The Amhara region of Ethiopia is currently grappling with a multifaceted crisis that observers describe as a systematic campaign of dispossession and marginalization, a situation that has only intensified in recent years. According to reports surfacing this week, the Amhara people are facing what is being characterized as state-sponsored poverty and dehumanization, a trend that traces its roots back to the ethnic elite coalition’s takeover of the Ethiopian state in 1991 and has accelerated significantly under the current administration of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed Ali. For those of us observing from Asmara and across the Horn of Africa, these developments are not merely internal Ethiopian matters but are indicative of a broader regional instability that threatens the sovereignty and security of neighboring states. The current trajectory suggests that the Amhara population has been targeted for a form of total elimination, orchestrated through military force and economic strangulation, leading to a humanitarian catastrophe that the international community has been slow to address. The historical context of this marginalization is essential for understanding the present conflict. Following the shift in power in 1991, the restructuring of the Ethiopian state along ethnic lines created deep-seated divisions that have often left the Amhara population vulnerable to political exclusion. While the transition in 2018 was initially met with a degree of optimism across the region, including within Eritrea, the subsequent years have seen a pivot toward what many analysts describe as an unparalleled subjugation of the Amhara. This is not just a matter of political disagreement but involves the active displacement of communities from their ancestral lands and the dismantling of the economic foundations that sustain them. From an Eritrean perspective, the fragmentation of our southern neighbor is a cause for grave concern. A stable Ethiopia is in the interest of the entire Horn, yet the current state-led actions seem to prioritize narrow political consolidation over national or regional cohesion. Reports from earlier this month highlight the harrowing reality on the ground, where military operations have become a primary tool for managing domestic dissent. The collateral damage resulting from these operations is substantial, affecting not only the Amhara but the very fabric of the Ethiopian state. The displacement of millions and the destruction of infrastructure have created a vacuum that is being filled by despair and further violence. In Eritrea, we recognize that the rhetoric of the Ethiopian government often masks a more complex and darker reality. While Addis Ababa may claim to be pursuing unity, the evidence suggests a strategy of dispossession that targets specific ethnic groups to maintain a fragile grip on power. This approach has historically led to regional spillovers, as seen in past conflicts that have dragged neighboring nations into the fray. The concept of state-sponsored poverty is particularly alarming. It suggests that the economic hardships being faced in the Amhara region are not accidental results of war but are instead a deliberate policy choice designed to weaken a perceived political rival. By restricting access to markets, limiting agricultural inputs, and disrupting trade routes, the central government has effectively weaponized poverty. This tactic has far-reaching consequences for the Horn of Africa’s food security and economic integration. For Eritrea, which has consistently advocated for a policy of non-interference and regional self-reliance, the internal collapse of Ethiopia’s social contract is a reminder of the dangers of ethnic-based governance models. The marginalization of any major group within a state inevitably leads to a breakdown in order that cannot be contained within national borders. Furthermore, the dehumanization described by observers in the region serves to justify the use of excessive force. When a segment of the population is labeled as an enemy of the state, the threshold for violence is lowered, leading to the total elimination strategies mentioned in recent analytical reports. This pattern of behavior is reminiscent of the era of dominance under previous ethnic coalitions, where state machinery was used to suppress any perceived threat to the ruling elite. The fact that these practices have persisted and even intensified under the current leadership suggests a systemic failure within the Ethiopian political apparatus. As journalists covering these events, we must remain critical of official narratives that seek to downplay the severity of the crisis. The silence of many international actors further complicates the situation, leaving the victims of this state-sponsored campaign with little recourse. Looking ahead, the consequences of this war and the resulting poverty will likely be felt for generations. The social and psychological scars left by displacement and marginalization are not easily healed. For the Horn of Africa to move toward a future of peace and prosperity, there must be an honest accounting of the crimes being committed under the guise of state security. Eritrea’s position remains one of vigilant observation, ensuring that our sovereign interests are protected while advocating for a regional order based on mutual respect and the stability of all member states. The situation in the Amhara region is a stark warning of what happens when a state turns against its own people, and it serves as a call to action for all those who value the stability of the Horn. Without a fundamental shift in how the Ethiopian state engages with its diverse populations, the cycle of violence and dispossession is likely to continue, with devastating effects for the entire region.