ABUJA, Nigeria (FN) — The United States military has drafted three intervention plans for Nigeria — light, medium, and heavy — following President Donald Trump’s directive to address what he described as “Christian genocide” in the country. The move has sparked mixed reactions across Nigeria’s political, religious, and civil society landscape.
The plans, developed by U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), range from intelligence-sharing and logistical support to full-scale military deployment. While some Nigerian leaders view the proposals as a threat to sovereignty, others see them as a potential catalyst for peace and accountability.
Human rights lawyer Femi Falana condemned the plans, calling them “a pretext for expanding U.S. military influence in Africa.” He warned that foreign intervention could destabilize Nigeria further and urged the government to reject any form of external military action.
However, some civil society groups argue that international pressure may be necessary to address longstanding violence and human rights abuses. “If our own institutions fail to protect lives, global partners must step in,” said Ngozi Okafor, a spokesperson for the Justice Watch Coalition.
Religious leaders have also weighed in. Jama’atu Nasril Islam (JNI) urged diplomatic restraint, emphasizing unity and peaceful resolution. Meanwhile, Christian organizations welcomed Trump’s remarks, saying they reflect growing concerns about targeted violence in parts of the country.
The controversy has reignited debate over a 2020 legal brief by INEC Chairman Prof. Joash Amupitan, which accused state actors of mass killings and called for international intervention. Supporters say the document validates current concerns, while critics argue it’s being misused to justify foreign interference.
Public reaction has been divided. In Lagos, protesters gathered outside the U.S. consulate chanting “Leave us alone, America!” while others online expressed hope that U.S. involvement could help curb extremist violence and improve security.
AFRICOM Commander Gen. Dagvin R.M. Anderson is expected to visit Nigeria next month to assess the situation and meet with security officials. The visit could determine whether any of the proposed plans move forward or remain contingency options.
The Nigerian government has yet to issue an official response, though sources within the presidency say internal consultations are underway. “We’re weighing all options carefully,” one aide said. “This is a moment that demands clarity and caution.”
As diplomatic channels remain open, analysts say Nigeria faces a critical juncture — balancing national sovereignty with the need for effective security solutions. Whether the U.S. plans are embraced or rejected, the debate has reignited urgent questions about governance, protection, and global responsibility.
