By Fortune Madondo

On the night of 25 December 2025 when the Christian community of the world in general was celebrating the gift given to the world by heaven (Jesus Christ), the President of United States of America (US) Donald Trump decided to give the Christian community in Nigeria a special, different but deadly Christmas present… precision bombing of ISIS and its elements in the Northwest state of Sokoto.

The ISIS, among other Islamic insurgents in Nigeria, have long been accused of targeting and killing Christians in that part of the world. But this different and deadly Christmas present by the Washington administration raises several fundamental questions, the answers to which are not clear and straightforward.

Why and why now US interest in protecting Christians in Nigeria, whilst in other parts of the world, Christians are and have been victims of violence with no US response? Is this US interest in Nigeria purely and genuinely driven by philanthropy?

The history of US intervention in Africa and other parts of the world does not allow the pleasure of accepting the “philanthropy narrative” at face value.

Is it about protecting Nigerian Christians from the so-called “Christian genocide” in a country where Moslems are also being targeted and equally victims of violence, or is it something much deeper?

Christmas 2025 Bombings

US president Trump highlighted that the bombings were meant to be conducted on the 24th of December, but delayed them.

“They were going to ​do ‌it earlier, and I ‌said, ‘Nope, let’s give ‌a Christmas present. They didn’t think that was coming, but ‌we hit them hard. Every camp got decimated,”  Trump told Politico in an interview.

Aftermath of The Attack

In the aftermath of the attack, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform:

“Tonight, at my direction as Commander in Chief, the United States launched a powerful and deadly strike against ISIS Terrorist Scum in Northwest Nigeria, who have been targeting and viciously killing, primarily, innocent Christians, at levels not seen for many years, and even Centuries!!”

I have previously warned these Terrorists that if they did not stop the slaughtering of Christians, there would be hell to pay, and tonight, there was. The Department of War executed numerous perfect strikes, as only the United States is capable of doing.

Deadly Christmas Present Unwrapped… The Attack!

Sanusi Madabo, a 40-year-old farmer in the Nigerian village of Jabo in the state of Sokoto, was preparing for bed on Christmas night, Thursday 25 December 2025, when he heard a loud noise that sounded like a plane crashing. Together with his wife, they rushed outside their mud house only to see the sky glowing a bright red. Madabo told Associated Press News Agency that the light burned bright for hours.

“It was almost like daytime.”

Madabo at that time did not realise that he was witnessing a US attack on an alleged ISIL (ISIS) camp. Abubakar Sani, another villager, said they heard a large explosion, but as the sound of the explosion “approached our area, the heat became intense,” further stating that, “Our rooms began to shake, and then fire broke out. The Nigerian government should take appropriate measures to protect us as citizens. We have never experienced anything like this before”, Abubakar told Associated Press.

Nigeria & US: Aligned or Acting Aligned?

Official communication is that the US is collaborating and cooperating with the Nigerian government and military in carrying out the military operations on Nigerian soil, like the Christmas 2025 bombing.

Working together militarily but not agreeing on the meaning of the fight. Jussuf Tugur, Nigerian foreign minister, categorically stated that his government and the US are coordinating.

The two countries may be cooperating, but their language is not the same. For Nigeria, this conflict is about dealing with acts of terrorism and insecurity, but for the US, it’s about saving Christians from “Christian genocide.

The Nigerian government is sticking to its terrorism and insecurity argument, certainly for domestic consumption, so that they don’t appear to be siding with or inviting a foreign army to kill its Muslim population and protect Christians.

It’s simple, not to present the whole fiasco as a fight for Christianity versus Islam, because doing so will deepen the crisis. But rather presenting it as a fight against terrorists who attack both Christians and Muslims.

In the American narrative, it will be hard for them to justify military action in another African sovereign country when America’s national interest is not being threatened.

And a situation of terrorist attacks against citizens of a country (Christians and Muslims) is not enough to invite another country’s military action. So they are selling “Christian genocide” narrative to have moral ground for intervention…and present the whole debacle as a US moral crusade against a “Christian genocide”. #

And this explains why you have the different explanations, even as the two governments are working together or are meant to be working together.

And the question is, how sustainable is this cooperation relationship between Washington DC and the Abuja administration? Can the two administrations with two totally opposed meanings of why they are fighting work together?

Observers point out that the two can work, but for a short while. Washington DC administration wants a moral victory of having stopped “Christian genocide“, and for Abuja, it wants *”quite support and cooperation* “to deal with these militias and insurgencies. So currently, both may be working together, but their meanings of the reason for the fight or bombing are totally opposed and different.

Information Deficit

Troubling is the lack of information on the operation or bombing. President Tinubu should explain who is targeted, what happened, and how Nigeria’s sovereignty is going to be protected.

A spokesperson within the Nigeriàn Tinubu administration, Daniel Buala, does not even know the target, nor does not know the enemy targeted.

This has created a picture of a Nigerian government not in control of Nigeria admnstration confused by the operation, suggesting the US may have worked alone, and the talk of coordinating and cooperation is nothing but a fallacy or that something is being hidden from the mainstream media and public.

Praise & Applause Only, No Data

After the aftermath of the Christmas deadly precision bombings, the US declared the mission a success. No statistics.No information.No identities given. No clear breakdown of what was achieved on the ground, only praise & applause, no data.

Counter-terrorism Or What?

Why Sokoto, Not Other Insurgency Hot States?

Analyst question US’s choice of striking northwestern Sokoto State. It needs to be noted that neither Abuja nor Washington have identified their precise targets among the multiple armed groups operating in Nigeria.

Observers are concerned as to why striking northwestern Sokoto State, where non-ideological armed gangs known as “bandits” are a bigger concern than fighters, who may not even have been hit by the strikes.

“If you’re going to strike, then it should not be the least affected areas,”said Victoria Ekhomu, an analyst and head of the Association of Industrial Security and Safety Operators of Nigeria.

She told the AFP news agency that a more obvious target would have been northeastern Borno State, the epicentre of Nigeria’s armed conflict. Experts note that the US Christmas airstrike in northwestern Nigeria appears to be politically motivated rather than militarily effective.

According to Dr Al-Khidr Abdel-Baqi of the Nigeriàn Centre for Arab Research,

“The targeted sites are not traditional strongholds of ISIS or Boko Haram. Expanding could trigger protests and deepen the government’s political crisis, especially given the symbolic weight of the Sokoto area “

Dr Alaa Al-Asfari, a Syrian political expert, is of the view that Trump’s US administration is exploiting extremist activity to “perpetuate instability” and could be laying the groundwork for schemes to fragment the West African country.

Tactical Strike or Strategic Signal?

Sokoto State has a symbolic significance in Nigeria as the “Seat of the Caliphate”, representing the spiritual andhistorical heart of Islam in Nigeria. Sokoto embodies a legacy of integrated spiritual and political governance that continues to influence modern Nigeria.

Sokoto, as the heartland of the old Islamic caliphate, represents continuity, authority, and religious legitimacy. However, in recent history, given the rise of insurgencies and acts of terrorism, Sokoto, once revered as a symbol of faith, authority, and order, is now dragged into narratives of terror, violence and insurgencies.

Sacred legacy overshadowed by bloodshed. By striking Sokoto, the US was executing more than just a tactical strike, but sending a strategic signal, maybe saying we know you are the heart of Islam, and possibly supporting and propping up these Islamic insurgencies, and we are coming for you.

The Concerns

a) Deepening Polarisation

Fears abound that the US involvement in Nigeria will attract the real anti-US forces, making Nigeria the theatre of war. The US’ involvement in Nigeria, citing coming to ‘protect Christians’, will ultimately polarise the West African nation between the Christian and Islam population, which is not a good sign in the long run. Already, signs of divisions may be there, but what US involvement is further deepening the division.

b) Infringed Nigerian Sovereignty

Nigeria should be aware of the potential trade-offs in terms of territorial integrity and independence if it allows an assertive nation like the US to establish a presence.

Therefore, as some advice, Nigeria should halt all military cooperation with the US immediately because, given the imperial tendencies of the US worldwide, Nigerian sovereignty may be in danger.

Some analysts argue that if Nigeria need assistance in dealing with insurgencies and acts of terrorism, better seek it from neutral countries, not the imperial US.

c) Nigeria’s Pawn in the Geopolitics Game

One school of thought points to the argument that Nigeria is of interest to the US administration because it provides the US with a gateway to the Sahel region. The Sahel region where the AES axis have laid dominant.

Their perceived anti- West stance has already seen France chased away. The AES have been pro- Russia. Nigeria is key to this strategy. It is Africa’s largest economy, its most populous country, and a regional anchor. If Nigeria is kept unstable, the entire West African region remains fragile.

Terrorism in Nigeria justifies foreign military presence, intelligence operations, and “security partnerships” that stretch across borders into Niger, Chad, and the Sahel. This creates a security corridor that can be activated or redirected when needed.

 d) Resources

It is folly to believe that the US’s interests are all about protecting Christians from the so-called “Christian genocide”. Practical geopolitical concerns and access to critical minerals are a very great possibility.

Nigeria has oil, and Nigeria is in the top ten countries that are the top producers of critical rare metals. Also, its neighbour is Niger, the top producer of uranium. Uranium is used for producing nuclear weapons.

 e) Foreign Intervention Induced Chaos

Contemporary African history is replete with the failure of foreign military powers to ensure peace in the conflict regions of Africa. And one wonders if US military intervention in Nigeria is going to turn out differently.

Most African leaders and people view the US- and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)- as the protector of democracy and a moral mediator of national conflicts.

The US even has a Mission to the African Union to strengthen democratic institutions, promote peace and stability, etc. But with the US-induced chaos in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, etc., Africa should be more cautious and should become wary of foreign military interference.

In 1992, UN Security Council Resolution 733 and UN Security Council Resolution 746 led to the creation of the United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM I) to provide humanitarian relief and help restore order in Somalia after the dissolution of its central government.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 794 was unanimously passed in December 1992, which approved a coalition of United Nations peacekeepers led by the United States.

In January 2021, the US troops completed their withdrawal from Somalia at a time when the Al-Qaeda-linked Al-Shabab extremist group was improving its bomb-making skills and continuing to attack military and civilian targets even in the capital, Mogadishu. For three decades of foreign interference, Somalia has 500,000 fatalities to show and a legacy of being both a fragile and failed state.

This *timing of the withdrawal makes one wonder whether* the United Nations Security Council worsened the heavy loss of life, destruction to property and threat to regional stability they set out to rectify in 1992.

In a bid to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 in response to the First Libyan Civil War events, US and British naval forces fired over 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles.Fighting in Libya ended in October 2011 following the death of Muammar Gaddafi. Libya’s newgovernment requested that the mission be extended to the end of the year, but the Security Council unanimously voted to end NATO’s mandate for military action.

This withdrawal shows a pattern of US and NATO troops withdrawing from territories in times of need.Since the end of the war, there has been violence involving various militias and the new state security forces, which have escalated into the Second Libyan Civil War. Libya is now arguably a failed state.

Anarchy, violence, and arms proliferation are what Libya has to show for foreign military intervention led by the US. Hopefully, Nigeria will not end up a “new Libya”, worse off in terms of insecurity and acts of terrorism.

Also, that citizens don’t become collateral damage in wars, which, regardless of the rhetoric deployed by various parties to these ongoing conflicts, have brought nothing but pain and suffering to Africa.

Conclusion

The two major actors in this debacle point out that they are coordinating and cooperating in this military action and possibly in actions being carried out on Nigerian soil. But the question is, will Tomahawk missiles be enough to address terrorism and insecurity problems bedevilling Nigeria?

Though cooperating, Abuja and Washington DC are talking different languages when it comes to the objective/s of these military operation/s. Washington DC is saying the major objective is the protection of the Christian population from ” *Christian genocide* whilst Abuja says this military co-operation with the US is to deal with ” *terrorism and insecurity* ” in Nigeria.

No doubt, different languages suit their audiences. Worringly, the history of US interventions in Somalia, in Libya, in Sudan has left those countries involved worse off… even outside Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan.

Hopefully, Nigeria won’t be added to this unfortunate list of chaos and destruction directly linked to US imperial interventions. It is naive to believe that the US is involved in Nigeria purely for the philanthropic reason of saving Christians from the so-called “Christian genocide. History has clearly shown that when these powers intervene, resources are not far from their menu. Nigeria has oil, and Nigeria is in top ten producers of critical rare minerals. Geopolitical factors cannot be dismissed. The US wants more military bases in the region.

And also, Nigeria, as some observers have pointed out, offers “door” or prelude to the Sahel region; Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso, possibly to deal with the troublesome trio of military leaders who are perceived to be anti- West and increasingly pro- Russia.

Over and above all, leaders and administrators in Abuja ought to be reminded that”America’s ally is America,” they better be advised (on the so-called military cooperation and coordination) and should not be under any illusion.

And also they should be reminded of Henry Kissinger, former US Secretary of State’s s warning; “it is dangerous to be an enemy of the US, but to be a friend of the US is fatal.”

F. Madondo (African Teacher) fortmada123@gmail.com