Trump’s Wake-up Call to Nigeria

In spite of the manner it was received, the United States designation of Nigeria as a ‘Country of Particular Concern’ offers an opportunity for the Nigerian government to tackle insecurity and uphold good governance, Davidson Iriekpen writes 

The  federal  government is currently challenging the designation of Nigeria as a ‘Country of Particular Concern’ (CPC) by the United States President, Mr. Donald Trump.

Trump had cited alleged widespread killings of Christians as his reason.

A Country of Particular Concern designation under the International Religious Freedom Act represents one of the most serious diplomatic rebukes the United States can issue. It signals that a government has either engaged in or tolerated systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom.

The designation comes with potential consequences, including sanctions, travel restrictions on government officials, and limitations on security assistance. 

More significantly, it places Nigeria alongside countries like China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea on a list of the world’s worst violators of religious freedom.

It is a devastating blow to Nigeria’s international reputation and a clear message that the world is no longer willing to ignore the alleged bloodshed going on in-country.

But President Bola Tinubu vehemently debunked the allegation, declaring that the Nigerian government protects citizens of all faiths and will never encourage religious persecution.

Tinubu, had in a six-paragraph statement, explained that Nigeria stands firmly as a democracy governed by constitutional guarantees of religious liberty, adding that since 2023, when he assumed office, he has maintained an open and active engagement with Christian and Muslim leaders alike and continues to address security challenges that affect citizens across faiths and regions.  

“The characterisation of Nigeria as religiously intolerant does not reflect our national reality, nor does it take into consideration the consistent and sincere efforts of the government to safeguard freedom of religion and beliefs for all Nigerians. 

“Religious freedom and tolerance have been a core tenet of our collective identity and shall always remain so. Nigeria opposes religious persecution and does not encourage it,” Tinubu stressed.

Also last Thursday, Tinubu assured the US that his administration is committed to defeating terrorism in Nigeria. He emphasised that Nigeria will continue to engage with its international partners, undeterred by current diplomatic tensions.

The Nigerian Tinubu assured the nation of his administration’s commitment to defeating terrorism.

In its reaction, the federal government, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, explained that Nigerians of all faiths have long lived, worked, and worshipped together peacefully. 

It equally stated that the Tinubu administration remains committed to fighting terrorism, strengthening interfaith harmony, and protecting the lives and rights of all Nigerians.

While appreciating the global concern for human rights and religious freedom in Nigeria, the federal government vehemently rejected Trump’s tag of a “Country of Particular Concern” on Nigeria, insisting that the claim of genocide against Christians does not reflect the situation on the ground.

The situation got worse when Trump, barely 24 hours after, said he had ordered the Department of War to prepare for possible military operations in Nigeria. He also threatened to immediately stop all aid and assistance to Nigeria.

He further added that the US would carry out military action against the country to completely wipe out those he described as the Islamic terrorists responsible for the killing of Christians. 

The issue has since divided Nigerians along religious and ethnic lines. While many Christian communities believed to be facing existential threats in the hands of terrorists are jubilating that for once their cries have heard abroad, the Muslim communities are wondering if their lives do not matter in the equation, having equally lost a large number of persons since the last two decades when insecurity started in the country.

While observers have attributed Trump’s actions to Nigeria’s recent bid to join the BRICS nations; its growing ties with China in the solid minerals sector; and its rejection of US deportee repatriations, what cannot be denied is that almost daily, people are being killed by terrorised across the country.

There is no doubt that Christians have suffered greatly, villages have been razed, churches burnt, pastors kidnapped and killed, and congregants massacred, many Muslims too have been victims of the same terrorism, often at the hands of the same armed groups, professing Islam. 

To frame the crisis solely through a religious lens risks deepening sectarian divides and undermining the possibility of unified national action against violence.

Many have accused successive governments, including the Tinubu-led administration of ignoring the sacking of indigenous communities and the forceful occupation of their ancestral lands.

Since Boko Haram launched its insurgency in 2009, Nigeria’s security landscape has grown increasingly fragile. What began as a regional insurgency in the North-east has evolved into a complex web of violence stretching across the country.

Armed groups, often indistinguishable from terrorists, ravage villages, kidnap residents, and loot resources with little resistance. Nigeria has become a fertile ground for them to operate unchallenged.

The consequences of these are visible everywhere: Communities uprooted, farmlands abandoned, highways turned into ambush zones, and thousands of citizens reduced to live in internally displaced persons’ camps.

The situation is most frustrating when the federal and the state governments have not been able to effectively address the menace. Each year, thousands are killed in terrorists and bandits’ attacks. Reports indicate that nearly 5,000 people have died this year alone. 

Section 14(2)(b) of the Constitution squarely puts the security and welfare of the people as the primary purpose of government but the Nigerian government is neglecting in his regard.

In fact, on several occasions and fora, many Nigerians have had to accuse the federal government of indifference. The political class concentrate efforts on the politics of 2027, at the expense of the people.

This is why they believe that the US designation of Nigeria didn’t happen in vacuum, it reflects years of lack of political will by successive Nigerian governments to confront the challenge. 

This glaring absence of commitment to justice and accountability has fuelled allegations of complicity.

If terrorists and militias are genuinely criminal groups operating outside state control, why aren’t security forces arresting them? If they’re terrorists threatening national security, why aren’t they being prosecuted? 

There are allegations that the groups sacking indigenous communities and occupying their lands operate with official protection or are tolerated by some elements within Nigeria’s security architecture.

Multiple credible reports document how security forces arrive hours after attacks despite communities alerting authorities before the raids.

In many other documented cases, security forces refused to pursue fleeing attackers, and in some other cases, actively prevented communities from defending themselves. Some survivors reported how security personnel withdrew from areas just before attacks occurred, suggesting foreknowledge, if not coordination and complicity. 

This pattern of complicity extends to the judicial system, where arrested suspects are always released without prosecution.

To further complicate matter, security agencies have not been able to demonstrate adequate capacity to decisively deal with the situation. Successive service chiefs have failed repeatedly to meet the expectations of Nigerians.

Now is the time for the federal government to take decisive action to address the country’s worsening insecurity before it spirals into a confrontation with the United States. 

It will be far more prudent – and humane – for Nigeria to safeguard its citizens’ lives than to leave its fate to foreign intervention. Trump’s warning, however politically charged, should serve as a wake-up call to the Tinubu administration.

This is no moment for rhetoric, grandstanding or pushing sovereign narratives. What Nigeria needs now is a clear strategy, strong leadership, and urgent action to show that it is not complicit but also ready to exhibit capacity and competence.