Controversy Trails US Airstrikes on Terrorist Targets in Nigeria
A fresh controversy has erupted following recent United States airstrikes on terrorist camps in north-western Nigeria, after civil society leader Auwalu Rafsanjani claimed that the US did not seek Nigeria’s approval before carrying out the military operation.
The statement has sparked intense debate across Nigeria, raising serious questions about national sovereignty, security cooperation, and transparency in counter-terrorism operations.
But what is the truth behind the claim?
Rafsanjani, Executive Director of the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), stated during a television interview that there was no public indication that the airstrikes were jointly planned with the Nigerian government.
According to him:
Nigerians were informed about the strikes first through US announcements, not Nigerian authorities
This raised concerns that the operation may not have followed proper diplomatic or constitutional processes
The incident highlights Nigeria’s struggle to secure its territory without foreign intervention
His comments quickly went viral, with many Nigerians questioning whether the country’s sovereignty had been compromised.
Contrary to Rafsanjani’s claim, the Nigerian government has officially stated that:
The airstrikes were approved by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu
Nigeria and the US coordinated intelligence ahead of the operation
The strikes were part of ongoing security cooperation between both countries
Nigeria’s Foreign Affairs officials insist that the operation did not violate Nigeria’s sovereignty and was conducted in line with international counter-terrorism partnerships.
Reports from reputable international news agencies indicate that:
The US targeted Islamic State–linked militants responsible for deadly attacks in the region
The strikes were conducted after consultations with Nigerian authorities
The operation aimed to weaken terrorist networks operating in remote areas difficult for ground forces to access
These reports support the Nigerian government’s position that approval was granted, even though communication to the public came later.
The confusion appears to stem from poor public communication and timing:
The US announced the operation before Nigeria released an official statement
This created the impression that Nigeria was bypassed
Critics argue that national security decisions of this magnitude should be communicated promptly and clearly
As a result, speculation quickly filled the information gap.
Beyond the approval debate, the incident highlights deeper concerns:
Nigeria’s reliance on foreign military support
The persistence of terrorist threats despite years of military operations
Public trust in government transparency on security matters
Many analysts argue that while cooperation is necessary, clear accountability and communication are equally important.
At this point, there is no verified proof that the US carried out the airstrikes without Nigeria’s consent. The controversy is largely driven by public perception and delayed official communication, not confirmed diplomatic violations.
The debate over US airstrikes in Nigeria underscores the need for clear, timely communication on national security matters. While cooperation with international partners remains crucial, Nigerians also demand transparency, sovereignty, and accountability.
Daily Gist & Guide will continue to follow developments and provide updates as more details emerge.
Comments