That account lays it out all out, damn what an eye opener.
@Midas @Shimbiris @Zak12 @Galool @X29 @NidarNidar read this too.
It lays the fault solely with Ethiopia(Abyssinia) and they are either impeding or undoing the progress in the region and are chief instigators. It says " a "violent desire of a barbarous people" to seize wealth that Adel had gained through trade and industry"
It also notes Awdals retaliation was brutal and strategic often taking Abyssinians slaves latter selling them as high value merchandise because unlike Adalites they didn't have any valuable goods or domestic manufactured products so there was not much else to take as a spoil of war.
The text notes a grim irony: Abyssinian slaves were often "idle warmongers," so their removal inadvertently reduced conflict.
It also gives the example that when Ethiopia is peaceful and cooperates with it's neighbors like Awdal they grows rich and prosperous because they benefited through Awdal's trade networks((gold, cattle, hide, all manners of provisions, coffee). War disrupted this, replacing mutual gain with zero-sum plunder.
What it also says is that "The Abyssinian elite’s corruption (accepting bribes to tolerate peace) undermined long-term stability for short-term wealth" .
It also shows how Awdal was commercial in nature driven by peaceful diplomatic trade agreements with Arabia, India and economic integration through trade and industry. As it say they formed "Three partners united one trade"
It narrates it from the perspective of a Muslim(Moorish) princess married into Abyssinian (Ethiopian) royalty. Helena saw both sides. She blamed Abyssinia’s warlike culture for rejecting peace, even when it was in their interest. Her efforts failed because Abyssinian elites preferred raiding over diplomacy, despite knowing the benefits of trade.
I transcribed it into readable modern English:
Besides the duty of governing, another motive influenced her, which, however good in itself, was very problematic given the present circumstances. A peace with Adel was what the Empress Helena consistently desired, for she could not bear to see the destruction of her own country, much less contribute to it. She herself was of Moorish origin, the daughter of Mahomet, the governor of Dawaro for the king. Even during her husband's reign, she had been suspected of favoring the welfare of her homeland over that of the kingdom of Abyssinia.
Thus, this princess, thoroughly informed about the interests of both nations, seems in her conduct to have acted upon the most judicious and sensible principles. She knew that Adel, by its situation and interests, was inherently commercial. That part of Africa, along with the opposite Arabia and the peninsula of India, formed three partners united in one trade. They mutually consumed each other's produce and contributed to exporting the combined goods of the three regions to distant parts of Europe, Asia, and Africa—the three continents that then constituted the known world. When Adel was at peace with Abyssinia, the latter grew wealthy from the gold, ivory, coffee, cattle, hides, and all manner of provisions procured by Adel from the mountainous regions above it. Trade flourished, and plenty followed. Merchants carried every kind of goods to the most distant provinces in safety, benefiting both Abyssinia and Adel equally.
These advantages, so keenly felt, were maintained by bribery and a steady flow of Mahometan gold in the Abyssinian court. The kingdom, however, prospered under these conditions. On the other hand, war with Adel arose from the violent desire of a barbarous people, such as the Abyssinians were, to seize riches their neighbors had gained through trade and industry.
She saw that even in the worst-case scenario, nothing utterly destructive could happen to the Abyssinians. In their raids into Adel, they plundered markets and obtained Indian goods of every kind at the risk of their lives—goods they would otherwise have paid for. Conversely, when the people of Adel were victorious, they acquired no goods or manufactures but took the Abyssinians themselves as slaves, selling them in Arabia and across Asia at immense profits. Next to gold, slaves were the most agreeable and valuable merchandise in the East. And since these slaves were chiefly the idle warmongers, their removal promoted the more desirable outcome of peace.
In this state, war was merely another form of commerce between the two nations, though peace was the most beneficial condition for both. This was what Empress Helena had constantly strived to maintain, though she could not always succeed.