When the Oromia regional government announced the creation of Shaggar City, the name itself sparked debate. Some interpreted it as a nod to the Oromo term shaggaa, meaning good or beautiful in the Tulama dialect of Afaan Oromoo—a term celebrated in Oromo songs and local expressions that evoke abundance and prosperity. This perspective aligns with the government’s narrative that Shaggar represents a new beginning, a modern, integrated urban project promising progress and development. Yet, for others, the name Shaggar carries a far darker historical weight, one rooted in famine, suffering, and exploitation.
According to elders and historical records, Shaggar derives from the Amharic word chigar, meaning hunger or misery—a reference to the hardships endured by the Tulama Oromo under imperial rule. Emperor Menelik’s conquest, the establishment of Addis Ababa, and subsequent natural calamities—including the great Ethiopian famine, the rinderpest cattle plague, and outbreaks of disease—left the Oromo population devastated. Taxation forced Tulama Oromo farmers to endure long, grueling journeys to Addis Ababa, often without food, only to have their payments dismissed as inadequate. For them, Shaggar is not a symbol of beauty but a reminder of subjugation and suffering, a term that encapsulates the violent processes through which Addis Ababa was built.
This article argues that Shaggar City, rather than embodying the aspirations of shaggaa, follows the trajectory of chigar. The city’s formation, framed as an urban modernization project, instead reflects a long-standing pattern of top-down state-driven urbanization, reinforcing authoritarianism rather than addressing the historical grievances of the Oromo. Far from an inclusive project, Shaggar City appears to be yet another manifestation of an urban order that perpetuates historical inequities under a new guise.
The establishment of Shaggar City in October 2022 raises significant questions about the role of urbanization in the country’s political, economic and cultural contestations. It has garnered attention not only for its grand plans for economic and infrastructural development but also for its deep political implications. On the surface, Shaggar City is framed as an urban development strategy aimed at promoting balanced regional growth and ensuring Oromo’s quest for urban center authentic to its identity. However, beneath this veneer of progress and modernization, many critics see Shaggar City as a modern reiteration of the historical processes of territorial control, exploitation, and centralization, echoing past policies that have marginalized the Oromo in the broader Ethiopian political landscape. In this context, Shaggar City can be understood as “old wine in new bottles”—a continuation of historical dynamics masked as a new, progressive urbanization effort.
Historical Context and Political Significance
The role of cities in the nation-building processes of African countries, including Ethiopia, has been closely tied to the nation-building trajectories. Cities often serve as instruments for asserting state authority, managing resources, and consolidating control over diverse populations. The connection between the establishment or relocation of cities and nation-building projects is particularly strong, as urban centers symbolize national identity and the power of the state. In Ethiopia, the rise of urban centers, particularly in the southern regions, has its roots in the military campaigns of Emperor Menelik II in the late 19th century, which expanded the reach of the Abyssinian Empire and established garrisons in newly incorporated territories.1 This territorial expansion, carried out through military conquest, was not only about physical occupation but also about reshaping the social, cultural, and political fabric of the newly incorporated regions, including Oromia.2 3
These historical patterns of control and integration have left enduring legacies of cultural marginalization and political subjugation, particularly for the Oromo nation. The expansion of cities and the establishment of state institutions often led to the erasure of indigenous languages, cultures, and religious practices, forcing local communities to conform to the dominant imperial identity.4 5 In this light, cities in Ethiopia, particularly those in Oromia, are seen as symbols of dysfunctionality of the federal arrangement and microcosm of exploitation and subjugation, rather than symbols of unity or modernity.
The creation of Shaggar City in 2022 can be understood within this historical context. While framed as an initiative for balanced regional growth and modernization, its establishment in close proximity to Addis Ababa—the political and economic capital of Ethiopia—raises questions about its true intentions. The Oromo people have long sought a city that is authentic to their history, culture, and identity, one that would provide a sense of ownership and empowerment rather than marginalization. However, the establishment of Shaggar City appears to perpetuate, rather than resolve, the longstanding issues of political and economic control over Oromia, thus reinforcing the notion of “old wine in new bottles.”
The Politics of Shaggar City: A Nativist Project or a Power Play?
One of the central justifications for the creation of Shaggar City is its role in promoting balanced regional development. The city is positioned as a key part of the Oromia region’s strategy to leverage its proximity to Addis Ababa, its transportation infrastructure, and its strategic location near key projects such as the new airport in Bishoftu and the Gadaa Special Economic Zone. The government has claimed that Shaggar City will serve as a political, economic, and cultural center for the Oromo people, and its development plans include large-scale infrastructure projects, including modern malls, residential complexes, and public spaces designed to reflect Oromo identity and cultural heritage. Monuments and statues, such as the planned Tufaa Munaa’s monument, are intended to serve as symbols of the Oromo struggle for recognition and self-determination.
However, this vision of Shaggar City as a nativist project has been met with skepticism, particularly from Oromo opposition forces. Many see the city as a continuation of the centralization efforts that have characterized Ethiopia’s political system for decades. The Oromo has long resisted the encroachment of Addis Ababa into surrounding Oromia towns. The 10th Master Plan of Addis Ababa, which aimed to annex surrounding towns and rural areas, sparked widespread protests in 2014-2018, culminating in the political change of 2018.
The creation of Shaggar City, with its expansion of urban development around Addis Ababa, has been perceived by some as a “Master Plan 2.0,” an effort to consolidate political and economic power in the capital while maintaining the status quo of Oromo marginalization. This emanates from two main reasons. The first is that the role of large urban mega projects (i.e., the new grand airport located around the town of Bishoftu, Gadaa special economic zone, the massive ‘Chaka’/forest project, Entoto park, and others) in addressing longstanding questions of the Oromo is unclear. Second, urban centers in Oromia are a microcosm of the often-fraught, irreconcilable, and contested relationship between Ethiopia and the Oromo.
For critics, the establishment of Shaggar City is not a genuine effort to address the Oromo people’s grievances but rather a strategic maneuver to reinforce the political power of the ruling elite. The OPDO’s resistance to the Addis Ababa Master Plan was not primarily driven by concerns for the Oromo people but by the party’s interest in maintaining control over key areas that were vital to its patronage networks. With the shift in political dynamics after 2018, the OPDO, now in power both regionally and federally, has adopted a more conciliatory stance toward Addis Ababa, making the establishment of Shaggar City appear as a rebranding effort rather than a genuine effort to address demands of the Oromo. By framing Shaggar City as a “nativist project,” the government has sought to legitimize the centralization of power while presenting itself as responsive to the demands of the Oromo nation.
The creation of Shaggar City can be seen as a manifestation of the enduring dynamics of exploitation and centralization in Ethiopia’s urban development. While the city’s modern infrastructure and cultural symbols may suggest progress and inclusion, they cannot mask the underlying power structures that continue to marginalize the Oromo people. The centralization of political and economic power around Addis Ababa, reinforced by the creation of Shaggar City, perpetuates the historical patterns of control that have defined the relationship between the Ethiopian state and the Oromo nation.
In conclusion, Shaggar City, while presented as a progressive urban development initiative, represents a modern reiteration of the historical dynamics of exploitation, centralization, and political control. Despite its outward appearance of progress, the creation of Shaggar City mirrors the patterns of past Ethiopian state-building efforts that have consistently marginalized the Oromo. As such, Shaggar City is best understood as old wine in new bottles—an attempt to disguise the enduring inequalities and struggles of the Oromo people under the guise of modern urban development.