OPINION: Welcoming the American troops

It should come as no surprise to anyone that American troops are now effectively on the ground in Nigeria to assist the country to fight Boko Haram and Islamic state insurgents and terrorists who have been tormenting the country for about two decades. Yet there are certain Nigerians at home and abroad who are indulging in the hypocrisy of accusing the Tinubu administration of handing over Nigerian territory to the Americans to set up military bases, and to turn Nigeria into a theatre for proxy war between the United States and others like China and Russia who have established presence in the Sahel region and much of Africa. We have no choice in the matter and co-operating with the United States is possibly the best option available to Nigeria at the moment. On October 31, 2025, President Donald Trump had redesignated Nigeria “a country of particular concern” where Christians are being persecuted by Muslim Jihadists with links to the Islamic State. President Trump directed a fact-finding team led by Rep. Riley Moore (R-WV) and the Congress Committee on Foreign Affairs to investigate and advise the US government. President Trump also put the Pentagon on standby for possible military intervention in Nigeria, guns-a-blazing. He had the support of the likes of Senator Ted Cruz, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Christian evangelical wing of the Republican Party.

On December 25, true to Trump’s word, the US sent Tomahawk missiles into the country to bomb identified camps of terrorists in Sokoto State, just to show that he meant business, and to give Nigerians what he called a “Christmas present”. The Nigerian government promptly went into a diplomacy overdrive; not having the capacity, the mind or the resources to take on the US in any form of retaliation, it chose to explain itself: that Christians are not targeted in Nigeria, there is no state religion, and that Nigeria is committed to addressing the challenge of insecurity in the country, and open to co-operation with the United States. Indeed, the Sokoto incident was passed off as a “joint operation” between Nigeria and the United States. What followed was a series of fact-finding visits and events by US officials. Congress hearings were also held where Nigerian Christian leaders and Nigerian experts testified before Congress committees. The National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu also led a delegation to the US and met with high-ranking state officials. Two different American delegations also visited Nigeria and met with government officials, Christian leaders and persons in Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camps. In the course of this face-saving diplomacy, the Office of the National Security Adviser engaged the services of a lobby group in Washington DC – the DCI Group -to the tune of $9 million payable in two tranches over a one-year period.

Nigeria’s efforts seem to have paid off, as diplomatic engagements between both countries intensified and the Tinubu administration apparently turned what could have become a tense moment with the Americans into an opportunity for strengthening bilateral relations. President Trump had threatened to order a visa ban against people who fund and support terrorism in Nigeria, and cut off all aid if the government fails to protect Christians. There is now before the US House of Representatives, a bill titled “Nigeria Religious Freedom and Accountability Bill, 2026, sponsored by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), Rep. Riley Moore (R-WV) and others, known as the Smith-Moore Bill, focusing on recommendations of executive actions to stop religious persecution in Nigeria. It is in this Bill, relying on the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act that the following have been named as promoters of acts of terrorism in Nigeria: former Kano State Governor, Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN), Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore and Fulani ethnic nomad militias. On February 10, the United States Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, in a 3, 000-page document further announced the freezing of assets and properties belonging to eight Nigerians accused of links with Boko Haram and Islamic militant groups. This is part of Executive Order 13224 on terrorism financing and related crimes. American citizens are prohibited from having any transaction with the named persons including again, Senator Rabiu Kwankwaso. The US has however, not cut “all aid” to Nigeria beyond the general re-orientation of its Africa policy. The main trope in the circumstance has been reports of co-operation between both countries on the threat of insecurity overseen by the US-Nigeria Joint Working Group.

READ ALSO: EFCC witness details how ₦5.78bn Kwara UBEC grant was diverted to salaries, loans, roads

In the last month, the US has deployed 200 troops to Nigeria to provide training, intelligence and technical support to the Nigerian military, but not to take part in combat. General Samaila Uba, Defence Headquarters spokesperson, says this is at the “request and invitation of the Nigeria government.” It was also reported that the US is seeking to establish a drone refuelling station in Nigeria’s North East to complement its drone facility in Accra, Ghana. The US used to have a drone base in Agadez, Niger, until the military in that country expelled about 1,000 American troops after the Niger coup of 2023. Last week Thursday and Friday, additional US troops arrived in Nigeria, together with five military US aircraft. They have since been deployed to the Kainji Airbase, and the Maiduguri airbase which would be the primary base of operations. Some commentators have protested that Nigeria is giving too much away to the United States in a lamentable demonstration of a neo-colonial dependency which compromises Nigeria’s sovereignty. They add that it is ironic that the same country where youths opposed the proposed 1963 Anglo-Nigerian Defence Pact, is now the same country, 63 years later that cannot defend itself and is now running to other countries: United States, Turkey, and the same old Britain for security assistance and co-operation.

The naysayers overlook the fact that the times have changed: 1963 is not 2026, the dynamics of international relations has changed. There was no global terrorism in 1963 requiring a multi-pronged approach and the current level of global co-operation. Besides, we are in Trump’s world where America is the primary and superior power. Those who criticize the Tinubu administration appear to be disappointed. In their mind, they would have wanted the United States to continue to bomb Nigeria, send troops for ground operations, and possibly create a situation where the current talk about Tinubu’s second term would have been impossible. In their mind, they would have wanted Tinubu to be given the Nicolas Maduro treatment, and taken to the United States. In their mind, they would even have wanted the US to remove Tinubu from office. In their mind, they would have been happier if the allegation of Christian genocide led to instability and confusion in Nigeria. But Tinubu appears to have outsmarted those who rose against him. He has played a smart game of self-preservation, beyond diplomacy. His wife, Senator Oluremi Tinubu, even got invited to the 74th National Breakfast Prayer meeting in Washington DC where President Trump personally recognized her “as a very respected woman” and a Christian leader. It was Remi Tinubu’s glorious moment. She got a trump card, in a brilliant showcase of soft diplomacy. Her husband’s detractors have not stopped agonizing since then!

Those who complain about America’s increased military deployment in Nigeria only need to be reminded that Trump’s Africa policy is not in any way altruistic. US foreign relations has moved away from broad multilateral engagements and development aid programming towards a more transactional, deal-making approach. Trump wants to Make America Great Again, and be it in trade, or diplomacy he is driven solely by the idea of American exceptionalism. In November 2025, the White House released a 29-page document titled “National Security Strategy” where in three paragraphs at the bottom of the last page, it defined Trump’s interest in Africa to be (a) US goal of countering China’s influence on the continent; (b) push to end conflicts in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Sudan; (c) a movement away from the old foreign aid paradigm towards an investment and growth paradigm with clear emphasis on rare earth minerals and energy resources in Africa. It must be clear enough that the claim about Christian persecution in Nigeria is a cover story for America’s own strategic interest. With China gaining foothold across Africa, and Russia becoming the dominant foreign player in the West African Sahel region, America has managed to score the bull’s eye by planting itself in Nigeria, the continent’s most populous nation in addition to its military presence in Ghana, Kenya, Djibouti, Somalia and about 10 other African countries. Niger may have expelled US troops but America is now just across the border in Nigeria. Nigeria is also a resource-rich country, very much like the Democratic Republic of Congo. Nigeria not only has oil and gas in enormous deposits, our mining sector has become attractive with the discovery of rare earth materials in the Central and Northern regions namely neodymium, cerium, lithium, lanthanum, praseodymium, yttrium in addition to other minerals like tantalite, barite, and quartz. China has the largest share of rare earth materials in the world. In October 2025, it placed strict restrictions on American access to its rare materials especially for the US defence sector. The response by the US is to look for other supply chains: Greenland, DRC, and although the interest in Nigeria is not yet publicly expressed, it is a sub-text that should be considered. Geo-politics is not an amateur game: it is driven by intentionality and properly defined strategic interests of nations. In 2007, most African countries rejected the idea of a US African Command in Africa. The headquarters of AFRICOM had to be taken to Stuttgart in Germany. The same AFRICOM is now comfortably ensconced in Africa. Its current commander, General Dagvin Anderson met with President Tinubu in Rome. He has also been hosted in the Presidential Villa.

The Tinubu administration has been realistic in its foreign policy approach. It can safely hide under the fact that the menace of terrorism, banditry and insurgency did not start under its watch. Every other administration before now merely spent funds and resources without ending the menace. Two former military Heads of State and retired Generals could not resolve the problem. The challenge of terror in Nigeria is a complex web of corruption, ethnicity and religious sentiments. Sustainable progress is hardly ever made because the military chiefs have their own interests, and any major onslaught by a sitting Southern President could be interpreted as an attack on the North. It has been speculated to no end that there are many sponsors of terror in high places, hidden within the system. Now that the Americans are involved, the government of the day has a perfect cover to confront terrorism frontally. No one can allege ethnicity or religion as an excuse; the government can easily point to the American presence as an alibi. Nigeria has intelligence units, but even when intelligence is provided, it is either delayed, compromised, ignored or acted upon so late it is no longer effective. Those who sell intelligence to the terrorists would now learn to be careful under the watchful eyes of Big Brother America. It is sad that Nigeria is at a point where it has to depend on an imperial foreign power like the US to fight its internal battles. There may be no guarantee however that American presence would make any significant difference in the form of a magical delivery of Nigeria from the clutches of terror, but it may make a symbolic difference in the long run, especially now that the criminal elements in our midst are becoming bolder. They even now have a National Terrorists Association (NTA)! And the boldness to write letters of notice and threaten communities as we have seen in Kwara state in Ira, Dunshigogo, Inaya and Aho communities.

The ultimate task of protecting Nigerians is the responsibility of the Nigerian government and the collective responsibility of the people. Responsibility and accountability in the war against terror cannot be outsourced in every respect, and certainly not permanently. Our leaders also have a lot to learn from the United States. The country’s strategic interest comes first and it must be protected with all that it takes to do so. When a country begins to outsource its leadership responsibility, it is more or less advertising its own incompetence. It would be tragic if Nigeria commits to this transactional deal with the Americans and the people end up being worse off. The wisdom of the present administration’s pragmatism would be assessed, when a proper accounting is done, in terms of outcomes and deliveries, not the photo opportunities that their choice provides.

AUTHOR: Reuben Abati

Articles published in our Graffiti section are strictly the opinion of the writers and do not represent the views of Ripples Nigeria or its editorial stand.

The post OPINION: Welcoming the American troops appeared first on Latest Nigeria News | Top Stories from Ripples Nigeria.