GOP Lawmaker Backs Trump’s Threat of Military Action in Nigeria Amid Genocide Allegations

Republican Rep. Riley Moore has strongly endorsed former President Donald Trump’s threats of military action in Nigeria, asserting that the violence against Christians constitutes ‘genocide.’ Moore, designated by Trump to lead an investigation into the killings by Islamist militants, has outlined potential measures, including sanctions and the possibility of kinetic strikes. Trump’s designation of Nigeria as a country of concern has prompted preparations for military intervention, with the former president warning of ‘things Nigeria is not going to be happy about.’ Moore’s stance reflects growing frustration with Nigeria’s government, which has received billions in U.S. security aid since 2009, yet has allegedly failed to address the violence effectively. Moore emphasizes that ‘all options are on the table,’ including strategic counterterrorism strikes against top militants to halt the killings. He has also highlighted the need for legislative action and collaboration with NGOs and religious groups on the ground to document the scale of the violence, while maintaining the possibility of a stronger U.S.-Nigeria relationship if the country demonstrates willingness to combat extremist groups.

The Nigerian government has publicly denied allegations of genocide, stating that portrayals of the conflict as a targeted campaign against a single religious group is a gross misrepresentation of the reality. The office of the presidency asserted that terrorists attack all who reject their ideology, including Muslims, Christians, and those of no faith. Moore and his colleague, Rep. Tom Cole, plan to meet with Nigerian officials in Washington this month as part of the investigation, potentially sending delegations to the nation. Moore emphasized that while the administration has the authority to take a range of actions, there are also opportunities for collaboration if Nigeria shows a commitment to addressing extremism.

Nigeria’s religious tensions have long been a source of instability, with Muslims predominantly in the north and Christians concentrated in the south. Boko Haram, an Islamist militant group, has been a major threat to Christians, conducting terrorist attacks that have claimed thousands of lives and displaced many communities. The International Society for Civil Liberties and Rule of Law reports at least 52,000 Christians have been killed, 18,500 abducted and unlikely to have survived, and 20,000 churches and Christian schools attacked between 2009 and 2023. The group’s historical atrocities, including the infamous 2014 kidnapping of 276 girls, underline the severity of the crisis. Despite international support, including U.S. security aid, the Nigerian government has been accused of inaction or complicity in the violence against Christians.

Moore’s investigation into the matter has drawn criticism and international attention, with some viewing the U.S. stance as an overreach, while others see it as a necessary step to hold Nigeria accountable. The situation also raises questions about the U.S.’s strategic interests in the region, particularly regarding Nigeria’s potential role in the global supply of critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel. While the U.S. has shown interest in investing in Nigeria’s mineral resources, persistent insecurity in mining regions poses challenges to these ambitions. The potential for a direct U.S. military campaign, however, remains constrained by current U.S. assets and strategic considerations, with no permanent military bases in Nigeria and limited direct combat presence.

As the situation unfolds, both the U.S. and Nigeria face complex decisions. Moore’s advocacy for decisive action highlights the urgent need for a response to the violence, while the Nigerian government’s denial of the genocide underscores the deepening divide. The potential for military intervention, while unlikely, remains a topic of intense debate. Meanwhile, the broader implications for U.S. foreign policy, regional security, and Nigeria’s internal stability continue to shape the discourse around this contentious issue.