Issues Around US Bombing Of Terror Hqtrs In Sokoto

The bombing of a terrorist operational headquarters in Sokoto State by the United States on Christmas Day has elicited significant discourse. There are individuals who perceive the attack as a violation of Nigeria’s sovereignty, contending that the federal government did not authorize the United States’ precision bombing.

Furthermore, questions have arisen regarding the choice of Sokoto State as a target, as opposed to the northern state of Borno or the North Central States of Plateau and Benue. Critics argue that Sokoto State has largely been free from terror activities.

Islamic cleric and terrorist negotiator Sheikh Gumi has expressed dissatisfaction with the United States’ involvement in Nigeria’s efforts against terrorism and banditry. He advocates for Nigeria to terminate any agreements with the United States and instead seek assistance from Turkey or Pakistan to combat terrorism.

Some individuals are taken aback by the perception that American President Donald Trump is introducing a religious dimension to the situation. According to these Nigerians, including the Bola Tinubu administration, there is no sectarian aspect to the terrorism and banditry that have afflicted the country since 2009. They prefer to maintain the narrative that these issues are not faith-specific.

Despite the Tinubu administration’s clarification that it sanctioned the attack on the terrorist stronghold and even provided intelligence to the United States, individuals like Rafsajani remain steadfast in their belief that the United States’ incursion constitutes a violation of Nigeria’s sovereignty.

The strategic rationale for targeting Sokoto State, despite its relative peace, revolves around the goal of dismantling the base or armory of groups such as the Islamic State West African Province (ISWAP) to weaken their operational capabilities. The principle of “striking the shepherd so the flock will scatter” is often cited in this context.

Regarding sovereignty, Nigeria is a signatory to international protocols that permit assistance to countries grappling with terrorism.

Additionally, President Trump has made it clear that the United States is prepared to intervene forcefully to combat terrorism in Nigeria if the federal government does not take decisive action. Since designating Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC), both nations have engaged in dialogue, with delegations exchanging visits to assess the situation’s gravity.

A recent United States delegation visited Nigeria to conduct a firsthand assessment of the challenges, engaging with survivors of terror attacks in numerous internally displaced persons (IDP) camps across the North.

On the topic of faith, some argue that there have not been genocidal attacks against Christians. But Boko Haram’s agenda includes the Islamization of the northern states, resulting in more churches being destroyed than mosques and more Christians being killed than Muslims. However, regardless of religious affiliation, no conscientious individual wishes for the senseless violence to persist. Those who do not value human life should face justice.

Reports indicate that some terrorists have begun calling for negotiation, a sign that the measures taken against them are having an impact. The complete eradication of terrorists in Nigeria and other West African countries, including the Sahel states, is deemed necessary. Moreover, identifying and addressing terror sponsors within Nigeria’s corridors of power is crucial. It is regrettable that the federal government has not disclosed the dossiers of terrorism sponsors provided by Dubai.