The United States has confirmed that it carried out airstrikes against militant groups linked to the Islamic State (IS) in parts of northwest Nigeria in late December. The operation targeted suspected militant camps in Sokoto State, close to Nigeria’s border with Niger
Former US President Donald Trump publicly announced the strikes on Christmas Day, describing them as decisive actions against extremist groups attempting to establish a foothold in the region. According to the US military, the strikes focused on camps believed to be operated by fighters affiliated with IS-linked factions, though exact casualty figures were not disclosed.
Nigeria’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Yusuf Maitama Tuggar, later stated that the operation was a joint effort between Nigeria and the United States. He explained that the strikes were the result of intelligence sharing and had been planned over a period of time. Nigerian authorities also stressed that the operation was not connected to any religious agenda.
Nigeria has for years battled multiple armed groups, including Boko Haram and IS-linked factions, particularly in the northeast. In recent years, however, insecurity has spread to northwestern regions, where banditry and extremist violence have increasingly affected rural communities.
Commentary
A Loud Strike and a Quiet Government: The Sokoto Bombing Debate
Following Donald Trump’s announcement on Truth Social, the bombing of targeted ISIL (ISIS) fighters in northwest Nigeria, Sokoto State to be precise has sparked intense conversations. In the largely Muslim-dominated state, fears of uncertainty are rising.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it is working with the U.S. government, noting that the Minister, Yusuf Tuggar had spoken with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio for 19 minutes earlier before the strike. However, his body language has fueled rumors that the Nigerian government was not fully aware until the strike made its loud announcement. Many individuals and opposition voices are questioning why the U.S. President made the announcement ahead of Nigeria, a country with departments of communication.
Consequently, the federal government insists it withheld information to avoid alerting the terrorists, citing intelligence and diplomatic coordination with the U.S.
Still, the long silence that followed the strike allowed speculations to rise to the heavens.
The question then is: was this truly a collaboration or a case of override? The latter is close to reality, considering President Trump’s declaration that he unilaterally gave the directive as the Commander-in-Chief without mentioning any partnership with the host Commander-in-Chief. So Nigerians wonder: What would our government do if the U.S. simply overrode Nigeria’s sovereignty?
It is also worth noting that Nigeria has now joined Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Venezuela and Syria on the list of nations struck or aided militarily by the U.S. in 2025. Many fear this could drag Nigeria into a conflict that never ends.
Even if it was a coordinated strike, one must ask: at what cost? Who foots the bill, a Washington Father Christmas? The suspected Tomahawk missile launched from a U.S. Navy warship is an advanced model that costs a fortune. An average guided missile destroyer like the USS Paul Ignatius DDG-117 costs more than the combined annual budget of Nigeria’s northwestern states. Perhaps, this is another loan Nigeria might never finish paying, because there must be something in it for the bankrolling nation. The U.S. is no Santa Claus, even in December.
As the clock ticks, Nigerians want answers. Are there more strikes to come? Will civilians remain safe? What about the Northeast where attacks have long been frequent? And importantly, what does the U.S. government want in return?
As we keep our fingers crossed and pray for peace, PSJ UK reiterates its unwavering commitment to social justice and peace. We urge U.S. authorities to act in the best interest of Nigeria, a sovereign nation and its people.
This commentary reflects the perspective of PSJ UK.
