The narrative that is developing in the aftermath of the U.S. strikes in Nigeria on Christmas night is that, had the Nigerian government not “cooperated” with the U.S., the U.S. would have launched the strikes unilaterally, supposedly to protect Christians. “After Trump threatened to come guns-blazing in Nigeria, we saw a Nigerian delegation visit the U.S.,” Kabir Adamu, managing director of Abuja-based Beacon Security and Intelligence Limited, told Reuters. “The Attorney General was involved, and agreements were signed. Then we learned of U.S. surveillance missions mapping terrorist locations” which Reuters had reported on Dec. 21.
Participating in the strikes could raise a risk of the government being perceived as endorsing Trump’s language on wider sectarian strife, a sensitive issue throughout Nigeria’s history. “Trump is pandering to domestic evangelical Christian objectives with his ‘Christian genocide’ narrative,” Adamu said.
There are also critics who say that the government’s involvement with the U.S. is a violation of Nigeria’s sovereignty and an embarrassment for the Nigerian army. Hakeem Baba-Ahmed, a former spokesman for the Northern Elders Forum, a group of elders that represents the interests of Nigeria’s northern states, told the Peoples Gazette in a Dec. 26 interview that the U.S military action on Nigerian soil undermines the country’s sovereignty and right to defend itself. “Now our country’s right to defend itself has been handed over by our leadership to the U.S.,” he said. “Our military assets sworn to protect and defend us have been further diminished by the action of the U.S.. They will be right if they feel humiliated.”
