A new controversy has arisen with allegations that U.S. President Donald Trump ordered airstrikes on Nigerian territory, with the apparent target being ISIS-linked terrorists. Although Washington considered the mission a major success against terrorism and in support of Christians, rumors are emerging in Nigeria about whether the mission was even related to terrorism or not. Nigerian writer Saddam Ibrahim has raised serious questions regarding the validity of the report, believing that geography and intelligence do not add up regarding what the US has reported. administration.
According to Ibrahim, ISIS and Boko Haram are known to operate primarily in Nigeria’s North-East, particularly around Borno and neighboring states. Sokoto, where reports indicate the strike occurred, has never been identified by credible security assessments as an ISIS stronghold.
“What intelligence basis would justify bombing a farm in Sokoto and declaring a counter-terrorism victory?” Ibrahim asked in a widely shared Facebook post. He noted that no verified intelligence reports have confirmed terrorist casualties, nor has any militant group claimed losses or acknowledged an attack, a silence that raises further suspicion.
The justification of protecting Christians has also come under scrutiny. Christians make up less than five percent of Sokoto State’s population, and there are no documented reports of systematic persecution of Christians in the area. Despite this, U.S. officials continue to advance what critics describe as a “Christian genocide” narrative, one that many Nigerian security analysts say is unsupported by data and risks inflaming religious tensions in an already fragile country.
Timing has added fuel to the controversy. The reported strike came a day after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu referenced Nigeria using similar claims of Christian persecution, shortly after a mosque bombing that killed Muslims, and amid ongoing violence involving Christian militias in parts of Plateau State. To critics, the sequence of events suggests not a carefully coordinated security operation, but a politically convenient storyline designed for external audiences.
Even within Nigeria’s security community, confusion persists. Analysts question why a supposedly joint operation has produced no transparent briefings, no confirmed targets, and no clear outcomes. The lack of clarity has led to a growing perception that Nigeria’s security crisis is being politicized by foreign powers rather than addressed through genuine cooperation.
Ibrahim and others stress that Nigerians are not opposed to international support in tackling violence. A coordinated, intelligence-driven effort against bandits in the North-West, militias in the North-Central, separatist violence in the South-East, and jihadist groups in the North-East would be widely welcomed. What alarms critics is the possibility that geopolitical maneuvering, rather than Nigerian lives, is shaping foreign military actions.
Read Also: Christmas Bombs Without Consent: Did the U.S. Strike Nigeria Without Tinubu’s Approval?
But at the forefront of the controversy is a very disturbing question: Was it a matter of fighting terror or a case of power projection and the spread of a particular narrative beyond the borders of the Nigerian state? Until then, Nigerians are left wondering why a farm was bombed, Sokoto was the target, and victory was celebrated without the facts. “A country already grappling with insecurity, poverty, and a lack of unity might just find that ‘agendas’ and ‘grand gestures’ end up causing more problems than they solve,” and Nigeria is “a nation torn between international politics and its own crises.”
