OROMUMMAA: NATIONAL IDENTITY AND POLITICS OF LIBERATION

By Asafa Jalata | From the Selected Works Of Asafa Jalata, April 2010


Asafa Jalata, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
The OLF Eastern US Regional Mid-Year Conference, Atlanta, April, 24, 2010


Thank you for inviting me to discuss this important topic at this OLF mid-year conference. In my talk, first, I clarify the differences between local and fragmented Oromoness or Oromummaa and
national and political Oromummaa. Since some Oromos confuse these two types of Oromummaa, it is necessary to identify and explain the differences between the two for understanding the issues the Oromo national identity and nationalism.Second, I present Oromummaa as a national and global project that all Oromos who are concerned about their people and country should comprehend and start to act upon it immediately. Third, I identify some specific steps that Oromo nationalists as individuals, groups, organizations, and associations should take to ensure the survival of Oromo peoplehood and to achieve liberation and sovereignty of Oromia in the context of multinational democracy.

Local and Fragmented Oromummaa

Local and fragmented Oromummaa and national Oromummaa are interconnected, but not necessarily one and the same. For instance, if you were born into an Oromo family in an area where the Oromo language is widely spoken, you automatically learn this language without relating it to Oromo national culture and liberation politics. In several Oromia regions, under Ethiopian colonialism, there are Oromos who speak Afaan Oromoo and express local culture without comprehending Oromo national culture and politics. Such Oromos may claim that they were born with Oromummaa. But this kind of Oromummaa is local and fragmented and little to do with Oromo nationalism. Oromo nationalism is built on the Oromo national cultural identity and liberation politics. Realizing the significance of Oromo nationalism, the Ethiopian colonial state has localized and fragmented Oromo culture and identity.

Those Oromos whose worldviews and politics are dominated by local and fragmented Oromummaa have little or no concern for the national affairs of Oromia due to the lack of Oromo national political consciousness and nationalism. Consequently, the Ethiopian colonial government has recruited most of its from Oromos who did not yet develop the Oromo national identity and national Oromummaa. Today, such Oromos are the majority in the Ethiopian army, the rubber-stamp parliament, and security networks. Most of such Oromos are mercenary and they serve their own personal interests and that of the Meles government at the cost of the Oromo nation. Currently, the mercenary Oromo elites promote the Tigrayan colonial objectives by joining the Ethiopian colonial institutions. Numerically Oromo mercenaries are the majority in the rubber-stamp parliament and the regional government of Oromia; they endorse the socalled laws of the Meles regime to enrich the Tigrayan region, Tigrayan elites and their domestic and international collaborators.

These mercenaries participate in the criminal activities of the Meles government by taking marching order from their Tigrayan colonial masters. There are also Oromo mercenaries in churches and mosques who use the name of God, but engage in domesticating the minds of the Oromo to be subservient for their enemies. History demonstrates that churches and mosques play important roles in defending the victimized people and encouraging them to be united and struggle for their liberation. Several indigenous peoples around the world were decimated partly because their enemies divided and turned them against one another. The colonized nations that could not defeat their traitors could not win their national victories.

The Tigrayan-led Ethiopian government loots Oromian economic and natural resources to pay for the Oromo collaborators it organized as the OPDO to do its dirty job in Oromia. Had the Oromo national struggle built itself as a more unified, structured, and strong movement, the umbilical cord that links Oromo society to its enemy could have been cut. Today the Oromo collaborators that are stuffed in the OPDO mainly maintain such links. Until these “social cancers” exist in Oromo society, it cannot be imagined to liberate Oromia from Ethiopian settler colonialism. These dangerous social elements survive in Oromo society because of the failure of the revolutionary nationalist Oromo elites in establishing a more unified and structured organization and leadership that can mobilize most of the Oromo people to defend their national interest. At the same time, the fire of Oromummaa survives and expands because of the few selfless and determined Oromo nationalists. However, such nationalists need to expand their mental horizons in order to reinvent the Oromo national movement by providing a more centralized structured organization and leadership by mobilizing all organizational, cultural, and material resources of the Oromo for national survival and self-defense.

Oromummaa as National and Global Project

Oromummaa is a complex and dynamic national and global project. As a national project and the central ideology of the Oromo national movement, Oromummaa enables Oromos to retrieve their
cultural memories, assess the consequences of Ethiopian colonialism, give voice to their collective grievances, mobilize diverse cultural resources, interlink Oromo personal, interpersonal,1 and collective2 relationships, and assists in the development of Oromo-centric political strategies and tactics that can mobilize the nation for collective action empowering the people for liberation. As a global project, Oromummaa requires that the Oromo national movement be inclusive of all persons, operating in a democratic fashion. This global Oromummaa enables the Oromo people to form alliances with all political forces and social movements that accept the principles of national self-determination and multinational democracy in the promotion of a global humanity that is free of all forms oppression and exploitation.

Oromummaa as an element of culture, nationalism, and vision has the power to serve as a manifestation of the national collective identity of the Oromo national movement. To date, the uneven development of Oromummaa is a reflection of the internal weakness of Oromo society and its political leadership. Against this background, the basis of Oromummaa must be built on overarching principles that are embedded within Oromo traditions and culture and, at the same time, have universal relevance for all oppressed peoples. The main foundations of Oromummaa are individual and collective freedom, justice, popular democracy, and human liberation, which are built on the concept of saffu (moral and ethical order) and are enshrined in gadaa principles. Although, in recent years, many Oromos have become adherents of Christianity and Islam, the concept of Waqaa lies at the heart of Oromo tradition and culture. In Oromo tradition, Waqaa is the creator of the universe and the source of all life. The universe created by Waqaa contains within itself a sense of order and balance that is to be made manifest in human society. Although Oromummaa emerges from the Oromo cultural and historical foundations, it goes beyond culture and history in providing a liberating narrative for the future of the Oromo nation as well as the future of other oppressed peoples, particularly those who suffer under the Ethiopian Empire.

The building of the Oromo national organizational capacity is only possible when Oromummaa is fully developed and can be packaged into a generally accepted vision that energizes the entire Oromo nation into well-organized and coordinated collective action at the personal, interpersonal and national levels. The full development of Oromummaa facilitates the mobilization of Oromo individuals and diverse groups enabling them to overcome political confusion and take the necessary concrete cultural and political actions essential to liberate themselves from psychological dehumanization and colonial oppression. After Oromos were colonized, and until Oromo nationalism emerged, Oromoness primarily remained on the personal and the interpersonal levels since Oromos were denied the opportunities to form national institutions. Oromoness was targeted for destruction and the colonial administrative regions that were established to suppress the Oromo people and exploit their resources were glorified and institutionalized. As a result Oromo relational identities have been localized, and not strongly connected to the collective identity of Oromummaa.

Oromos have been separated from one another and prevented from exchanging goods and information for more than a century. They have been exposed to different cultures (i.e.,languages, customs, values, etc.) and religions, adopting some elements of these cultures and religions. Consequently, today there are Oromo elites who have internalized these externally imposed regional or religious identities. This may result from a low level of political consciousness, political/economic opportunism, or a lack of a clear understanding of Oromo nationalism. Oromo relational identities include extended families and clan families.3 The Ethiopian colonial system and borrowed cultural and religious identities were imposed on Oromos creating artificial regional and religious boundaries within the Oromo community, supplanting broader extended family and clan identities. Consequently, there have been times when Christian Oromos were more identified with Habashas and Muslim Oromos were more identified with Arabs, Adares and Somalis than they were with other Oromos. Under these conditions, Oromo personal identities, such as religion replaced Oromoness, central Oromo values, and core Oromo self-schemas. There are Oromos who still confuse such identities with the Oromo central identity.

Colonial rulers saw Oromoness as a source of raw material that needed to be suppressed and/or transformed into other identities. In the colonial process, millions of Oromos lost their identities and became attached to other peoples. Consequently, the number of Amharas, Tigrayans, Adares, Gurages, and Somalis has increased at the cost of the Oromo population. The Oromo self was attacked and distorted by Ethiopian colonial institutions. While fighting against these institutions, the restoration and development of the Oromo self through cognitive liberation and Oromo-centric values must be the order of the day. The attack on the Oromo self at the personal, interpersonal and collective-levels has undermined the self-confidence of some Oromo individuals, creating an inferiority complex within them. Without emancipating Oromo individuals from this inferiority complex and without overcoming the ignorance and the alien worldviews that their enemies imposed on them, they lack the self-confidence necessary to facilitate individual liberation and Oromo emancipation.

The development of the Oromo self and relational self help in developing a collectivelevel Oromo identity. The collective-level Oromo identity involves complex social dynamics that are based on the organizational culture or on collective norms. Because of internal cultural crises and external oppressive institutions, Oromo collective norms or organizational culture is at a rudimentary level at this historical moment. Consequently, some Oromo comrades in an Oromo organization do not see themselves as members of a team, and they engage in undermining members in their team through gossips and rumors. For the sake of self-promotion, they belittle their comrades in his or her absence. Such individuals lack a strong organizational culture or norm. Such individual Oromo activist and leaders are not able to develop the core of Oromo leadership that is required to build a strong liberation organization.

The exploration of the concept of diversity is an essential element of Oromummaa since Oromos are a diverse and heterogeneous people. The concept of diversity applies to Oromo cultural, religious, class, and gender divisions. Studying Oromummaa in relation to diversity requires integrating structural, cultural, psychological, and behavioral issues. The structural approach assists in explaining how Oromummaa as Oromo nationalism and political identity has emerged from multiple factors, such as collective grievances, socio-cultural changes, the emergence of an explicit intellectual class, political consciousness, and the desire for Oromo liberation from exploitation and oppression. Collective identities are not automatically given, but they are “essential outcomes of the mobilization process and crucial prerequisite to movement success.” Oromo nationalists can only reach a common understanding of Oromoness through open, critical, honest dialogue and debate. Fears, suspicions, misunderstandings and hopes or aspirations of Oromo individuals or groups should be discussed through invoking Oromo cultural memory and democratic principles. Through such discussion a single standard that respects the dignity and inalienable human rights of all persons with respect to political, social, and economic interaction should be established for all Oromos.

Oromo personal and social identities can be fully released and mobilized for collective actions if reasonable Oromos recognize that they can freely start to shape their future aspirations or possibilities without discrimination. This is only possible through developing an Oromo identity on both personal and collective levels that is broader and more inclusive than gender, class, clan, family, region, and religion. The lack of open dialogue among Oromo nationalists, political leaders, activists, and ordinary citizens on the issue of religious differences and/or the problems of colonial regions have provided opportunities for those who profit from the continued subjugation of the Oromo people to employ a divide and conquer strategy by exploiting religious and regional differences among the Oromo people. Since Turks, Arabs, Habashas and the Europeans imposed both Islam and Christianity on Oromos in order to psychologically control and dominate them, Oromo nationalists must encourage an open dialogue among adherents of indigenous Oromo religion, Islam and Christianity and reach a common understanding of what it means to be an Oromo and the positive role religion can play in Oromo society.

Similarly, because colonial administrative regions were invented by the Ethiopian colonial structure, they do not correspond to Oromo group or regional identities. As a result the political diversity of Oromo society can and should transcend regional identities based on the boundaries of colonial regions. Political diversity exists in Oromo society to the extent that individuals and national political organizations have serious ideological, political, and strategic differences. And, it is the acceptance of this diversity that provides the basis for the establishment of a truly democratic, egalitarian Oromo society. At present, the various Oromo liberation organizations are not separated by clear ideological, political and strategic differences. The (1) lack of political experience; (2) borrowed cultures, religions, and political practices; (3) the abandonment of the Oromo democratic heritage of consensus building; (4) the low level of Oromummaa; (5) the existence of political opportunism; and (6) a lack of open dialogue and conversation have all contributed to political fragmentation in a context that does not value ideological, political and strategic differences, viewing alternate ideas as a threat to unity rather than a resource that reflects strength.

The Oromo political problems have emerged primarily from attitudes, behavior and perceptions that have been shaped by a culture that values domination and exploitation and sees diversity and equality as threats to the colonial institutions most Oromos pass through. These problems play a significant role in undermining Oromummaa and the organizational capacity of the Oromo national movement. The behavior and political practices of Oromo elites and leaders of Oromo institutions in the Diaspora—like churches and mosques, associations, and political and community organizations—demonstrate that the impact of the ideology of domination and control that was impacted by Ethiopian colonial institutions and organizations is pervasive. Despite the fact that Oromos are proud of their democratic tradition, their behavior and practices in politics, religion, and community affairs indicate that they have learned more from Habashas and Oromo chiefs than from the gadaa system of democracy.

While the social and cultural construction of the Oromo collective identity is an ongoing process, this process cannot be completed without the recognition that Oromo society is composed of a set of diverse and heterogeneous individuals and groups with a wide variety of cultural and economic experiences. Hence, Oromo nationalists need to recognize and value the diversity and unity of the Oromo people because “people who participate in collective action do so only when such action resonates with both an individual and a collective identity that makes such action meaningful.” In every society, personal and social identities are flexible. They are not rigid and monolithic. Similarly, Oromo self-identity exists at the personal, interpersonal, and collective levels with this confederation of identity being continuously shaped by Oromo historical and cultural memory, current conditions, and hopes and aspirations for the future.

Every Oromo has an internally focused self and an externally focused social self. The Oromo social selves emerge from the interplay between intimate personal relations and less personal social relations. The former comprise the interpersonal or relational identity and the latter are a collective identity. The relational-level identity is based on perceptions or views of others about an individual. Thus, individual Oromos have knowledge of themselves from their personal viewpoints as well as knowledge from the perspective of significant others and larger social groups. This concept of individual self emerges from complex conditions that reflect past and present experiences and future possibilities. The self-concept allows individuals to have “the capacity to reinstate a past situation and locate themselves in it; they also have the capacity to project the self into future contexts, anticipating possible actions and their consequences for the self.”

Some Oromos are more familiar with their personal and relational selves than they are with their Oromo collective self, because their level of Oromummaa is rudimentary. Oromo individuals have intimate relations with their family members, friends, and local communities. These interpersonal and close relations foster helping, nurturing, and caring relationships. Without developing these micro-relationships into the macro-relationship of Oromummaa, the building of Oromo national organizational capacity is illusive. Organizing Oromos requires learning about the multiplicity and flexibility of Oromo identities and fashioning from them a collective identity that encompasses the vast majority of the Oromo populace. This process can be facilitated by an Oromo political leadership that is willing to develop an understanding of the breadth of the diversity of Oromo society looking for those personal and relational identities that can be used to construct an Oromo collective identity, expanding Oromummaa. Activist political leaders must be teachers and effective communicators imbued with an egalitarian spirit. In addition, they must be effective listeners and students. Only such a leadership can stimulate the development of Oromo identity at the personal, interpersonal and collective levels simultaneously.

Change starts with individuals who are both leaders and followers. Culture, collective grievances, and visions connect leaders and followers in an oppressed society like the Oromo. Consequently, to be effective the Oromo political leadership must be guided by Oromo-centric cardinal values and principles that reflect honesty, fairness, single standard, equality and democracy in developing Oromummaa. The political leadership of Oromo society needs to understand the concept and essence of the changing selves of Oromos. These self-concepts include cognitive, psychological and behavioral activities of Oromo individuals. Collective grievances, the Oromo language and history, the historical memory of the gadaa system and other forms of Oromo culture, and the hope for liberation have helped in maintaining fragmented connections among various Oromo groups. The emergence of Oromo nationalism from underground to public discourse in the 1990s allowed some Oromos to openly declare their Oromummaa without clearly realizing the connection between the personal and interpersonal selves and the Oromo collectivity.

This articulation occurred without strong national institutions and organizational capacity that can cultivate and develop Oromummaa through transcending the political and religious barriers that undermine the collective identity of the Oromo. Oromo nationalists cannot build effective national institutions and organizations without taking Oromo personal, interpersonal and collective-level Oromo selves to a new level. Oromo collective selves develop through relations with one another. Good interpersonal relations and good treatment of one another create sense of security, confidence, sense of belonging, strong and effective bonds, willingness to admit and deal with mistakes and increase commitment to political objectives and organizations. The individuality of an Oromo can be observed and examined in relation to the concept of self which is linked to psychological processes and outcomes, such as motivation, affection, selfmanagement, information processing, interpersonal relations, commitment, dignity and selfrespect, self-preservation and so forth. The Oromo self-concept as an extensive knowledge structure contains all pieces of information on self that an individual Oromo internalizes in his or her value systems.

Every Oromo has a self-schema or a cognitive schema that organizes both perceptional and behavioral information. An individual’s self-schema can be easily captured by accessible knowledge that comes to mind quickly to evaluate information on any issue. The Oromo self is the central point at which personality, cognitive schema and social psychology meet. The Oromo self consists both personal or individual and social identities. The former is based on an individual’s comparison of oneself to other individuals and reveals one’s own uniqueness and the latter are based on self-definition in relation to others or through group membership. Without recognizing and confronting these problems at all levels, the Oromo movement cannot build its organizational capacity. The social experiment of exploring and understanding their internal selves at the level of individual, relational and collective selves must start with Oromos who aspire to organize and lead the Oromo people. Since the ideological and organizational tools that Oromos have borrowed from other cultures have reached their maximum limit of capacities and cannot move the Oromo movement forward in the quest for achieving self-determination and human liberation, Oromo nationalists must reorganize their approaches to those based on Oromummaa and gadaa democratic heritage.

The Oromo elites passed through schools that were designed to domesticate or “civilize” them and to mold them into intermediaries between the Oromo people and those who dominated and exploited them. They have been trained by foreign educational and religious institutions that glorified the culture, history, language and religion of others and have become disconnected from own their history, culture, language, and worldview. Consequently, most Oromo elites do not adequately understand the history, culture, and worldview of the broader Oromo tradition. Although the Oromo movement has achieved many important things in the past, the organizational and ideological tools it has used has not provided an effective basis for organizing the Oromo people, enabling them to defend themselves from their enemies. At present the Oromo human and material resources remain scattered, and are often used by their enemies who are committing hidden genocide on them. The main goal of Oromo nationalism is to facilitate the creation of state that will defend the interests of Oromos on the individual, group, and national levels.

The failure of Oromo nationalists and political leaders to frame issues and formulate policies that promote actions based on the concept of Oromummaa has given ample opportunity for free-riders, political opportunists, enemy agents, and confused individuals and groups to claim that they are nationalists and leaders who represent their clans, localities, religious groups, or nominal organizations. While using Oromo slogans, such individuals or groups attack and attempt to discredit those individuals and organizations that have accomplished many things for the Oromo cause. Oromo national institutions and organizational capacity will develop when nationalists, intellectuals and political leaders start to fully embrace Oromummaa and work openly and courageously through the formulation of practical domestic and foreign policies that can be implemented by a broad-based Oromo movement. Although Oromos can learn a lot from other forms of leadership, without developing the style of leadership that is Oromo-centric, Oromo nationalists will be unable to build enduring national institutions and organizations.

The Urgency of Centralized and Structured Organization and Leadership

The Oromo national movement has reached at the stage where it is absolutely necessary to consolidate itself for its survival and the survival of the Oromo nation and Oromia. All Oromo nationalists, associations, and community organizations must start to demand that all Oromo independent liberation organizations to form one centralized and structured organization and leadership for the Oromo national movement. This centralized and structured organization and leadership should be fashioned on the principles of gadaa and Caaffee or Gumii assembly. I propose this organization and leadership called the National Gumii Oromiyaa that will be the foundation of an Oromia state.

Why do we need to centralize and structure our organization and leadership? First of all, we could not establish such organization and leadership by force, and hence it is necessary to use consensus and democracy to forge our organizational and leadership unity. Second, it is our democratic tradition of the gadaa system to organize our society on democratic principles. Third, the future of Oromia for individual and democratic freedom will be only achieved through consensus and democracy. Fourth, through consensus and democracy we can build a wellorganized mass movement on the global level. Five, by building a centralized organization and leadership we can isolate Oromo mercenaries who use clan, religion, and colonial regions to turn Oromo against one another. Sixth, we can minimize destructive politics of gossips, clans, and regions by expressing by one voice. Seventh, we can develop our national culture and liberation politics. Eight, we can contribute effectively financial, ideological and organization resources to build the Oromo Liberation Army and Oromia’s self defense forces in every parts of Oromia. Ninth, we can easy package and disseminate victorious consciousness among the Oromo people in the Diaspora and Oromia without opposition from most of our people. Tenth, we can make our national, cultural, ideological, and political unity practical.

Conclusion

In the absence of a critically and deeply understood Oromummaa, Oromos will be unable to build the strong Oromo social and political institutions and organizations that are needed to take the Oromo nation to a promised land. It is only if the Oromo people and leaders adequately understand the concept of Oromummaa and engage in fully deploying Oromo cultural and political institutions both in the Diaspora and at home through a centralized and organized channel, that the Oromo people will be able to challenge Ethiopian colonial institutions in Oromia and gain international recognition and support for the Oromo cause. The major problem facing Oromo society at this historical juncture is its lack of an organizational capacity that has the ability to mobilize all Oromo human and material resources under one leadership in confronting both the internal and external enemies of the Oromo nation. The first step in dealing with this major challenge is to develop and unleash the power of Oromo individuals on both the personal and collective levels by clearly understanding the concepts of Oromummaa and diversity.

If Oromos honestly and courageously recognize their strengths and weaknesses as individuals, groups, organizations, and society and build upon their strengths while reducing or eliminating their weaknesses, they can emerge victorious from the cultural, ideological, and political nightmares they have faced in the past. Oromo leadership needs to recognize the inadequacies of existing organizations, visions, and strategies and start to plan and develop new strategies and approaches that will unleash the potential of an Oromo society based on Oromummaa. Oromos cannot liberate themselves without overcoming the organizational deficiencies and leadership problems that emerged prior to and after the colonization of their people. While recognizing the negative legacy of portions of historical Oromo political systems, the Oromo political leadership should practically incorporate the positive aspects of gadaa into their organizational norms and culture.

Oromo organizational cultures and norms cannot be changed without transforming Oromo self-concepts at the individual, interpersonal and collective levels. The Oromo political leadership as well as the population as a whole must adopt these changes. Members of the Oromo political leadership need to be effective political leaders who can engage in the processes of cognitive liberation and self-emancipation; they must struggle to develop in themselves and their followers’ personal leadership skills, such as self-control, discipline, ability to communicate, and a deep sense of social obligation or commitment. Effective leaders have the capacity to understand that the oppressed are capable of self-change through educational and popular participation in struggle. They believe in a democratic conversation and they recognize that both leaders and followers possess both “leading” and “led” selves.

The combination of the processes of cognitive liberation and self-emancipation along with liberation knowledge or expertise, technological capability or skills, modern organizational rules and codes, and courage and determination are needed to build an effective and strong political leadership. Oromo leadership cannot find all these qualities from a few individuals. Therefore, the leadership needs to blend the experiences of political leadership and public intellectuals with the knowledge and commitment of the general populace. Leadership networks and chains should engage the Oromo people in a conversation to develop a new organizational culture that facilitates the institutionalization of Oromo democratic experiences in ways that are compatible with contemporary technological and political conditions. Revolutionary Oromo nationalists, public intellectuals, and the Oromo people as a whole must challenge the tendency of exclusivist leadership and political anarchism and fragmentation and reinvent the Oromo national political leadership that is anchored in Oromummaa and gadaa.

The Oromo national political leadership should practice the principles of Oromummaa and gadaa and at the same time must specialize and professionalize the Oromo national movement. The processes of specialization and professionalization can assist in reframing Oromo national issues in practical ways. The political leadership needs to develop four activist group leaders in the Oromo national movement. The first group needs to engage in frame bridging by identifying Oromo sectors and organizations that share similar political concerns and grievances and by facilitating ways of forming the organizational base for the Oromo national solidarity network. This group responsibility is to create a common platform for various Oromo sectors and organizations as a means of forming a national solidarity network that is able to take collective action at both the local and national levels so as to advance the Oromo national struggle.

The second activist group is charged with designing cultural and political policies that help in deepening and broadening Oromummaa as national and international projects. This group may be called the frame amplification group. This group needs to research various Oromo social and cultural experiences as the self-representation of the Oromo nation and draw from these in the development of public policies that will further enhance Oromummaa. This approach will help mobilize potential constituents and supporters for the Oromo national project on national, regional and international levels. The third leadership group has the responsibility of developing new principles, ideas and values for the Oromo national movement based on the work of the frame amplification group. This group may be called the frame extension group. This group should focus on domestic, regional and international policy formations.

The fourth leadership group may be called the frame transformation group. This group is charged with studying the weaknesses and strengths of the Oromo movement and suggesting necessary transformations in the organizing structure and operation of the Oromo national movement. All these framing groups can help improve the habits and behavior of leaders and followers and increase the organizational capacity of the Oromo national movement by suggesting how to improve their performance. These four leadership groups need to broadly disseminate information about their work on a regular basis.

From The Selected Works Of Asafa Jalata

No comments:

Post a Comment