US President Donald Trump’s comments on Nigeria and its government’s perceived failure to protect the Christian population raised more than one eyebrow. While public opinion is now accustomed to his blunt and direct communication style, the reason behind his comments on Nigeria escaped most.
A war on words
Trump brought Nigeria to the forefront of US foreign policy in November by announcing that it had become a Country of Particular Concern (CPC). This designation was due to the widespread violence against Christians in the northern regions at the hands of Islamist groups (namely Boko Haram and the Islamic State West Africa (ISWA)). Labeling a country as a CPC is a very specific status under the International Religious Freedom Act; it describes a country as responsible for severe, systematic, ongoing and egregious violations of religious freedom. The US President expressed concern over attacks against “our cherished Christians” and, most critically, over the central government’s failure to prevent or stop them. Trump threatened economic retaliation and went as far as announcing he had instructed the US military to prepare for a land intervention.
Why Nigeria?
With a population of 240 million, Nigeria is the most populous African country. Furthermore, with 1.4 million barrels per day in 2023, it is by far the largest oil-producing country on the continent, with second-tier Algeria producing 1.2 million barrels per day. Unsurprisingly, for such a vast country, Nigeria has a very diverse religious landscape: roughly half of its population is Muslim, predominantly residing in the northern regions, while the other half is Christian, living mostly in the south. US Presidents, both Democrat and Republican, have recently characterized the US relationship with Nigeria as one of the most vital on the African continent. However, despite shared interests and cooperation in areas like counterterrorism and economic development, the bilateral relationship frequently encounters periods of tension concerning both security and economic affairs.
As one of the largest and most economically developed countries in Africa, Nigeria has regional and continental influence but has long suffered from terrorist attacks and internal insecurity – perhaps as a consequence of its size and weight. It is worth noting that Nigeria is a liberal democracy, but this does not translate into more stability. In fact, the northernmost regions of the country, those bordering Niger, Chad and Cameroon, have been subjected to countless episodes of violence in recent decades. However, it is untenable to claim that violence is religiously motivated: Boko Haram and the ISWA, while self-characterized as Islamist groups, target Muslim and Christian population indiscriminately: their fight is about land and power, not about religious supremacy. In fact, in the past year alone, almost three quarters of the victims in the Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states were of Muslim faith. Terrorist attacks are more the result of ethnic tensions, land claims and local power than religious beliefs. As such, the narrative of “an entire faith being erased” at the hands of Islamic terrorists, while appealing to a large part of Trump’s constituency, is oversimplistic and misleading: framing a complex crisis solely in religious terms risks inflaming tensions and undermining efforts to address its multifold root causes.
Regarding international law, unilaterally characterizing the ongoing violence (however severe) as a single, intentional genocidal act against Nigerian Christians does not authorize the United States or any other country to intervene militarily in Nigeria. While the international community has the responsibility to stop any genocide, international practice typically awaits the findings of independent inquiries before a determination of genocide is made. A lawful military intervention would be possible if the Nigerian government admitted its failure to protect its own population and requested foreign military assistance. However, this option was categorically dismissed by the Nigerian government, which rejected the claims made by Trump. In the words of Nigerian Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar, religious freedom is fully protected under the Nigerian constitution, as he dismissed accusations of an inability to curb the violence.
Why now?
Massacres by Islamist groups in Northern Nigeria are not new; it has been a well-documented horror for years, including for Christian populations. This renewed attention on Nigeria is a consequence of how much the US has lost influence – though not interest – in Africa. Most of West Africa is, in fact, breaking away from Western influence, especially when it comes to major economic deals. For example, one of the most low-key and under-spoken events in the last few years was the withdrawal of Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso from the Economic Community of West African States, a residual post-colonial organization that addresses military and economic matters – and openly favors Western governments and their investments in the region. They instead founded the Confederation of Sahel Countries, under apparent Russian blessing.
Read also: South of Sahara: Conflicts to watch
Moreover, when African countries flee former colonial powers, China thrives. It is widely known that China has been investing colossally in Africa, especially in infrastructures and notably in Eastern Africa – for obvious proximity reasons. During the second half of the last century, Beijing found it easy to promote the idea that both China and African nations were engaged in the same struggle to break free from the chains of the imperialistic West. While this was undoubtedly true, China has now become the world’s second-largest economy and is currently Africa’s biggest trading partner. Beijing, with its enormous population, has an appetite for raw materials, an area in which Nigeria is abundant. The list is extensive, ranging from lithium and cobalt (essential for our cellphones and batteries) to gold, oil and bauxite.
Furthermore, Nigeria has been a major beneficiary of Sino-African ties. In the last 13 years alone, the China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation has invested more than $7 billion in infrastructure – especially railways, roads, airports and bridges. According to the World Bank, China has consistently supported the industrialization of African nations, accounting for an average of 12% of Africa’s total industrial or manufacturing production; when it comes to Nigeria, China’s contribution to industrial outcomes stands out at 9.2%. The same World Bank data places China as the highest employment generator in Africa, creating an average of 18,600 direct jobs per year; for comparison, the US accounts for less than 12,000 direct jobs created. Former Chinese Consul General in Lagos Chu Maoming said that in 2020 there were more than 120 top-tier Chinese companies operating in Nigeria, either independently or in partnership with local businesses.
China’s strategy in the country is clear: it focuses on developing colossal projects that would eventually tie the regional, national and local economies to its companies. A good example of this strategy is the Lekki Deep Sea Port in Nigeria. Inaugurated in 2023, it is now the largest seaport of Nigeria and one of the biggest in West Africa. Less tangible but equally powerful is the telecommunication sector, with Huawei a major technology player in Africa, from building digital infrastructure to powering digital transformation across industries. Huawei currently provides hardware services for all the major Nigerian telecom operators.
What now?
It is safe to assume that Nigeria, to the US, represents a breakaway country – or a breakaway market. Among foreign policy analysts it is common to say that US foreign policy does not change overnight, even when White House tenants do. Ultimately, the recently turned aggressive rhetoric from the Trump administration on Nigeria’s internal conflicts appears to be a strategically timed maneuver crafted to undermine the flourishing Sino-Nigerian relationship – that is reshaping the regional power dynamics.
Whether this “war on words” escalates to tangible economic or military action, the underlying tension is clear: the battle for influence in Africa is intensifying, and Nigeria, with its vast resources and strategic importance, is already a critical battleground.