…As Trump vows more bombing
…Mixed reactions trail first attacks
Minister of Foreign Affairs, Yusuf Tuggar, disclosed yesterday that the strikes – carried out on Christmas Day in parts of northern Nigeria – were jointly planned and executed with Nigerian approval and intelligence support.
The Minister stressed that the operation was neither religiously motivated nor unilateral. He said, “President Tinubu gave clear approval on the condition that it must be stated clearly that this is a joint operation and that it is not targeting any religion”, adding that Nigeria provided the intelligence that guided the strikes.
Tuggar revealed he held a 19-minute discussion with U.S. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, before securing presidential consent. He described the airstrikes as a vindication of the Tinubu administration’s security strategy and a signal of Nigeria’s willingness to work with international partners to confront terrorism “irrespective of religion, victims or ideology”.
The confirmation followed an announcement by U.S. President Donald Trump, who said American forces had carried out “powerful and deadly” strikes against ISIS-linked fighters in north-west Nigeria, particularly in Sokoto State. Trump warned that more airstrikes would follow until terrorists were “totally wiped out,” declaring the operation part of America’s renewed global war on terror.
The U.S. Department of War later released footage of the strike, reportedly launched from a warship, though the exact location of the vessel was not disclosed. Trump and U.S. War Secretary, Pete Hegseth both signalled that the Christmas Day attack marked only the beginning of sustained U.S. military action in Nigeria.
However, early assessments from security analysts have cast doubt on the effectiveness of the first strikes.
Security expert, Zagazola Makama, in his reaction, said the bombs landed in Jabo community, Tambuwal local government area of Sokoto State—a farming area with no known ISIS, ISWAP or Boko Haram presence. “Jabo is a relatively safe farming community. The strikes had no impact on insurgents terrorising Nigeria”, he stated, though he added that continued U.S. involvement could still send a strong deterrent message.
Similarly, West Africa security analyst Brant Philip said U.S. missiles “missed most of the intended targets,” describing the initial strikes as largely symbolic. He disclosed that further attacks, possibly using MQ-9 Reaper drones, are expected in both the North-West and North-East, as operational plans are already underway.
The strikes have drawn sharply divided reactions across Nigeria. The pan-Yoruba socio-political group, Afenifere, strongly endorsed the operation, describing it as “timely and necessary” after years of persistent insecurity. The group argued that sovereignty should be measured by a government’s ability to protect lives, not by resistance to foreign support, and commended President Tinubu for approving the joint mission.
Also, Northern Christian leaders welcomed the development. According to the Northern Chairman of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), John Hayab, the strikes were justified if they help end the killing of Nigerians, whether Muslim or Christian. He urged both governments to sustain the collaboration until all terrorists are eliminated.
In contrast, Islamic scholar Sheikh Ahmad Gumi warned that U.S. military involvement could destabilise Nigeria and polarise the country along religious lines. While acknowledging that eliminating terrorists is permissible in Islam, Gumi argued that foreign powers often pursue hidden agendas and risk turning Nigeria into a theatre of war.
Similarly, the Muslim Rights Concern, (MURIC), expressed reservations, demanding clarification from the Federal Government over alleged civilian and property damage in Sokoto and Kwara states. While supporting decisive action against terrorists, the group insisted that innocent Nigerians must not suffer collateral damage and called for compensation for affected residents.
Also, former Kaduna Central senator, Shehu Sani, struck a middle ground, saying the strikes were justifiable if truly conducted jointly with Nigerian authorities. However, he cautioned against over-reliance on foreign powers, stressing that “the U.S. can’t eternally fight our battles”.
As the Tinubu administration defends the joint airstrikes as a necessary escalation against terrorism, the mixed reactions underline a broader national dilemma—balancing sovereignty, civilian protection, religious sensitivity and the urgent need to defeat violent extremism threatening lives across Nigeria.
