Given the conflict in Iraq and the unfolding of genocide in Sudan, perhaps it should not be surprising that renewed hostilities between Ethiopia and Eritrea have failed to attract any meaningful international attention. Yet this conflict, which has flared up once again after four years of relative peace, threatens to further destabilize an already tumultuous region and give rise to a humanitarian disaster.

The current conflict stems from the breakdown of the December 2000 Algiers Peace Accord that agreed to end the fighting and accepted borders drawn by a new international commission as “final and binding.” This was a step that seemed to signal a genuine commitment towards sustained peace on the part of both sides. Yet in 2002, when the Boundary Commission announced its recommendations at the Hague, a new war of words began. Although the Boundary Commission demarcated a new border, it was initially unclear where the symbolic, and hotly contested, town of Badme fell in relation to the new boundaries. Both sides claim Badme, but it seems that the majority of the Badme region, including Badme village, falls under the territory awarded to Eritrea by the Boundary Commission in 2002.

Despite their previous pledge to obey the commission, neither Meles Zenawi, Ethiopia’s Prime Minister, nor Isaias Afwerki, Eritrea’s President, has encouraged peace after the Boundary Commission’s ruling. Afwerki has ruled out any further dialogue with Ethiopia, saying that Ethiopia’s refusal to abide by the 2000 Algiers agreement is tantamount to a declaration of war. Meanwhile, Zenawi has publicly expressed his displeasure with the Badme ruling, offering a renegotiated peace as the only solution. Also, it seems that Zenawi’s small ruling coalition clings to power only by appeasing Ethiopian nationalists with talk of war. The opposition’s hard-line stance in Ethiopia became clear in late 2004, when Zenawi’s new peace proposal was decried in the press by his countrymen as a traitorous act. Fearing similar unrest, Afwerki has used the conflict as a pretext for limiting public dissent in Eritrea, postponing elections and arresting journalists. Eritrea now has more imprisoned journalists than any other African state. It seems that this conflict allows both Afwerki and Zenawi, former allies in the 1970s and 1980s, to cling to power under nationalist banners.

While there are already rhetorical battles between these politicians, the Ethio-Eritrean border dispute seems to rest on the brink of full-blown war. There has been some reported movement of troops along the border by both sides, yet the United Nations refers to the situation as “militarily stable.” Peacekeepers remain as part of the UN Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea, attempting to preserve the fragile stability. Memories of the costly 1998 to 2000 war, which claimed the lives of over 70,000, still linger.

Yet more concern has come from regional states like Egypt and Yemen than from the United Nations or the United States. Egypt’s prime minister has voiced his support for renewed negotiations, saying that only discussion will bring an end to the dispute. Similarly concerned, Yemeni President Ali Abdallah Salih has engaged in ongoing negotiations with both sides as part of his effort to avoid escalation.

While the United States has voiced the same worry over the developments in the region, it seems that vague warnings to both sides are as far as it will go. US President George W. Bush is fond of referencing his “Coalition of the Willing,” but he has been less willing to offer constructive solutions to these two enemy states that are coalition members. The United States continues to maintain an untenable alliance with both states that leaves it little room to threaten either Afwerki or Zenawi. Neither the United States nor the United Nations has planned for economic sanctions, a move which could compel both countries to de-escalate. To humanitarians’ dismay, the Western powers have also been reluctant to contribute money for food aid out of fear that it will be used for military purposes. Since the United Nations seems unprepared to provide oversight on any possible aid, the famine’s victims’ cries have gone unanswered.

All this comes at the same time as the ongoing genocide in neighboring Sudan has attracted the most public attention in Africa. Indeed, the Ethio-Eritrean dispute is not a priority for the United States or the United Nations in that region, let alone in Africa as a whole. Yet as the current military posturing and fiery rhetoric continue to go unchecked, the possibility of renewed fighting looms—a disastrous scenario for Ethiopia and Eritrea that could force the international community to take a more active role. The question is whether that international response will be too late.