By Rufai Ahmed Alkali, Ph. D.
Introduction
The recent statement by US President Donald J. Trump threatening possible military action against Nigeria — ostensibly to “protect Christians from persecution” — represents one of the most serious diplomatic challenges Nigeria has faced in recent times.
While ostensibly couched in humanitarian and religious-freedom terms, the underlying motivations are clearly broader and more complex, involving domestic US politics, strategic rivalries in the Sahel, global economic realignments, and competition over access to Nigeria’s vast natural and energy resources.
This intervention situates the current US posture within a wider geopolitical context and offers clear steps the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) should take to manage, diffuse, and ultimately transform this crisis into an opportunity for strategic repositioning.
1. Background
The US threat emerged following a series of statements in which President Trump accused Nigeria’s government of failing to protect Christians from what he described as “systematic religious genocide.” He suggested that the United States “could not remain idle” and even hinted at potential troop deployment or targeted air strikes under a humanitarian justification.
The Federal Government of Nigeria swiftly rejected the claim and reaffirmed its commitment to the protection of all citizens regardless of religion, describing the remarks as “unfortunate, unfounded, and unacceptable interference in Nigeria’s internal affairs.”
However, the threat has exposed deeper currents in international politics. It comes at a time of global transition — where new alliances, energy dynamics, and power blocs are reshaping the world order — and Nigeria, by virtue of its size and strategic importance, finds itself at the crossroads.
It is even more shocking to both the government and people of Nigeria because, since political independence in 1960 (precisely 65 years ago), the United States has always been seen and treated as one of the closest (if not not closest) ally to Nigeria.
2. What are the Real Motives Behind President Trump Threats?
On the surface, while the religious argument has been presented upfront as the moral ‘justification’, it is widely believed that there are a number of other interlinked forces and motives that underpins this hostile posture from President Trump.
i. US Domestic Politics and Trump’s Conservative Evangelical Base
At home, President Trump faces pressure from a powerful evangelical constituency that has long framed global politics in religious terms. For many in that base, Africa — and particularly Nigeria — represents a frontline in a supposed struggle between Christianity and Islam. The rhetoric of “saving Nigerian Christians” therefore plays directly into the emotional and electoral logic of his domestic politics.
By adopting a tough stance, Trump projects strength, reassures his evangelical supporters, and reclaims the narrative of “defender of faith” at a crucial political moment in the US.
ii. Diversion of Global Attention from the Israel–Gaza Crisis
The timing of Trump’s remarks also coincided with intensifying criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza. Analysts believe that shifting attention to a new theatre — Nigeria — allows Washington to redirect global conversation away from the Middle East, while reasserting its moral posture elsewhere.
In this sense, the Nigerian issue serves as both a distraction and a symbolic reaffirmation of American global activism.
iii. The BRICS Challenge and the New Emerging Financial Order
Nigeria’s growing engagement with the BRICS group and other non-Western partners has unsettled Washington. The ongoing global push for de-dollarization and alternative payment systems poses a challenge to US economic hegemony. Nigeria, as Africa’s largest economy and a potential BRICS partner, represents a critical node in this shift.
By invoking threats under humanitarian pretexts, the US may be seeking to remind Nigeria — and by extension, Africa — of its continuing strategic leverage and military reach.
iv. Declining US Influence in the Sahel and Growing Russian Presence
In the last few years, the Sahel has witnessed a dramatic erosion of Western European influence, as was the case in Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso, where pro-Russian sentiment and cooperation have increased. The US military footprint has contracted, while Russia, through both state and private actors, has filled the vacuum.
It is obvious to the US, Nigeria’s central position in Sub-Sahara Africa makes it both the next potential target and the last stronghold in the contest for regional influence and control. The US threat therefore doubles as a warning to Moscow and a signal of renewed American assertiveness in West Africa.
v. Chinese Depeening Penetration of the Nigerian Economy
It is a fact that in the past few years, China’s presence in Nigeria has expanded far beyond infrastructure projects to mining, energy, telecommunications, and finance. The United States views this deepening relationship with serious concern, interpreting it as a loss of economic and political space.
As Chinese interests secure long-term access to Nigerian minerals and construction contracts, Washington fears that Nigeria may slip further from its orbit — a trend that military rhetoric may be designed to stop or reverse.
vi. Oil, Minerals, and the Dangote Refinery Effect
Perhaps the most concrete economic factor is the rapid transformation of Nigeria’s energy landscape. The coming onstream of the Dangote Refinery — the largest in Africa — is poised to end Nigeria’s dependence on imported refined petroleum, much of which has been coming from US-based petroleum suppliers.
For many decades, American and European corporations benefited from exporting refined fuel to Nigeria. The Dangote refinery now challenges those commercial interests while strengthening Nigeria’s energy sovereignty. This is one of the sore points for President Trump and his administration.
Similarly, the competition for control over Nigeria’s oil, gas, and rare minerals has intensified — and the language of “humanitarian intervention” can easily mask underlying economic and Imperial motives.
vii. Nigeria – US Bilateral Frictions and the France Factor
It is widely believed that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s early overtures to France and the European Union, along with his apparently lack of personal rapport with Donald Trump, have contributed to a cooling of relations between the US and Nigeria.
It is known that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been to France many times on official and private visits over the last few years. From available records, Tinubu has visited France once before the 2023 Presidential election; twice as President – elect; and over four times as President of Nigeria. During all this period, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was in the United States only once in September 2023, to attend the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). Surely, the Americans, have been following all these President Tinubu’s movements.
The US perceives President Bola Ahmed Tinubu as more inclined towards Paris and potentially aligned with Europe’s own African policy.
In the fluid world of power politics, such perception — however unfounded — can fuel miscalculation, leading to the kind of bluster seen in recent weeks.
3. Implications for Nigeria
The US threat, if left unaddressed, carries serious consequences on multiple fronts:
i. Sovereignty and national pride: The open suggestion of foreign military action undercuts Nigeria’s independence and global image.
ii. Economic vulnerability:
Even rhetorical threats can rattle investors, slow capital flows, and destabilize markets.
iii. Diplomatic isolation: Nigeria risks being cast as a “problem country,” inviting more external interference.
iv. Internal cohesion: Framing Nigeria’s insecurity as religious persecution could deepen domestic mistrust and embolden extremists.
v. Regional stability: Any misstep could further destabilize ECOWAS and invite further external manipulation in the Sahel. Already the three countries of Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso have delinked from the ECOWAS and any further international crises affecting Nigeria would make it even more difficult for ECOWAS to recalibrate itself.
4. Urgent Steps the Federal Government of Nigeria Should Take
In my view, in order to safeguard Nigeria’s short, medium and long term interests and defuse tensions, the Federal Government must act swiftly but strategically. I wish to suggest the following (not necessarily exhaustive) multi-track approaches:
A. Immediate Actions
i. Diplomatic Engagement:
The Federal Government should seek a direct conversation between Presidents Tinubu and President Trump to clarify Nigeria’s position and reaffirm the mutual respect between the two nations;
The Federal Government should mobilize the Nigerian Embassy in Washington to engage US lawmakers, Think- Tanks, and faith-based organizations to correct the current misconceptions and misrepresentation the Nigerian situation.
2. Narrative Management:
i. The Federal Government should establish a ‘Crisis Management and Communication Unit’ under the Presidency (with representatives from relevant MDA) to coordinate messaging, emphasizing Nigeria’s secular constitution and government efforts to protect all Nigerian citizens.
ii. It is also critical at this stage to encourage inter-faith meetings and national solidarity messages from Muslim and Christian leaders within Nigeria to undercut the false external narrative of religious war.
3. Time for Visible Humanitarian Actions:
The Federal Government should increase protection for the
high-risk communities, enhance policing in conflict-prone zones, and publicize results to demonstrate effective governance.
In recent times, a number of states have introduced community based security support units which are working side by side with the Nigerian Police. These should be properly regulated, trained and funded to avoid unprofessional conducts and behaviours.
B. Medium -Term Strategy
4. Strategic Foreign Policy Recalibration:
i. Given Nigeria’s experience, this is the time to reinforce Nigeria’s commitment to multi-alignment — maintaining balanced relations with the US, China, Russia, and the European Union without dependency on any single power bloc.
It appears to most keen observers that, Nigeria, for too long has put all its eggs in one basket, unfortunately, it’s traditional allies have always failed the country at the time of need, just as in the case today.
ii. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu should urgently convoc the All Nigeria Ambassadors Conference to review the Nigeria’s Foreign Policy in order to chart a new course for the country. Participants should be drawn from the following: former and serving senior Nigerian Diplomats in the United Nations system; experienced former and serving Nigerian Ambassadors; experts from the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA) Lagos, and the National Institute of Strategic Studies (NIPS), Kuru Jos; Scholars in International Relations and Nigerian Foreign Policy in Nigerian Universities; experts in Defence and Strategic Studies from the Nigerian Defence Academy, Kaduna, and the National Defence College, Abuja; and Leaders and select members of the Nigerian Political Science Association (NPSA).
iii. Despite all the challenges in ECOWAS and the African Union, still Nigeria can rally the Sub Regional and continental Organisations for solidarity against any foreign threat to Nigeria’s sovereignty.
5. Economic and Energy Diplomacy:
i. The Federal Government should ensure that despite all the pressures, it continues to promote and protect Nigeria’s petroleum refining independence. The Dangote Refinery and subsequent ones should be supported and defended against both local and external sabotage.
ii. Since rare minerals have become the new battle grounds, and it is known that these are available in large quantities in the country, the Nigerian Government should do everything possible to reform the extractive sectors for the benefit of all Nigerians.
All these can be achieved through discussions, negotiations, and collaboration and not through confrontation. In other words, Government should encourage partnerships with friendly nations to develop local value chains in oil, gas, and mining.
6. Security Reforms:
i. It is time for Government to urgently upgrade and improve intelligence, coordination, and deploy rapid-response capacities to prevent localized violence that foreign actors could exploit.
ii. Governments at all levels in the country should improve the process and transparency in reporting communal conflicts to counter exaggerated foreign narratives. It is very clear that in absence of well documented official reports about conflicts, fake news will take over and fill the vacuum with their narratives which often travel faster with unpleasant consequences.
C. Long-Term Strategic Goals
7. Institutional Resilience:
i. The Federal Government should strengthen the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ strategic analysis unit to anticipate and manage international crises.
It is time to move away from routine and bureaucratic red-tapism which often lack depths, coherence and currency.
ii. The Federal Government should develop a robust framework for conflict prevention and peacebuilding within Nigeria’s federal structure. The state Governments should also collaborate with the Federal Government on this critical area. Governments should avoid politicisation of inter-faith and communal disagreements which could degenerate to open violent conflicts.
8. Global Positioning:
i. Given the strategic position of Nigeria in the West Africa Sub Region and the African Continent, it is time to promote Nigeria’s role as a responsible regional power — one that supports stability, religious tolerance, and inclusive development.
ii. To achieve this,we must put our house in order. This would also enable Nigeria to use soft diplomacy, including cultural and diaspora engagement, to shape international perception. At the moment, the Federal Government need to engage the Diaspora fully so that they can play their own roles as goodwill Ambassadors of the country. Alienating this critical segment of the Nigerian Society will end up breeding resentment, bitterness, anger escalating into anti Nigeria rhetorics actions.
No matter the pressure, the Federal Government should not open a corridor for for the Establishment of a US military base in Nigeria. The short and long term security, political and economic implications of a foreign military base on Nigerian soil is beyond contemplation.
Meanwhile, I call on all Nigerians, especially the political elites, the Ulama, the Clergy, Civil Society Organisations and the media (both traditional and social media) to exercise restraint in their comments and commentaries not to further exacerbate tention between Nigeria and the rest of the world. This is a test for Nigeria and for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and surely, if we put our acts we shall overcome.
5. My Final Word
The current tension with the United States is not an isolated episode but part of a broader geopolitical contest — one in which Nigeria’s resources, geography, and influence make it a crucial prize. The challenge for Nigeria is to respond wisely: neither with submission nor with defiance, but with strategic composure.
By combining assertive diplomacy, domestic unity, and economic and security reforms, Nigeria can transform this moment of threat into one of renewal. The world must be reminded that Nigeria is not a passive object of external pity or pressure, but a proud, sovereign nation capable of managing its own destiny — in peace, in dignity, and in partnership with all who respect its independence.
Rufa’i Ahmed Alkali is a Professor of Political Science and Writes from Nigeria.
