On Christmas Day, 25 December 2025, the United States launched strikes in Sokoto State, northern Nigeria. The official justification was familiar: protecting Christians from Islamic extremism. But this explanation raises serious questions.
Were Christians truly the strategic target? Or was religion simply the most effective emotional pretext for a much deeper geopolitical move?
The problem with the religious narrative
Washington claimed the strikes targeted Islamic State-linked groups responsible for attacks on Christians. Yet Nigeria’s main extremist threat, Boko Haram, is often misunderstood. Despite frequent media framing, Boko Haram’s ideology is not narrowly anti-Christian. Its violence targets anyone who resists its radical Salafist worldview — Muslims, Christians, and non-believers alike. Religion, in this context, simplifies a far more complex security reality.
In short: religion mobilizes emotion, but it does not fully explain the timing or scale of US involvement.
Why now? Follow the oil.
Nigeria is Africa’s largest oil producer, pumping roughly 1.8 million barrels per day.
Its importance lies not just in volume, but in quality:
This is the kind of oil global markets — including the United States — actively seek.
A long-standing strategic interest
For more than 60 years, Washington has quietly viewed Nigerian oil as a strategic asset. Not officially, but consistently. Why? Because influence over Nigerian oil means influence over global energy stability:
In energy terms, Nigeria is not peripheral — it is central.
The bigger picture
This intervention is less about religion and more about energy, influence, and balance of power. Religion provides the narrative.
Oil provides the motive. And the consequences will not stop at Nigeria’s borders. They will ripple across West Africa, Central Africa, and global energy markets.
Closing thought: When major powers invoke morality, it’s worth asking:
What strategic asset lies beneath the rhetoric?