Pat Stevens & Femi Ashekun/
Islamic cleric, Sheikh Ahmad Gumi, has called on the Federal Government to immediately halt all military cooperation with the United States following reported U.S. airstrikes against suspected Islamic State fighters in Sokoto State, north-west Nigeria.
Gumi warned that American military involvement could aggravate Nigeria’s security challenges and erode national sovereignty, particularly when framed along religious lines.
He cautioned that foreign intervention risks deepening divisions in an already fragile security environment and urged Nigeria to rely on its own armed forces or pursue alternative partnerships if external support was unavoidable.
The cleric’s comments followed confirmation by the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) that American forces carried out airstrikes on Christmas Day, an operation publicly announced by Donald Trump, who said the strikes targeted militants “viciously killing, primarily, innocent Christians”.
In a statement shared by the official White House account (@WhiteHouse) on X, Trump said: “Tonight, at my direction as Commander in Chief, the United States launched a powerful and deadly strike against ISIS terrorist scum in Northwest Nigeria,” praising the Department of Defense and warning that more strikes could follow.
The language used in the announcement sparked a wave of criticism in Nigeria, both over the religious framing and the question of Nigeria’s role in authorising the operation.
Former presidential candidate and activist, Omoyele Sowore (@YeleSowore), accused the Federal Government of surrendering sovereignty, arguing that no foreign military should conduct lethal operations on Nigerian soil without transparent public accountability.
Public scrutiny intensified after the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (@NigeriaMFA) issued a statement describing the strikes as part of structured security cooperation. The post attracted thousands of reactions, many of them sharply critical.
Responding to the ministry, influencer Bitcoin Chief (@royaltyuso) wrote: “This is a whole lot of garbage. Nothing was said here. The only thing that’s clear here is that Nigeria wasn’t aware of the strike.”
Another commentator, BITCOIN CHIEF (AKA OMA…), added: “You’ve really not said anything. You weren’t part of the strike,” echoing widespread scepticism about the government’s claimed involvement.
Verified user Farmer Akin Alabi (@akin… ), replying to the same post, struck a more restrained tone, saying: “Don’t know how to take this news… But I know surely that Nigeria will succeed,” while others were less charitable. ABetterWay (@GabrielNaija) challenged the ministry to explain what it meant by “cooperation”, noting that earlier public communications appeared to contradict that claim.
Similar reactions trailed a post by former Bureau of Public Service Reforms director-general, Dr Joe Abah (@DrJoeAbah), where commenters questioned whether Nigeria had prior knowledge of the strike or was merely informed after the fact.
Several users warned that ambiguity from officials only fuels distrust and conspiracy theories around foreign military involvement.
Social media commentator, Daniel Regha (@DanielRegha), also weighed in, questioning both the optics and substance of the operation. He argued that celebrating foreign strikes without clear Nigerian leadership sends a damaging signal about state capacity and could embolden armed groups seeking propaganda victories.
The controversy deepened further after multiple users on X claimed that AFRICOM edited or replaced its initial post about the airstrikes.
According to screenshots widely circulated online, an earlier post referenced coordination with Nigerian authorities, while a subsequent version placed explicit emphasis on the operation being conducted under the direction of President Trump and the U.S. Secretary of Defense.
AFRICOM has not publicly addressed the alleged edit, but the claim has added to public suspicion about shifting narratives around Nigeria’s role.
While some analysts and commentators defended the strikes as necessary given Nigeria’s overstretched security forces, many warned that counter-terrorism success depends as much on legitimacy and public trust as on firepower.
Several users stressed that terrorism in Nigeria affects Muslims, Christians and traditional communities alike and cautioned against narratives that risk inflaming sectarian tensions.
In response to the growing backlash, the Federal Government reiterated that Nigeria remains in control of its security architecture and that any cooperation with foreign partners operates within international law and respect for sovereignty.
Officials also maintained that no civilian casualties were recorded.
Nevertheless, the sustained online reaction suggests the issue has evolved beyond the airstrikes themselves. What now dominates national discourse is concern over transparency, sovereignty and whether Nigeria is shaping its security partnerships or being shaped by them, particularly when major decisions are first communicated through foreign political statements rather than domestic institutions.
0Related posts:
Interrogating Two Years of Nigeria’s Foreign Policy Under President Tinubu
Internal Security Dynamics and the Imperative of a New Policing Thought in Nigeria
FG Presents Buhari’s Scorecard
Warning Shots: Trump Orders Missile Strike Against Syria over Tuesday’s Chemical Attack
Elections and the Role of the Nigeria Police Force in the Electoral Process – Solomon Arase
Bad News for Nigeria as Moody’s Downgrades First Bank, Access Bank, GTB, others