ABUJA, Nigeria (FN) — A national debate is intensifying over President Bola Tinubu’s leadership after the United States carried out a strike on Nigerian territory in what Washington described as an operation targeting ISIS‑linked militants. The incident — the first known foreign military attack on Nigeria in the country’s modern history — has raised questions about the government’s strength, its intelligence posture, and its regional standing.
The Federal Government confirmed that Tinubu approved the operation after being briefed by Foreign Affairs Minister Yusuf Tuggar, who said he relayed details of a call with U.S. officials before the strike was launched. Officials described the mission as a joint effort, though the United States announced the operation before Nigeria issued any public statement.
Despite the magnitude of the event, Tinubu has not addressed the nation, held a press conference, or issued a personal statement. All communication has come through ministers and spokespersons, prompting criticism from opposition parties and civil society groups.
Critics say Tinubu’s government appears weakened
Opposition figures argue that the strike exposes vulnerabilities in Nigeria’s security architecture and raises concerns about the administration’s control over intelligence and counterterrorism operations.
- Symbolic blow: Critics say the fact that a foreign military force conducted an operation inside Nigeria — even with approval — is unprecedented and signals a weakened government.
- Communication vacuum: Tinubu’s silence has fueled speculation and allowed foreign governments to shape the narrative first.
- Public confidence: Opponents say the lack of a direct presidential response has deepened uncertainty.
- Accountability expectations: Some argue that in other democracies, major security breaches prompt leadership changes or at least immediate public engagement.
“This is a country that once led peacekeeping missions across West Africa,” one analyst said. “Now it is struggling to explain how foreign forces operated on its soil.”
Supporters say resignation calls are premature and politically driven
Tinubu’s allies counter that the attack reflects broader regional instability rather than a failure unique to his administration.
- Longstanding threats: Nigeria has battled insurgency and banditry for more than a decade.
- Regional volatility: The Sahel is experiencing record levels of extremist activity.
- Diplomatic complexity: Supporters argue that the U.S. strike may have stemmed from urgent intelligence assessments, not Nigerian weakness.
- Continuity of leadership: Some warn that abrupt political upheaval could destabilize the country further.
“Security failures happen in many countries,” a former diplomat said. “Leadership changes in the middle of a crisis can make things worse.”
A nation accustomed to projecting power now faces new questions
Nigeria has long viewed itself as a regional stabilizer, intervening militarily in Benin Republic, and earlier in Sierra Leone and Liberia, to restore order. The U.S. strike has unsettled that narrative, raising questions about sovereignty, intelligence coordination, and Nigeria’s evolving role in West African security.
Tinubu’s silence: political and diplomatic impact
Analysts say Tinubu’s decision not to speak publicly has had several consequences:
- Information vacuum: With no presidential address, speculation has filled the gap.
- Perception of detachment: Some Nigerians interpret the silence as a lack of urgency or empathy.
- Diplomatic ambiguity: Without a direct statement, foreign governments must rely on ministers for clarity.
- Narrative control: The U.S. announcement of the strike before Nigeria’s response allowed Washington to define the global framing of the incident.
On the ground, signs the strike may have failed
With no official discussion of the impact of the attack, some analysts say the operation may not have achieved its intended objectives. In Sokoto State, residents were seen packing away debris from what appeared to be a missile casing, with no evidence of militant activity in the area.
Local leaders said the strike caused confusion but little else, reinforcing claims that the targeted community had no known extremist presence.
Government insists cooperation will continue
Despite the controversy, Nigerian officials say the partnership with the United States will continue and that more joint operations are possible as both countries target ISIS‑linked groups in the northwest.
For now, the political debate continues, with both supporters and critics agreeing on one point: the incident marks a turning point in Nigeria’s security landscape, and Tinubu’s next steps — including whether he addresses the nation — may shape the country’s politics for months to come.
