BY DR. ANTHONY NWOKOLOBIA
RECENTLY, the President of the United States, Donald Trump, announced that Nigeria had been designated as one of the “Countries of Particular Concern” (CPC) to the United States. This classification followed numerous allegations of religious persecution against Christians in Nigeria, especially in the Northern geopolitical zones, where extremist groups such as the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) and Boko Haram have carried out genocidal attacks.
Only recently, President Trump reportedly directed the U.S. Department of Defense to prepare for possible military intervention in Nigeria, accusing the Nigerian government of failing to adequately address the violence against Christians, an allegation Nigerian authority has consistently refuted. In an extended statement, Trump vowed to deploy American forces “into the disgraced nation, guns blazing,” to eradicate the Islamic terrorists responsible for these atrocities.
Broadly defined, a “Country of Particular Concern” (CPC) is a classification made by the United States Secretary of State, under authority delegated by the President, identifying nations responsible for severe violations of religious freedom, as outlined in the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA) of 1998 (H.R. 2431) and its 1999 amendment (Public Law 106-55). The term “particularly severe violations of religious freedom” refers to systematic, ongoing, and egregious abuses, including:
- Torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment;
- Prolonged detention without formal charges;
- Enforced disappearances through abduction or secret detention; or
- Other gross denials of the rights to life, liberty, and personal security.
It is important to note that countries designated as “Countries of Particular Concern” (CPC) by the United States are subject to additional measures, including possible economic sanctions. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), established under the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA) and the U.S. Department of State’s Office of International Religious Freedom are tasked with monitoring religious liberty worldwide. These bodies make policy recommendations to the President, the Secretary of State and the U.S. Congress regarding nations that should be classified as CPCs, based on thorough assessments of global religious freedom conditions.
Following this recent designation, Nigeria has been added to the list of countries identified as major violators of religious freedom, joining others such as Burma, China, Cuba, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan.
Religious intolerance in northern Nigeria has long manifested in violent clashes, discrimination, and assaults on places of worship, often driven by political manipulation, extremist ideologies, and socio-economic inequality. Numerous incidents of extrajudicial killings, kidnappings, and deep-seated mutual distrust have created a climate of insecurity that undermines peace and development in the region.
Historically, religious violence in Nigeria has deep roots. Notable episodes include the Maitatsine Riots of the 1980s and the emergence of Boko Haram in the 2000s. Even before Nigeria’s independence in 1960, intergroup tensions existed, tracing back to the colonial period. The 1953 Kano Riots and the 1966 post-independence pogroms against the Igbo community in northern Nigeria fueled religious and ethnic animosities that ultimately contributed to the outbreak of the Biafran War.
Since independence, the Nigerian government has typically responded to internal unrest with a combination of military intervention, commissions of inquiry, amnesty programs, and sporadic peace-building dialogues. These measures have been applied to various crises, including ethno-religious riots, political conflicts, the Biafran war, the Niger Delta militancy, and the Boko Haram insurgency.
However, Federal Government’s approaches to religious conflict have often proven ineffective, as recurring violence exposes the absence of coherent and long-term strategies. Despite numerous peace initiatives, the overall impact has been limited, failing to deliver lasting stability and harmony within the nation. The key reasons that caused this ineffectiveness include:
- Incoherent Response: Government actions are typically reactive and inconsistent, lacking a coordinated and long-term strategic framework.
- Poor Implementation: A major obstacle has been the non-implementation of investigative panel recommendations and government initiatives, often hindered by political interference and weak political will.
- Weak Governance: Fundamental problems such as poor governance, corruption, and limited economic opportunities continue to fuel violence, issues that the government has been unable to tackle effectively.
- Perceived Bias: The government’s visible support for both Christianity and Islam has intensified religious rivalry and mutual distrust, despite Nigeria’s constitutional commitment to secularism.
- Intelligence Gaps: Early warning systems and intelligence networks have frequently failed to detect or prevent emerging conflicts, resulting in preventable outbreaks of violence.
- Absence of Justice: The failure to prosecute perpetrators of religious violence has fostered a culture of impunity, diminishing public confidence in the government’s capacity and commitment to safeguarding all citizens.
Viewed together, the evidence suggests that although the government has launched numerous initiatives, their execution has been weak and insufficient to tackle the deep-seated socio-economic and political drivers of religious violence in Nigeria.
Recently, much of the violence with religious and ethnic overtones has been concentrated in the North-East, where banditry, competition over resources, and criminality are major causes. Islamist extremist groups such as Boko Haram have attacked both Muslims and Christians. There have also been deadly clashes between farming and pastoral communities, producing heavy casualties and large-scale displacement.
Attacks on clergy, especially Catholic priests, have become a recurring problem, increasingly framed as a systematic and worsening crisis driven by a mix of ransom-motivated kidnappings, political intimidation, and religious extremism. This phenomenon reflects broader insecurity, weak governance, and widespread socio-economic distress across the country.
Between 2015 and 2025, at least 145 Catholic priests were reported kidnapped and about 11 killed, with Kaduna recording the highest number of clergy fatalities, a consequence of both terrorist activity and intensified religious tensions. The main groups implicated in these crimes include Boko Haram, the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), Fulani herder militias, and organized criminal gangs (bandits).
Most recently, comments by United States President Donald Trump about potential military action in Nigeria have generated alarm and confusion. Trump has threatened aid cuts over alleged attacks on Christians and reportedly ordered the U.S. defense apparatus to “prepare for action in Nigeria,” warning that American intervention would be swift and forceful to eliminate the Islamic extremists responsible for the atrocities.
In recent months, several right-wing lawmakers in the United States and other influential figures have suggested that the ongoing violence in Nigeria amounts to a deliberate campaign of genocide against Christians. The Nigerian government, however, has dismissed these claims as unfounded, maintaining that the attacks have not been targeted at any particular religious group. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s Senior Special Assistant on Media, Temitope Ajayi, publicly refuted reports of a planned meeting between President Tinubu and U.S. Vice President James David Vance, while emphasizing that the president is already pursuing broad reforms aimed at addressing the root causes of insecurity and restoring peace.
Concerns over a potential U.S. military intervention in Nigeria have dominated public discourse, generating mixed reactions across the country’s geopolitical zones. The United States, guided by its realpolitik and national interest, is known for decisive foreign actions. Any form of military strike, whether direct or preemptive, could have devastating consequences for Nigeria, worsening its fragile economy and undermining national stability. Hence, these warnings must be taken seriously and addressed through proactive and strategic diplomacy. The right to life and freedom of worship are non-negotiable human rights, and it is the government’s responsibility to confront the ongoing bloodshed and destabilizing influences threatening Nigeria’s survival. Strengthening diplomatic engagement may well be the only way to avert another transatlantic intervention by the United States.
Domestically, Nigeria’s foreign policy communication appears fragmented, with too many voices speaking on international matters. Diplomacy is not an all-comers affair; it requires expertise and coordination. It is therefore the responsibility of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its technocrats to advise the presidency on appropriate diplomatic strategies and actions. The use of provocative language or insults directed at foreign leaders is counterproductive, as it can damage Nigeria’s international reputation, strain relations, and hinder cooperation.
Public commentators, analysts, and opinion leaders should therefore refrain from undiplomatic statements and instead collaborate with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ technical team to develop practical solutions for easing tensions. In the coming days and weeks, it is hoped that the Federal Government will articulate a clear diplomatic strategy capable of rallying global support behind Nigeria in its fight against insurgency and religious extremism, thereby restoring national stability and safeguarding the country’s territorial integrity.
Anthony C. Nwokolobia, Ph.D., is a distinguished political scientist, scholar, and public affairs analyst based in Asaba, Delta State, Nigeria. He has a deep academic and professional interest in areas such as governance, international relations, peace and conflict studies, and public policy analysis. Over the years, Dr. Nwokolobia has contributed significantly to academic discourse through his research, publications, and insightful commentaries on national and global political developments.
As a seasoned academic, he is known for his analytical approach to political and socio-economic issues, often emphasizing the importance of good governance, effective diplomacy, and institutional reform in advancing Nigeria’s democratic development. His writings reflect a commitment to evidence-based analysis and a passion for promoting peace, stability, and sustainable development in Nigeria and Africa at large.
Dr. Nwokolobia a public affairs analyst, provides thought-provoking articles and media contributions on emerging challenges in Nigeria’s political landscape. He can be reached via
+234 803 774 8692
