu ykn waliin filannoodhaan callifama.

  Hordoffii fi to’annoo: Lammiileen hordoffiin cimaan kan hordofamu, mormiin akka yakkaatti kan ilaalamu yoo ta’u, sodaan haasaa ummataa keessatti kan babal’atudha.   Sabummaa, saaxila dijitaalaa, fi poolisiin waraanaa ta’e hojjechuun waanuma barame ta’eera.

  Walqixxummaa dhabuu fi namummaa dhabuu: Tajaajilli hawaasummaa walqixa kan hin raabsamne yoo ta’u, hawaasni guutuun saba, naannoo ykn siyaasaa irratti hundaa’uun marginalized ta’a.   Yeroo baay’ee jireenyi dhala namaa aangoo ykn bu’aa dinagdee hordofuuf akka ba’utti ilaalama.

  Jeequmsaa fi walitti bu’iinsa: Itoophiyaan tiyaatira waraana keessoo irra deddeebi’ee mul’atu, qulqulleessuu sabaa fi duula duguuggaa sanyii taatee jirti.   Gidiraan namoota siiviilii bal’inaan kan mul’atu yoo ta’u, haqni ammallee hin argamne.

  Amaloonni kun suuraa gaddisiisaa rippabiliika maqaa qofaan, dhaabbileen qola ta’anii, lammiileen nageenyaafi kabajaan osoo hin taane sodaa fi mirkanaa’uu dhabuun jiraatan dhiyeessu.

  Rakkoo Naamusaa fi Bu'aa Isaa

  Qaawwi naamusaa hawaasa Itoophiyaa keessatti mul’atu bu’aa qabatamaa qaba.   Aadaa adabbii malee hammeenyi osoo hin adabamin hafe, aangoo seera qabeessummaa osoo hin taane humnaan kan eegamu dhalcha.   Amantaa hawaasaa ni diiga, araaraa fi tumsi akka ulfaatu taasisa.   Marsaan haaloo bahuu fi wal amantaa dhabuu osoo hin citin itti fufee waan jiruuf, abdii nagaa itti fufiinsa qabu ni mancaasa.

  Kana malees, rakkoon naamusaa kun egeree Itoophiyaa balaadhaaf saaxilaa jira.   Hawaasni kallattii naamusaa dhabe hoggantoota mul’ata qaban uumuu, hirmaannaa lammummaa kakaasuu, ykn walitti hidhamiinsa hawaasummaa guddisuu hin danda’u.   Haaromsi siyaasaa fi guddinni dinagdee haaromsa naamusaa malee gadi fagoo fi yeroo gabaabaaf kan turu ta’a.

  Yaada Safuu Deebifachuu

  Dukkanni jiraatus, karaan gara fuulduraatti deemu haaromsa naamusaa keessa jira.   Kunis sirnoota naamusaa dhalootaan kan akka Safuu Oromoo biratti fi saboota biroo Itoophiyaa biratti duudhaa walgitu deebisee dammaqsuu, amanamummaa dhaabbilee amantaa fi barnootaa deebisuun, sadarkaa hoggansa hundatti aadaa itti gaafatamummaa horachuu gaafata.   Sochiin bu’uuraa, haasaan hayyootaa, fi mariin dhaloota gidduutti taasifamu Itoophiyaa akka qaama teessuma lafaa ykn siyaasaa fi akka hawaasa naamusaatti deebi’anii yaaduuf gahee giddu galeessaa qabaachuu qaba.

  Xumura irratti Itiyoophiyaan har’a hojii dhabuu siyaasaa fi naamusa gadi fagoo ta’een rakkachaa jirti.   Hawaasa dhiphina keessa jiruudha, koompaasii naamusaa malee dhugaa dystopian keessa kan naanna’udha.   Ta’us seenaan yeroo dukkanaa’aa ta’ettillee saboonni haaromsa karaa dhugaa, haqaa fi ija jabina naamusaa argachuu akka danda’an barsiisa.   Ummanni Itiyoophiyaa dhaala naamusaa isaa deebifatee riphaabiliika yaada ol’aanaa calaqqisutti deebisee bocuuf ka’uu qaba.

www.oromoheritage.ca 

"ካድሬ" - ትክክለኛ ትርጉም፣ የተሳሳቱ አመለካከቶች እና ተፅዕኖ በኢትዮጵያ ማህበረሰብ ውስጥ

"ካድሬ" - ትክክለኛ ትርጉም፣ የተሳሳቱ አመለካከቶች እና ተፅዕኖ በኢትዮጵያ ማህበረሰብ ውስጥ

 “ካድሬ” (ካድሬ) የሚለው ቃል በኢትዮጵያ ፖለቲካ ንግግሮች ውስጥ በብዛት ጥቅም ላይ ከዋሉት-ነገር ግን ብዙ ጊዜ ያልተረዱ-ቃላቶች አንዱ ነው። ለአንዳንዶች ታማኝ የመንግስት ወይም የፓርቲ ሰራተኛን ይመለከታል። ለሌሎች፣ ሙሰኛ፣ ብቃት የሌላቸው ባለስልጣናትን ለመግለጽ የሚያገለግል የስም ማዋረድ ነው። ግን ካድሬ ማለት ምን ማለት ነው? እያንዳንዱ ካድሬ ያልተማረ ነው ወይስ ለሀገር ይጎዳል? ወይንስ ቃሉ ራሱ በፖለቲካዊ እና ህዝባዊ ንግግሮች ውስጥ ኢ-ፍትሃዊ በሆነ መንገድ የታጠቀ ነው?

 1. “ካድሬ” ማለት ምን ማለት ነው?

 ከታሪክ አኳያ ካድሬ የፓርቲ ባለስልጣንን፣ የመንግስት ወኪልን ወይም የፖለቲካ ቅስቀሳን በተለይም በኢትዮጵያ ደርግ ጊዜ እና በኋላም በኢህአዴግ ዘመን ነበር። ቃሉ የመጣው ከፈረንሣይ "ካድሬ" ሲሆን ትርጉሙም የሰለጠነ ወይም ባለሙያ ሰራተኛ ማለት ነው። ኢትዮጵያ ውስጥ የፖለቲካ አጀንዳዎችን ተግባራዊ ለማድረግ፣ ማህበረሰቦችን በፓርቲ ርዕዮተ ዓለም ለማሰልጠን ወይም የመንግስት ጉዳዮችን እንዲያስተዳድር በገዢው ፓርቲ የተመደበውን ሰው ለማመልከት መጣ።

 ስለዚህ ካድሬ በገለልተኛነት ወይም በመነሻ መልኩ በፖለቲካ የተሾመ በሕዝብ አስተዳደር፣ በቅስቀሳ እና በአመራር ተግባራት ላይ የተሰማራ ሠራተኛ ነው።

 2. ሁሉም ካድሬዎች ያልተማሩ ናቸው ወይንስ ብቁ አይደሉም?

 አይደለም ካድሬዎች ከትምህርታቸው ወይም ከቴክኒክ ችሎታቸው ይልቅ ለገዥው ፓርቲ ባላቸው ታማኝነት የተመረጡባቸው አጋጣሚዎች ብዙ ቢሆኑም፣ ሁሉንም በአንድ ብሩሽ መቀባቱ ትክክል አይደለም። ብዙ ካድሬዎች የትምህርት ታሪክ፣ የአስተዳደር ልምድ እና ለህዝብ አገልግሎት ቁርጠኝነት አላቸው። ነገር ግን፣ የመንግስት ሚናዎች በፖለቲካዊ አሰራር ምክንያት፣ ብቃትን መሰረት ያደረጉ ሹመቶች ብዙ ጊዜ ወደ ጎን ቀርተዋል። ይህም በቁልፍ ቦታዎች ላይ ብቃት የሌላቸው ባለስልጣናት የበላይ እንዲሆኑ በማድረግ ለመልካም አስተዳደር እጦት እና የህዝብ አመኔታ እንዲፈጠር ምክንያት ሆኗል።

 3. ካድሬስ ኢትዮጵያን ይጎዳል?

 ይህ ውስብስብ ጥያቄ ነው። ካድሬዎች ገንቢ እና አጥፊ ሚናዎችን ተጫውተዋል። በአንድ በኩል፣ የመንግስት ፖሊሲዎችን ተግባራዊ ለማድረግ፣ የልማት ፕሮግራሞችን በማስተዳደር እና የግዛት መዋቅሮችን ለመጠበቅ ረድተዋል። በሌላ በኩል ብዙዎች ከሚከተሉት ጋር ተያይዘዋል።

 ሙስና

 የፖለቲካ ጭቆና

 የብሄር አድሎአዊነት

 የሀሳብ ልዩነትን ማፈን

 የህዝብ ተቋማትን ማጭበርበር

 ስለዚህም የካድሬ ስርዓት በራሱ መጥፎ ባይሆንም የተጠቀመበት መንገድ በተለይም ታማኝነት ከብቃት በላይ ሲመዘን ብዙ ጊዜ ተቋማትን በመጉዳት የኢትዮጵያን የፖለቲካ እና የስነምግባር ውድቀት አባብሷል።

 ---

 4. "ካድሬ" አሁን አላግባብ ጥቅም ላይ የዋለ ነው?

 አዎ፣ እየጨመረ ነው። ዛሬ “ካድሬ” ከመንግስትም ሆነ ከገዥው ፓርቲ ጋር የተቆራኘን ማንኛውንም ሰው ከትክክለኛ ባህሪያቸውና ከብቃቱ አንፃር ለማጣጣል እንደ ማስመሰያ ቃል ተደጋግሞ ይሠራበታል። ይህ አጠቃላይ አጠቃቀሙ ቃሉን ወደ ፖለቲካዊ ስድብ ይለውጠዋል፣ ነገሩን እርቃን በመግፈፍ እና በመንግስት ስርአቶች ውስጥ ያሉ የሰዎችን ብዝሃነት ችላ በማለት። ሁሉም ካድሬ በሙስና የተዘፈቁ ወይም አቅም የሌላቸው አይደሉም፣ ልክ ሁሉም ተቃዋሚዎች ታማኝ እና ባለራዕይ አይደሉም።

 ማጠቃለያ፡-

 ካድሬ የሚለው ቃል በመጀመሪያ የሚያመለክተው በመንግስት እና በፓርቲ መዋቅር ውስጥ ያለውን ተግባራዊ ሚና ነው። በዛሬይቱ ኢትዮጵያ ግን የተጫነ ቃል ሆኗል - ብዙ ጊዜ ከመተንተን ይልቅ ለማጥቃት ይጠቅማል። ይህ በሕዝብ ተቋማት ላይ ያለውን የመተማመን ቀውስ የሚያንፀባርቅ ሲሆን ሰዎች ከሕዝብ ጥቅም ይልቅ የፓርቲ ጥቅም በሚያቀርቡ መሪዎች እንደተከዱ ይሰማቸዋል።

 አሁንም ግለሰቦችን ከፖለቲካዊ ትርክቶች መለየት አስፈላጊ ነው። በቅንነት እና በብቃት የሚያገለግሉ ካድሬዎች አሉ። ችግሩ ያለው የካድሬዎች ህልውና ሳይሆን የህዝብ አገልጋይነትን ወደ ፖለቲካ በማሸጋገር፣ የተጠያቂነት ጉድለት እና የሜሪቶክራሲ መበስበስ ላይ ነው። ኢትዮጵያ የሞራልና የተቋማዊ ጥንካሬዋን እንድታገግም ከተፈለገ ከስም መጥራት ወጥታ ከፖለቲካ ታማኝነት በላይ ብቃት፣ ስነምግባር እና የህዝብ አገልጋይነት ጉዳይ በሆነበት ስርዓት ላይ ኢንቨስት ማድረግ አለባት።