I would not care or lose sleep over TPLF leaders being subjected to visa restrictions, travel sanctions, or even finding themselves on international wanted lists if they are found responsible for wrongdoing. What concerns me is not the sanctions themselves, but what they reveal about the evolving narrative surrounding peace, stability, accountability, transparency, and the implementation of the Pretoria Agreement. Few days ago I shared the same concern. Now the federal government seems to have gained another momentum in its struggle to control and shape the narratives. The Pretoria Agreement was signed by two parties and facilitated by several actors, with the United States playing a central role. Yet nearly four years later, it is difficult to argue that any of the key stakeholders have treated its implementation with the seriousness it deserves. The TPLF failed in many respects. The federal government failed as well. And the international facilitators were far less engaged than the complexity of the situation required. One of the most consequential shortcomings was the absence of sustained international engagement after the agreement was signed. The United States did not maintain the level of diplomatic attention necessary to shepherd implementation forward, including failing to provide continuity after Ambassador Mike Hammer’s role ended. The result was predictable. The federal government gained greater room to shape outcomes on the ground and pursue its own political objectives. The Interim Administration never received the support necessary to become genuinely inclusive, effective, and rooted in the region. The spirit of the agreement, and the constitutional order it was supposed to restore, was never fully embraced. The TPLF, for its part, cruel and despotic as they are, responded to these dynamics in ways that were often shortsighted, reactive, and self-serving. Rather than adapting strategically, it resorted to familiar patterns of political maneuvering and exploitation including the legitimate concerns of Tigrayans such as IDPs dignified return to their homes and constitutionally recognized territorial integrity of Tigray. What is disappointing is the growing preference for shortcuts and symbolic actions over a serious effort to address the underlying political challenges. Visa restrictions may send a message. They may even be justified. But they are not a strategy. The crisis in Tigray, and the future of the Pretoria Agreement, and beyond that the crisis Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa will not be resolved through gestures alone. These are deeply complex political problems that require sustained engagement, accountability, and long-term strategic thinking. There are no easy answers, and pretending otherwise only delays the difficult work that still lies ahead.