OPINION FEATURE

Clarity or Confusion: The Unfinished Mission of the Oromo Liberation Front

By Ibsaa Guutama

The political landscape for the Oromo people is at a crossroads, not only of strategy but of fundamental principle. A fog of ambiguity has settled over the core objective of the Oromo national struggle, threatening to erode the very foundation upon which the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) was built. It is time for a return to crystalline clarity: From its inception, the OLF’s political program was unequivocally for the independence of Oromiyaa. This founding principle is what has historically distinguished it from other political forces that argue the Oromo question can be resolved within a democratized Ethiopian empire.

This distinction is not a minor tactical difference; it is a chasm of ideology and final destination. The struggle launched by the OLF was meant to crown the Oromo people with the right to self-determination, liberating them from a history of oppression and exploitation. This vision can have only one logical and complete conclusion: the establishment of an independent, democratic Republic of Oromiyaa. This is the kaayyoo (goal) inscribed in the OLF’s early charters. To stop at merely achieving the “right” to self-determination without seeing it through to its natural end—independence—is to abandon the journey halfway. It was never the plan to leave the people at the threshold of a decision; the objective was to lead them to the outcome.

Yet, we now witness a troubling dissonance. There are those who, having accepted the cause of independence during their own political prime, now seek to quietly distance themselves from it. They devise opaque language and dual narratives—one for internal consumption and another for external diplomats—to obscure their retreat from the original kaayyoo. This strategic ambiguity is the source of profound confusion. Many rightfully ask: What does this movement truly want? Transparency builds trust; obscurity breeds suspicion and factionalism.

The amended political programs of 1976 and 1978 did not alter this core objective. However, the 2004 revision appears to have become a vessel for this ambiguity, a text with which many now operating under the OLF banner are “baptized.” This has created a space where words and intentions diverge, weakening the movement’s resolve and muddying the field of struggle.

Therefore, a definitive declaration is urgently needed, especially from the diplomats and leaders of the OLF and its armed wing, the OLA (WBO). They must answer plainly: Is the chief objective the struggle for the right to self-determination, or is it the achievement of independence itself?

The Ethiopian constitution’s mention of self-determination is not the kaayyoo for which the OLF fights; it is merely a potential, peaceful avenue to reach it. Patience for peace is a virtue, but it must not become a disguise for abandoning the destination.

The mechanism for achieving this is a referendum. In such a vote, the OLF’s duty is clear: it must openly and unapologetically present the case for independence as its chief recommendation to the people. This is the stand it must declare to the world, without being silenced because “aliens do not favor it.” If the people, in their sovereign will, vote against independence, the OLF has an obligation to accept that result. It would not dissolve but would remain a political organization. Should the people later reconsider, the call for a referendum could be made again.

But to shy away from advocating for the logical conclusion of its own struggle—independence—is to betray the historical mission. If the kaayyoo has indeed changed, then the organization must have the courage to convene a Kora (general assembly) and seek formal, democratic approval for this seismic shift. To do otherwise—to operate with a hidden agenda or a diluted purpose—is to do more than just confuse the struggle. It is to invite internal strife, to disarm the spirit of the movement, and to risk the very fratricide that has historically crippled liberation causes.

The Oromo people deserve a leadership with a clear compass. The world deserves to know the true aim of one of Africa’s longest-running liberation movements. The time for hedging is over. The stand must be made clear again: The true objective of the OLF is an independent, democratic Oromiyaa. Anything less is a departure from the path, and a disservice to the millions whose hopes have been anchored in that promise for generations.