Tensions between Nigeria and the United States have climbed sharply in recent weeks after former U.S. President Donald Trump issued a series of public threats and policy moves centered on religious violence in Africa’s most populous nation. The diplomatic friction, marked by heated rhetoric and misinformation, has thrust Nigeria’s security challenges and its religious landscape into the global spotlight, while also exposing the risks of viral falsehoods in an already volatile environment.
At the heart of the controversy are Trump’s claims, made in early November 2025, that Nigeria is experiencing rampant “Christian persecution” at the hands of radical Islamist militants. Trump designated Nigeria a “Country of Particular Concern” under the International Religious Freedom Act—a move that signals Washington’s alarm over alleged severe violations of religious liberty. According to Africa Check, Trump went so far as to threaten military intervention, declaring he would send the U.S. Army “guns-a-blazing” to Nigeria to “wipe out” what he called the “Islamic Terrorists” allegedly responsible for the killings of Christians.
Yet, Trump’s statements have drawn scrutiny—not only for their inflammatory tone but also for their lack of substantiating evidence. While there have indeed been reports of attacks on Christians in Nigeria, other religious groups, including Muslims, have also suffered violence at the hands of insurgents. The Nigerian government, in its official response, emphasized that the country’s security challenges affect both Christians and Muslims and reaffirmed its constitutional guarantee of religious freedom for all citizens.
As the diplomatic row intensified, Walid Phares, a political scientist and former adviser to Trump, suggested on social media that the U.S. should establish a military base in Port Harcourt, an oil-rich city and hub of Nigeria’s petroleum industry. “To deter #BokoHaram and other jihadist groups in Nigeria – and to stop their massacres of Christians and threats against moderate Muslims – I advise the #Trump administration to establish an emergency base in #PortHarcourt,” Phares wrote on X (formerly Twitter).
This suggestion sparked a flurry of rumors and viral posts on Facebook, some of which falsely attributed a provocative statement to Nigerian Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe. The posts claimed Abaribe had responded to Phares’s proposal by saying, “Whoever wants the oil can come and get it,” and criticized northern Nigerian leaders for their alleged panic over the idea of a U.S. base in the south. The supposed quote included pointed remarks about oil ownership and environmental degradation in the Niger Delta, stoking regional and ethnic tensions.
However, a thorough investigation by Africa Check found no credible evidence that Abaribe made any such statement. The fact-checkers noted that if a Nigerian senator had publicly encouraged the U.S. to set up a military base and offered oil resources, it would have been widely reported in the local and international press. Instead, the quote appeared only in anonymous social media posts, with no indication of when or where it was supposedly made. Some links attached to the posts led to unrelated websites—a classic red flag for misinformation. As Africa Check concluded, “We found no evidence to support the claim that Abaribe made the comments attributed to him.”
This episode underscores the dangers of misinformation in a high-stakes international dispute. According to Africa Check, posts rated as “false” by fact-checkers are now downgraded on Facebook and Instagram, meaning fewer people see them. The organization, a partner in Meta’s third-party fact-checking program, urges users to be vigilant and to follow guidelines for reporting and correcting false information.
Meanwhile, diplomatic efforts between Nigeria and the United States are ongoing. On Monday, November 17, 2025, Nigeria’s Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar told AFP that talks with Washington were focused on finding ways to collaborate on security challenges that “are in the interest of the entire planet.” Tuggar addressed Trump’s threats directly, saying, “No, I do not think so” when asked if he believed the U.S. would actually launch a military strike against Nigeria. He added, “Because we continue to talk, and as I said, the discussion has progressed. It’s moved on from that.”
Tuggar also pushed back against the narrative that Christians alone are being targeted by violence in Nigeria. He acknowledged that the country faces serious security challenges, many of which are “beyond our control,” but argued that the story of religious persecution is being distorted. “People have been misinformed. There’s a drive towards creating these false narratives in order to, I suppose, debilitate Nigeria,” he said, as reported by AFP. Tuggar emphasized that terrorism and insurgency in Nigeria have claimed the lives of both Christians and Muslims, often indiscriminately.
Nigeria, with its estimated 230 million inhabitants, is roughly split between a predominantly Christian south and a Muslim-majority north. The nation has struggled with a jihadist insurgency in the northeast since 2009, a conflict that has killed more than 40,000 people and displaced around two million. The violence has spilled over into neighboring Niger, Chad, and Cameroon, prompting the formation of a regional military force to combat the militants. In addition to jihadist violence, Nigeria is plagued by criminal gangs—locally known as “bandits”—who have carried out kidnappings, robberies, and attacks in various regions.
The U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Africa is set to hold a public hearing on Thursday, November 20, 2025, to examine Trump’s recent redesignation of Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern. Tuggar expressed hope that Nigeria would get a fair hearing and not be judged solely on the basis of one-sided narratives. “Our hope is that Nigeria will get a fair hearing when they’re having their public hearings, instead of just listening to one side,” he stated.
Despite the heated exchanges and the specter of U.S. military involvement, Nigerian officials have maintained a diplomatic tone, welcoming international partnerships while insisting that “Nigeria and Nigerian security and Nigerian troops, Nigerian military, has to be the one to take the lead,” as Tuggar told AFP. This stance reflects a desire to assert national sovereignty even as the country seeks help in addressing the complex web of security threats it faces.
As the world watches the unfolding situation, the episode serves as a stark reminder of how misinformation—whether spread by viral social media posts or by world leaders—can complicate efforts to resolve real and pressing problems. With both countries signaling a willingness to continue dialogue, the coming weeks will reveal whether cooler heads and accurate information can prevail over sensationalism and rumor-mongering.
