O-Dispatch #9: What the Oromo Struggle Can Learn from the TPLF’s Rise to Power

 By Bantii Qixxeessaa

🎧 Listen to the Audio Version (10 minutes)

Learning from the successes and failures of friends, foes, and neutral actors alike equips a movement with a broader strategic lens. It helps avoid costly missteps, replicate effective tactics, and adapt to shifting contexts. By understanding what works and what doesn’t, movements can improve decision-making, navigate internal challenges, and respond more effectively to external dynamics. The Oromo struggle for self-determination is one of the oldest and

most complex liberation efforts in the Horn of Africa. Despite being the region’s largest ethnic group, the Oromo political movement has not yet consolidated power or sustained national influence at the level achieved by the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) in the late 20th century. The contrast between the two movements offers valuable lessons—both strategic and cautionary—for today’s Oromo leaders.

Strategic Evolution: Clarity vs. Ambiguity

The TPLF began as a Marxist-Leninist secessionist movement seeking Tigrayan independence from Ethiopia, a state it had been historically part of. However, during the 1980s, it strategically pivoted. Rebranding itself as a pan-Ethiopian revolutionary force, the TPLF presented itself as a reformist vanguard rather than a secessionist front. This led to the formation of the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF)—a coalition of ethnic-based parties under TPLF dominance. This repositioning enabled the TPLF, with support from the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF) and the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF), to overthrow the Derg regime in 1991 and take control of the Ethiopian state.

In contrast, the Oromo people, colonized by the Abyssinian Empire during Menelik II’s expansion, assert a legal and moral right to decolonization. Within that framework, independence is a right—not a privilege to be negotiated, nor simply a form of secession. The question is not whether Oromia should separate, but whether Ethiopia can justify continued control over a nation annexed by force. The OLF has remained committed to Oromo self-determination—especially in Oromo-facing communications—but has failed to clearly and consistently articulate whether it seeks full independence or a reformed federal Ethiopia. This ambiguity has weakened its domestic mobilization and international diplomacy. Meanwhile, internal fragmentation—unlike the TPLF's centralized and disciplined (if at times coercive) leadership—has further undermined the OLF’s effectiveness.

Coalition-Building and Political Reach

The TPLF’s success stemmed largely from its mastery of coalition politics. Through the EPRDF, it projected ethnic inclusivity while retaining real power. The OLF, by contrast, has remained largely Oromo-centric and has failed to forge enduring alliances with other marginalized groups such as the Sidama, Somali, or Afar. This isolation has stifled the political breadth of the Oromo struggle, even as popular support remains broad.

Armed Struggle and Governance

The TPLF conducted a disciplined guerrilla campaign, gained and maintained territorial control in Tigray, and functioned effectively as a government-in-waiting. It governed liberated areas, which boosted its domestic legitimacy and earned international recognition.

The OLF’s track record has been more inconsistent. It has alternated between armed and peaceful resistance without establishing durable territorial control or credible governance capacity. Its armed wing, the OLA, has shown growing potential and recently forced the Abiy regime into negotiations. Still, it struggles with strategic coherence and operational coordination. Unlike the TPLF in the 1980s, the OLF-OLA alliance has yet to present itself as a tactically effective or governance-ready force.

Regional Relations and Multi-National Alliances

The TPLF, once in power, managed neighboring regions like Amhara and Afar through a mix of coercion, co-optation, and federal restructuring. Though these tactics bred long-term resentment, they also allowed the TPLF to maintain control.

By contrast, the OLF’s engagement with neighboring oppressed groups has been inconsistent, often reactive, marred by mistrust, rivalry, or even open conflict. As a result, the Oromo movement has failed to transform into a broader multi-national coalition, limiting its influence and leverage.

International Diplomacy and Geopolitical Context

The TPLF's diplomatic strategy was arguably its greatest strength. Navigating the post-Cold War unipolar order, it portrayed itself as a modernizing and stabilizing force. Western powers—especially the United States—embraced the TPLF as a reliable partner in regional security and counterterrorism. This alignment delivered recognition, legitimacy, and substantial aid.

In contrast, the OLF has not cultivated a comparable global influence. Despite strong support from the Oromo diaspora, its fragmented leadership and inconsistent messaging have hampered international engagement. That said, growing global awareness of Abiy’s human rights abuses and the OLA’s emerging credibility have opened new diplomatic possibilities.

However, today’s geopolitical terrain is far less favorable. When the TPLF rose to power in the early 1990s, the global order was unipolar, Eritrea was an ally, Somalia was collapsing, and Sudan was internally preoccupied. The TPLF benefited from appearing as a stabilizing force.

Today, the Oromo struggle unfolds in a multipolar world where the U.S., China, Gulf states, and Turkey all vie for influence. The African Union remains committed to territorial integrity, and Western powers prioritize regional stability over justice. Movements labeled as separatist face steep diplomatic challenges, especially in the post-9/11 security era.

The Road Ahead: Clarity, Unity, and Credibility

So, what should the Oromo struggle do now, whether the ultimate goal is independence or the reform of the Ethiopian state?

#1. Unify the Movement: Fragmentation is a critical weakness. Popular support cannot substitute for disciplined, coherent leadership.

#2. Clarify the Goal: The movement must clearly state whether it seeks full independence or structural reform within Ethiopia. The decolonization paradigm provides a powerful legal and moral foundation—but only if the message is consistently and effectively delivered, both domestically and internationally.

#3. Reframe the Narrative: While holding firm to its principles, the movement should communicate a global-facing message centered on democracy, human rights, and inclusive governance—values that resonate beyond Oromia.

#4. Build Multi-National Coalitions: Strategic partnerships with other marginalized groups in Ethiopia are vital for legitimacy and broader political reach.

#5. Demonstrate Governance Capacity: Where influence exists, the movement must model justice, transparency, and effective service delivery to gain local and international trust.

#6. Avoid Authoritarian Pitfalls: The TPLF’s eventual downfall stemmed not from military weakness but from its authoritarian governance. The Oromo movement must learn from that and remain committed to the democratic values it espouses.

Conclusion

The TPLF rose to power through tactical flexibility, political organization, and diplomatic engagement. The Oromo movement faces a more difficult international landscape, but it also has a profound moral opportunity: not just to seize power, but to earn the trust of other oppressed nations; not just to liberate one people, but multiple oppressed nations in that empire by forming alliances; not just to survive, but to lead, grounded in clarity, justice, and enduring principles.