Trump’s Military Action: Genocide, Hypocrisy, and Blood on Nigeria’s Soil

By: Dr. James Bwala

President Donald Trump has doubled down on military actions following ongoing violence and conflict in Nigeria, particularly in regions like Plateau, Kaduna, and Benue, which have drawn the attention of various groups, including religious communities. The argument put forth by many who identify as Christians in Nigeria centers around whether the killings they face can be classified as genocide. The actions of these bandits, terrorists, or Fulani militia and the silence of some Nigerians irrespective of their position in leadership or the poor affirmatively revealed that these actions warrant such a label. Examining the roles of different organizations, particularly Muslim scholars, leaders, and groups like the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC), which is now calling for the sack of INEC Chairman, Professor Josh Amupitan; the Jama’atul Nasrul’la, which is almost nonexistent; as well as the broader implications of American military presence or presence in Nigeria calls for redoubling down indeed. 

I believe that it is critical to define what constitutes genocide according to international law. The United Nations defines genocide as acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. This includes killing members of the group, causing serious bodily or mental harm, and deliberately inflicting conditions calculated to bring about its physical destruction. Given the systematic targeting of Christians in areas such as Plateau, Benue, Kaduna, and other places, one could argue that these attacks meet the criteria for genocide. 

READ ALSO:https://newsng.ng/harassment-of-muslim-women-in-maiduguri-hospitals-an-assertion-amidst-an-alarming-increase-in-terrorist-activities-in-nigerias-northeastern-region/

Reports from various human rights organizations indicate a pattern of violence against Christians that suggests an organized effort to eliminate their presence in certain regions. These are facts facing us, which we cannot deny. The use of terror tactics, mass killings, and displacement aligns with the characteristics of genocide as outlined by the UN. Indeed, the persistent nature of these attacks over time raises questions about the intentions behind them, reinforcing the argument that Christians in Nigeria have a legitimate claim to label these acts as genocide.

The argument for calling these acts genocide is not solely based on the statistics of violence but also on the response—or lack thereof—from other religious groups. For example, while groups like MURIC have vocally addressed issues impacting Muslims, particularly in relation to the hijab controversy and recently the case of harassment of female Muslims regarding routine checks before entry into some hospitals in Maiduguri for security purposes, there has been a conspicuous silence regarding the atrocities of banditry and other terrorist groups committed against Muslims by these same organizations. This silence in response to Muslim killings invites skepticism regarding the motivations and priorities of these organizations. It raises the question: why do Muslim scholars or groups remain silent when Muslims are victimized by bandits, Fulani militia, and Boko Haram but are quick to respond to grievances on other grounds without looking at the weighty things? This inconsistency is indicative of a deeper hypocrisy, suggesting that these groups may be selective in their advocacy based on who is affected, even if Muslim, rather than the universal principle of fighting against injustice for all classes of Muslims.

It is rather essential to understand the sociopolitical context in which these killings occur. Nigeria is characterized by a complex tapestry of ethnic and religious identities, with tensions frequently surfacing between the predominantly Muslim North and the predominantly Christian South. This divide has been exacerbated by economic hardship, political corruption, and increasing competition for resources. In this volatile environment, the actions of armed groups—often labeled as “bandits” or “Fulani militias”—have plunged the nation into chaos, with significant consequences for interreligious relations. The failure of organizations like MURIC and others to condemn violence perpetrated by bandits and terrorists, even against Muslims, or to address this violence by terrorists against the Muslims also calls for questioning regarding what Professor Akintola and his MURIC stand for. Such stands indeed raise troubling questions about the Islamic wing’s and Christian groups’ genuine commitment to justice and community welfare and, indeed, the concerns for Muslims, as Professor Akintola has shown, or which he claimed to be standing on, revealed he is only standing on his own political and business gains and not for any Muslims being victimized daily by bandits. 

The passivity exhibited by some Muslim leaders in denouncing violence within their ranks signals complicity or at least a reluctance to hold their community accountable when it comes to dealing with evil because killing, especially of innocent people, as carried out by these bandits, is the greatest evil against mankind. Such a stance does not foster an inclusive approach to resolving grievances. Instead, it entrenches divisions and fuels cycles of doubt. This, in turn, undermines efforts toward national healing and reconciliation. Without collective action against all forms of terrorism, Nigeria will continue to face escalated violence, making it increasingly challenging to address the root causes of these evils going on and perpetrated by enemies of peace, or whatever names we call them. The results we are getting now with our armed forces rising to the occasion areindicative of the capability of our soldiers to deal with the situations given the support. 

READ ALSO: https://ebonyheraldnewsonline.com.ng/the-kidnapped-kebbi-deputy-speaker-breath-air-of-freedom-by-jamil-gulma-kebbi/

What we are struggling with now, the fear that the American military boots may be seen on our soil, is the case of invoking the UN RnP. The shame of not being able to clean up our mess is that someone else is coming to clean it up for us. That is the ‘disgrace’ Trump allegedly said about us. Indeed, the role of external actors—most notably the presence of American military forces—has stirred debate about intervention strategies in Nigeria. The arrival of American soldiers, if they come, serves both as a sign of hope and as a contentious issue. For many Nigerians, particularly those suffering under the weight of banditry and terrorism, the presence of foreign military personnel signals a potential turning point in the fight against armed groups. There is an expectation that U.S. forces can aid in dismantling the networks of violence and restoring a semblance of peace.

However, this brings up important ethical considerations. Interventions are often fraught with the risk of achieving unintended consequences. If not approached delicately, increased militarization might further exacerbate existing tensions between religious groups, especially if perceptions emerge that foreign troops are intervening in a manner that favors one group over the other. Therefore, the intervention must be accompanied by dialogues aimed at building bridges between communities and addressing historical grievances. Failure to consider the local nuances could lead to a wider rift, countering the very objectives of stabilizing the regions.

The engagement of international communities—including Western nations—is imperative in helping stabilize Nigeria but should be carefully measured. The focus should remain on humanitarian aid, support for local peace-building efforts, and facilitating interfaith dialogues. While military action can neutralize immediate threats, long-term solutions require cooperation among diverse groups within Nigeria and sustained dialogue about shared grievances and aspirations.

READ ALSO:https://newsng.ng/asuu-like-pengasan-and-the-unending-trauma-of-the-nigerian-federal-university-students/

The situation faced by Christians in Plateau, Kaduna, and Benue does qualify as genocide under international definitions, highlighting an alarming trend of targeted violence against religious minorities. The silence of groups such as MURIC illustrates a troubling hypocrisy that suggests selective outrage confined to ethnoreligious identity.  While the presence of American military forces may offer hope for mitigating the influence of violent extremist groups, it must be accompanied by comprehensive strategies that recognize the complex socio-political landscape of Nigeria. Ultimately, genuine reconciliation will require the collaboration of all parties involved—Christians, Muslims, and international actors—to forge a path towards an inclusive and peaceful society that respects the rights of every individual, irrespective of their faith.

* James Bwala, PhD, a security strategy analyst, writes from Abuja.

Trump’s Military Action: Genocide, Hypocrisy, and Blood on Nigeria’s Soil

Boko Haram: Of ISWAP Gathering, Ambush, and the Killing of CO Bama in Borno

By: Dr. James Bwala

In the complex landscape of insecurity and conflict in Nigeria, the recent developments surrounding the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) in Konduga Local Government Area (LGA) of Borno State, Northeast Nigeria, raise critical concerns that warrant immediate attention and action. The incident that transpired on Friday at a village behind Kalleri—where ISWAP was reported to be gathering—exemplifies the ongoing threat posed by extremist groups in the region. 

The ambush on security forces, resulting in multiple casualties, underscored the urgent need for strategic interventions, community engagement, and policy reforms to effectively counter this menace. Therefore, it is imperative that the Nigerian government, in collaboration with local stakeholders, take decisive and comprehensive measures to address the resurgence of ISWAP and its implications for national security.

The ambush on the Konduga security forces, leading to the death of seven personnel, including the Commanding Officer (CO) from Bama, highlights a significant vulnerability within Nigeria’s security apparatus. This incident illustrates not only the tactical proficiency of ISWAP but also the possible shortcomings in intelligence, response coordination, and operational preparedness among security forces. It raises critical questions about the readiness of military units to respond to emerging threats in real time. The immediate request for reinforcements points to gaps in local capacity and the need for better communication and intelligence-sharing frameworks between different military units working across overlapping jurisdictions.

The context of this incident cannot be divorced from the broader socio-economic and political dynamics at play in northeast Nigeria. The protracted nature of the insurgency has led to widespread displacement, loss of livelihoods, and a breakdown of social cohesion. Many villagers have found themselves trapped between the forces of ISWAP and the military, facing violence from both sides. Such precarious living conditions foster an environment ripe for recruitment into extremist groups, as individuals, particularly youth, seek means of survival in a landscape devoid of economic opportunities. To effectively combat ISWAP, it is necessary to not only defeat them militarily but also address the socio-economic conditions that contribute to their appeal.

Community engagement is therefore paramount in mitigating the risk of further violence and extremism. Security forces need to prioritize building trust with local populations through outreach programs and dialogue initiatives that convey their commitment to civilian safety. Establishing an effective community-policing model could yield dividends in terms of intelligence-gathering and local cooperation. Communities often have significant insights into the movements and tactics of insurgents but may fear providing information due to a lack of trust. Creating avenues for safe reporting and collaboration can empower local residents and disrupt ISWAP’s operational networks.

READ ALSO: https://newsng.ng/harassment-of-muslim-women-in-maiduguri-hospitals-an-assertion-amidst-an-alarming-increase-in-terrorist-activities-in-nigerias-northeastern-region/

At the same time, addressing the underlying grievances that fuel discontent is crucial. Many citizens in northeastern Nigeria feel marginalized and neglected by the state, contributing to an environment where extremist ideologies can take root. A concerted approach involving improved governance, provision of basic services, and economic opportunities will be fundamental in reversing the cycle of violence. The Nigerian government must commit to long-term development strategies that emphasize education, employment, and reconciliation to foster resilient communities less susceptible to radicalization.

Additionally, there is a pressing need for reforms within the security sector itself. An assessment of the current military strategy against ISWAP reveals the necessity for developing more adaptive, intelligence-driven operational methodologies. This includes bolstering surveillance capabilities, enhancing training for troops, and fostering inter-agency cooperation among military, police, and intelligence services. Given the evolving nature of insurgent tactics, a rigid approach is inadequate; instead, a flexible and responsive force equipped with the necessary tools and skills is essential for effectiveness in counter-insurgency operations.

It is important to recognize the role of international partners in addressing the challenges posed by ISWAP. The Nigerian government should actively seek support in terms of training, surveillance technology, and logistical assistance. Collaborations with international security agencies could enhance the capacity of local forces, equipping them with the latest strategies and resources necessary for contemporary warfare. However, such partnerships should be approached with caution to ensure that they align with Nigeria’s sovereignty and intended outcomes.

In response to the ambush that occurred near Kalleri, the restriction of movement along the Konduga-Bama road serves as a temporary measure to enhance security but does not address the root causes of instability. While such measures might provide short-term safety for civilians, they often inadvertently exacerbate existing tensions and further isolate vulnerable communities. The government must work towards reestablishing normalcy and accessibility while simultaneously ensuring the safety of its citizens through enhanced security measures that do not infringe upon civil liberties or economic activities.

Ultimately, the incident in Konduga serves as a clarion call for urgent action on multiple fronts. The Nigerian government’s ability to effectively counteract the threat posed by ISWAP hinges on its commitment to comprehensively addressing the challenges of intelligence, community relations, socio-economic development, and security sector reform. By taking a holistic approach that recognizes the interconnectedness of these issues, Nigeria can work towards a more stable and secure environment.

Indeed, the ambush on the Konduga security forces is symptomatic of a broader crisis that requires immediate and concerted efforts from all stakeholders involved. Ensuring the safety and stability of the region will necessitate not only tactical military responses but also community engagement, socio-economic development, and strategic reforms within the security apparatus. As Nigeria grapples with the persistent threat of extremism, the path forward must be characterized by collaboration, innovation, and a commitment to building a more inclusive and resilient society. Failure to act decisively risks entrenching ISWAP’s influence and perpetuating violence, thus eroding civil order and jeopardizing the future of countless innocent lives caught in the crossfire.

* James Bwala, PhD, a security strategy analyst, writes from Abuja. 

Boko Haram: Of ISWAP Gathering, Ambush, and the Killing of CO Bama in Borno

The State Security Service: DG Adeola Oluwatosin Ajayi and the Challenges of Leadership

By: Dr. James Bwala

The role of the State Security Service (SSS) in Nigeria has become increasingly important due to the rise in security challenges facing the nation. With the appointment of Adeola Oluwatosin Ajayi as the new Director-General (DG) of the SSS, there are high expectations for his leadership in tackling various threats. Indeed, the recent strides made by the DG cannot be overstated. Under his leadership, the organization has undergone significant reform, enhancing its operations, boosting morale among personnel, and improving its overall efficacy in maintaining national security. However, it is disheartening to acknowledge that certain individuals, both within and outside the commission, are actively attempting to undermine these commendable efforts. 

Adeola Oluwatosin Ajayi assumed office as DG of the SSS with a wealth of experience in security and intelligence operations. His appointment comes at a crucial time when Nigeria is facing numerous security threats, including terrorism, banditry, and communal clashes. These challenges not only threaten the safety of citizens but also undermine public trust in government institutions. Since his assumption, Ajayi’s leadership has been vital for restoring confidence and ensuring the security of the nation. To appreciate the extent of these advancements, one must first consider the context in which the SSS operates. In a world increasingly fraught with security challenges—ranging from terrorism and cybercrime to organized crime—the role of national security agencies has never been more critical. The Director General’s vision for the SSS emphasizes adaptability, professionalism, and responsiveness. These principles have guided strategic initiatives aimed at modernizing the agency’s operations, fostering collaboration with other security bodies, and engaging with communities to promote trust and cooperation.

Among the notable achievements during this tenure is the modernization of intelligence-gathering methods. The incorporation of advanced technological tools has not only streamlined operations but also enhanced the accuracy and reliability of gathered intelligence. In an age where information is paramount, the SSS has begun harnessing data analytics and artificial intelligence to better preempt security threats. This forward-thinking approach places the service at the forefront of global security practices, demonstrating how proactive measures can deter potential risks before they escalate into crises. Equally important is the emphasis on personnel training and development. Recognizing that the strength of any organization lies in its people, the Director General has prioritized continuous professional development for SSS staff. Through specialized training programs, workshops, and seminars, agents are being equipped with the skills necessary to navigate the complexities of modern security challenges. This investment in human capital not only boosts the competence of personnel but also fosters a culture of excellence and accountability within the ranks.

Despite these accomplishments, challenges persist. Certain factions, driven by self-interest or outdated ideologies, have emerged to destabilize the progress made thus far. These individuals often resort to misinformation campaigns, slander, and attempts at political manipulation, aiming to tarnish the reputation of the Director General and his reform agenda. Such actions not only jeopardize the integrity of the SSS but also pose a threat to national security by sowing discord and eroding public confidence in the institution. Indeed, one of the most alarming aspects of this opposition is its rootedness within the service itself. Individuals who feel threatened by the changes implemented by the Director General may attempt to sabotage initiatives or create an atmosphere of distrust amongst colleagues. This internal dissent can be incredibly damaging, as it undermines the cohesion necessary for effective teamwork and collective action. However, the leadership is acutely aware of these dynamics and is taking decisive steps to cultivate an environment of transparency and unity.

The immediate challenge faced by Mr. Ajayi when he took over was the persistent threat by terrorist groups, particularly Boko Haram and its splinter factions. These groups have continued to launch attacks in the northeastern part of the country, leading to significant loss of life and displacement of communities. However, under Ajayi’s leadership, the SSS enhanced intelligence gathering and collaborated effectively with other security agencies to neutralize these threats. Improved intelligence operations leading to timely interventions and preventing attacks on innocent civilians. 

At the core of the current leadership’s strategy is open communication. The Director General, Mr. Ajayi, aims to build trust and mitigate the impact of dissenters. Regular meetings, team-building exercises, and anonymous reporting channels empower employees to voice concerns without fear of retribution, effectively countering the narratives propagated by those intent on running down the agency. Transparency in decision-making processes not only cultivates a sense of ownership among personnel but also fortifies the agency against external attacks, as a well-informed workforce is less susceptible to manipulation.

READ ALSO: https://newsng.ng/when-vice-president-kashim-shettima-approaches-the-podium-at-the-80th-session-of-the-united-nations-general-assembly-in-new-yorka-moment-of-courage-and-pride-for-nigeria/

Outside of the commission, the SSS faces scrutiny from various stakeholders, including media entities, civil society organizations, and political actors. While oversight is essential for accountability, there are instances where critics may leverage genuine concerns to further their agendas, distorting facts for sensationalism or political gain. It is crucial for the SSS to engage constructively with these stakeholders, presenting evidence of its achievements while remaining open to constructive criticism. Building collaborative relationships can serve to counteract negative portrayals in the media and foster a greater understanding of the complexities involved in national security operations. As the Director General continues to navigate the challenges posed by detractors, it is essential to maintain focus on the long-term vision for the SSS. While immediate concerns may demand attention, sustainable change requires a commitment to perseverance and innovation. The evolving nature of security concerns necessitates a dynamic response, one that looks beyond today’s adversities and builds a robust framework for future challenges.

The resilience demonstrated thus far provides a strong foundation for navigating the complex landscape of national security. Those seeking to undermine the efforts of Mr. Ajayi, the DG SSS, will ultimately falter, as their efforts are overshadowed by tangible results and an unwavering commitment to reform. The leadership’s awareness of dissenters—both internal and external—coupled with a transparent, cohesive approach, lays the groundwork for sustained progress. Therefore, while the Director General of the State Security Service may be facing attempts to undermine the transformational efforts underway, these endeavors will ultimately fail. The combination of informed leadership, a commitment to transparency, and a unified organizational culture positions the SSS to rise above opposition. As the agency continues its path toward modernization and enhanced effectiveness, it remains poised to adapt to emerging threats while safeguarding the interests of the nation. The journey toward a more vibrant and capable SSS may be fraught with challenges, but with steadfast leadership and a dedicated workforce, the goals set forth will undoubtedly be achieved.

*James Bwala, PhD, a security strategy analyst, writes from Abuja.

*The State Security Service: DG Adeola Oluwatosin Ajayi and the Challenges of Leadership