The military strikes launched by the United States in northern Nigeria on Christmas Day have sparked intense debate, fear and geopolitical concern across West Africa.

Critics warn that any foreign military intervention in Africa’s most populous country could have long-term consequences for regional stability.

News of the strikes, which circulated widely on social media on December 25, was confirmed by the Nigerian government as a U.S. response to reported attacks on Christians in northern Nigeria on Christmas Eve.

According to the narrative shared online, the strikes were presented as an effort to deter extremist violence and protect religious minorities.

However, the claims have drawn sharp criticism from commentators, including @_the_merc on Instagram, who described the alleged action as “a dark moment for Nigeria and West Africa,” arguing that foreign military involvement poses a greater danger than insurgent groups themselves.

“It’s not every day you wake up to hear that America bombed your country,” the commentator said, adding that he initially withheld his reaction because of the emotional weight of the news.

He claimed the strikes targeted northwestern Nigeria, particularly Sokoto, a region that borders the Sahel belt—a strategically sensitive zone stretching across Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso.

The Sahel has become a flashpoint in recent years, marked by military coups, rising anti-Western sentiment and the withdrawal of U.S. and French forces from several countries. Analysts note that any perceived American military action in Nigeria could further inflame tensions in a region already hostile to foreign intervention.

While acknowledging that Christians have been victims of extremist violence in northern Nigeria, the commentator rejected the framing of the situation as a religious crusade. He argued that Muslims and other communities have also borne the brunt of insecurity and that portraying the conflict solely as Christian persecution risks oversimplifying Nigeria’s complex security challenges.

“The framing of this as a mission to save Nigerian Christians is propaganda,” he said, claiming it was designed to blunt criticism by appealing to moral and religious sentiment, particularly among global Black communities.

Nigeria has for over a decade battled multiple armed groups, including Boko Haram, Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), bandit networks and communal militias. The violence has displaced millions and strained the capacity of the Nigerian state, but the country has historically resisted the establishment of permanent foreign military bases on its soil.

The commentator warned that further U.S. strikes could signal a precursor to deeper American military involvement, including the possible establishment of a base in Nigeria. He pointed to past U.S. interventions in Libya and Somalia, which critics argue left long-term instability in their wake.

“Can you name one time U.S. bombing campaigns in Africa ended well for Africans in the long run?” he asked, urging Nigerians not to allow frustration with insecurity to cloud judgment about foreign involvement.

The reaction to the military strike in Nigeria highlights growing anxiety across West Africa about sovereignty, militarisation and the region’s place in global power struggles.

For many observers, the controversy underscores a broader question confronting African states: how to address internal security crises without opening the door to foreign interventions that may reshape the region’s future.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by THE MERC (@_the_merc)

Fresh U.S. airstrikes on militant targets in north-western Nigeria are sharpening security, diplomatic and geopolitical questions across West Africa, as Washington deepens its military footprint in the region under President Donald Trump’s second term.

The strikes, carried out in Sokoto State and confirmed by the U.S. Africa Command (Africom), targeted camps linked to Islamic State–Sahel Province (ISSP), known locally as Lakurawa. U.S. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said further action was likely, warning that Washington remained “always ready” to confront militants it accuses of killing civilians, including Christians, in Nigeria.

The Nigerian government has confirmed that the operation was a joint effort.

Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar stated that Abuja provided intelligence for the strikes and coordinated closely with U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, prior to President Bola Tinubu’s final approval. Africom also said the strikes were conducted in coordination with Nigerian authorities.

Regional security implications

For West Africa, the strikes underscore a growing internationalisation of Nigeria’s security crisis and the risk of spillover across borders. Sokoto State lies close to Niger, a country already grappling with jihadist violence and political instability following recent military takeovers in the Sahel. Analysts warn that increased pressure on militant groups in one area can push fighters across porous borders into neighbouring states.

Nigeria’s north-west has become a complex conflict zone where jihadist factions, armed bandit groups and criminal kidnapping networks overlap. According to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED), Nigeria recorded nearly 6,000 violent incidents in 2025, with about half targeting civilians. Katsina State recorded the highest number, while Sokoto ranked fourth.

Security experts say sustained U.S. involvement could improve Nigeria’s intelligence and strike capacity, but it may also provoke reprisals, raise civilian protection concerns and further militarise already fragile border communities.

Ghana’s strategic relevance

The development has particular resonance for Ghana. U.S. aircraft conducted surveillance missions over north-western Nigeria earlier this month, and it is believed they were operating from an airport in Ghana. While Accra has not publicly commented, Ghana has increasingly been viewed by Western partners as a stable logistics and intelligence hub in a volatile sub-region.

That role brings both strategic leverage and heightened responsibility. Analysts note that closer security cooperation with the U.S. may strengthen Ghana’s counter-terrorism preparedness, especially as extremist violence edges closer to coastal West Africa. At the same time, it could expose the country to diplomatic sensitivities and security risks if regional tensions escalate.

Religion, politics and perception

The strikes have also reignited debate over how Nigeria’s violence is framed internationally. President Trump described the operation as an effort to stop the killing of Christians, language that has resonated with parts of the U.S. religious right. Nigerian officials, however, insist the conflict is not religiously targeted.

Nigeria is officially secular, with Muslims making up about 53% of the population and Christians around 45%. Authorities stress that armed groups have targeted both communities and that many kidnappings, including of priests and pastors, are driven by criminal motives rather than ideology.

Foreign Minister Tuggar said the operation was about protecting Nigerians “and innocent lives,” adding that it was “not targeting any religion.”

A shifting U.S. posture in Africa

Regionally, the strikes add to signs that Washington is adopting a more assertive security posture in Africa, even as President Trump had campaigned in 2024 as a “candidate of peace” opposed to “endless wars.”

In his first year back in office, the U.S. has carried out or supported military actions in countries including Yemen, Iran and Syria, alongside a military buildup in the Caribbean.

For West Africa, the immediate concern is whether deeper U.S.–Nigeria cooperation can weaken militant networks without destabilising civilian life or widening the conflict. Residents of Jabo village in Sokoto described panic and confusion as missiles struck nearby, with some calling on the government to protect civilians better.

As further strikes are signalled, governments across the region — including Ghana — will be watching closely, balancing the promise of enhanced security cooperation against the risks of escalation in an already volatile West African security landscape.

Senegalese entrepreneur and author Magatte Wade has ignited a fresh global conversation about Africa’s development challenges.

Wade is arguing that the continent’s persistent poverty is less about its colonial past and more about policies that stifle wealth creation today.

In a widely shared video posted by @thefreepress on Instagram, Wade opens with a stark claim: “You’ve been lied to about Africa.”

Speaking from personal experience, she insists that Africa is not poor because of colonialism, but because its systems often make it nearly impossible for ordinary people to start and grow businesses.

To illustrate her point, Wade points to what should be a simple aspiration: opening a small bakery. In many African countries, she says, an entrepreneur must secure as many as a dozen permits, navigate multiple government offices, and pay fees that stretch out over months. By the time approvals are granted, savings are depleted—before a single loaf of bread is sold.

The hurdles do not end there.

Wade describes layers of taxes and compliance costs that hit businesses upfront, alongside rigid labour laws that discourage hiring. The result, she argues, is that many would-be entrepreneurs either give up or stay informal, and potential jobs never materialize.

“The bakery never opens. The jobs never exist,” Wade says, linking these missed opportunities to the desperation that pushes young Africans to risk dangerous migration routes in search of work.

Her argument cuts against a long-standing narrative that frames Africa primarily as a victim of history in need of aid. Instead, Wade calls for a shift toward economic freedom: fewer bureaucratic barriers, stronger property rights, simpler regulations, and open trade.

“The best way to help the poor is to make it easy for them to stop being poor,” she says, adding that prosperity does not come from pity, but from freedom.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by The Free Press (@thefreepress)

Wade’s message has resonated beyond Africa, especially among policymakers, entrepreneurs and young people questioning why growth remains uneven despite abundant talent and resources. While critics caution that colonial legacies and global power imbalances still matter, supporters say her intervention forces an uncomfortable but necessary conversation about internal reforms.

For Ghana and other African economies pushing industrialisation, export growth and job creation, Wade’s critique lands at a critical moment. It raises a central question for governments and citizens alike: Are Africa’s systems designed to protect control, or to unlock creativity and enterprise?

As Wade concludes, Africa’s future, in her view, will not be shaped by coups or slogans, but by ideas—and by whether the continent chooses to free its entrepreneurs to dream, build and trade.