“If the Nigerian Government continues to allow the killing of Christians, the U.S.A. will immediately stop all aid and assistance to Nigeria, and may very well go into that now disgraced country, ‘guns-a-blazing,’ to completely wipe out the Islamic Terrorists who are committing these horrible atrocities,” Trump posted on his Truth social media.
During his first term in office, President Trump categorically called all African nations ‘shithole countries.’ It seems he intentionally seeks out reasons to criticize and shame African countries without justification.
May I remind all of Trump’s threat to the Republic of South Africa earlier this year: “South Africa is confiscating land and treating certain classes of people VERY BADLY.” He continued, “I will be cutting off all future funding to South Africa until a full investigation of this situation has been completed!”
Trump immediately followed this post up with comments to reporters later in the day. “Terrible things are happening in South Africa,” he said. “The leadership is taking away land, they’re confiscating land, and actually they’re doing things that are perhaps far worse than that.”
Trump openly disrespected South African President Cyril Ramaphosa during his visit to the White House, launching into false claims about events that never happened to White South Africans in their homeland. Trump’s claims about South Africa, driven by unfounded internet rumors and misguided advice from his associates, were entirely baseless and lacked any credible evidence.
In the midst of a myriad of lies and misrepresentations, it has become imperative to question why the leader of the free world consistently resorts to social media for sensitive diplomacy, misrepresents, and makes rash decisions even in the absence of factual evidence.
Traditionally, U.S. presidents have relied on reliable intelligence and formal channels — such as diplomatic cables, press briefings, vetted statements, and cabinet discussions — to communicate policy. Presidents typically work through the State Department and the National Security Council to develop and coordinate messages. Trump’s approach disrupted all of these, bypassing norms, sidelining these institutions, announcing major decisions without prior consultation with his cabinet, and expressing personal sentiments and vendettas. This created confusion and unpredictability both domestically and internationally. This conduct is unacceptable and unprecedented for a U.S. president, and it significantly undermines the integrity of the office.
The dull-witted arguments by President Trump that Muslims wantonly killed Christians indiscriminately in Nigeria are unfounded and misguided. And his statement that the U.S. would respond “guns-a-blazing” is utterly exaggerated.
While the U.S. is a superpower, this does not give it the right to attack another country that has not violated international law, especially when that country has not acted against U.S. interests. Instead of resorting to threats or military action, what if the U.S. offered direct assistance—such as military support—to help Nigeria completely and permanently eliminate Boko Haram in the fight against terrorism? That would be a great thing! It is obvious that, for whatever reasons, the Nigerian government has not been able to eliminate Boko Haram for its own good.
For over three decades, the group, Boko Haram, has been responsible for terrorism in northern Nigeria. The group, led by the Muslim cleric Mohammed Yusuf, was founded in Maiduguri, Nigeria, in 2002. For its first seven years, the group operated as a relatively peaceful religious sect that focused on Islamic education and opposed Western influence.
The group did not begin its widespread, large-scale violent insurgency until an uprising and subsequent security crackdown in July 2009, during which its leader, Mohammed Yusuf, was killed in police custody. After this event, Abubakar Shekau, who took over the group, adopted a much more active and violent approach, including the abduction of the Chibok girls in 2014, and many other violent occurrences in the region.
In Nigeria, the religious distribution is relatively balanced, with each faith representing about 50% of the population— the South predominantly Christian and the North predominantly Muslim. Since its inception, restricted to the north of Nigeria, Boko Haram has perpetrated violence against both Christians and Muslims in the region, and more Muslims there have likely fallen victim to its violent actions. Therefore, if Boko Haram operates mainly in the North, where more Muslims reside, how is it that the group is killing more Christians than Muslims?
Mr. President, it is crucial that you tone down your hostile rhetoric towards Nigeria. Christians and Muslims have coexisted peacefully since the nation’s founding, intermarrying and collaborating in business. I urge you, President Trump, to work with the Nigerian government by providing direct military assistance aimed at eliminating Boko Haram in Nigeria once and for all. That is leadership!
Please visit our website for more informative newsletters.
Nicholas A. Owoyemi, CFA
President & CEO (Author)
Moderate Voices of America (MVA)
30 Wall Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10005
212 406-1958
info@moderatevoices.org / www.moderatevoices.org
Nicholas A. Owoyemi is also a Principal Financial Consultant with Newbridge Securities Corporation, based in the USA.