The United States has defended easing sanctions on Eritrean targets, saying the move could improve its ability to communicate with both sides as military tensions between Ethiopia and Eritrea threaten a wider conflict.
- Marco Rubio says sanctions relief could improve Washington’s communication with Eritrea.
- He warned that troops gathering along the Ethiopia–Eritrea border risk a wider conflict.
- US Treasury records show the relevant sanctions removals occurred on 18 September.
- Washington has not announced a formal mediation agreement between the two countries.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Washington had increased contact with Eritrea in recent months and hoped sanctions relief would help preserve diplomatic access.
His explanation came as troops gathered on both sides of the border, raising concern that Ethiopia’s renewed internal fighting could develop into a confrontation involving neighbouring countries.
Speaking at Joint Base Andrews on 17 October, Rubio also said he had personally urged Ethiopian officials that week to respond with restraint.
According to the State Department’s transcript via Forth, Rubio argued that communication with both governments was necessary for any potential peacemaking role. “The last thing the world needs right now is another war,” he said.
Which sanctions ended?
The financial restrictions were removed a month before Rubio’s remarks.
The US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control announced on 18 September that the national emergency underpinning its Ethiopia-related sanctions programme had expired.
It consequently removed designations imposed under Executive Order 14046. The listed removals included the Eritrean Defense Forces, the ruling People’s Front for Democracy and Justice, Hidri Trust, Red Sea Trading Corporation and two Eritrean officials.
These were removals under that specific programme. The notice did not announce the cancellation of every US restriction affecting Eritrea.
Rubio’s new comments explain Washington’s diplomatic reasoning. They do not amount to a formal mediation arrangement or evidence that either government has accepted an American negotiating role.
A border confrontation beyond Tigray
The diplomatic effort comes against a worsening relationship between the two neighbours.
As BIA previously reported, Ethiopia and Eritrea cut diplomatic ties earlier this month amid allegations of hostile activity and reports of drone attacks.
A subsequent BIA report on troop mobilisation examined the risk of renewed interstate fighting as Ethiopian forces moved towards the border. Eritrea has disputed allegations that its forces entered Ethiopia.
Fighting involving Ethiopian armed groups and a direct war between Ethiopia and Eritrea are different developments, with different implications for the region.
Rubio warned that escalation could pull other countries into the confrontation. He did not name those countries or announce new US deployments, military assistance or security guarantees.
Washington’s stated approach is to maintain communication with both governments while pressing for restraint. Whether that access produces negotiations remains unresolved.