In a powerful new salvo amid Nigeria’s volatile security landscape, the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) has vehemently rejected a recent presidential statement, accusing the Presidency of deliberately misrepresenting its stance on the spate of deadly attacks against Christian communities. CAN insists what is unfolding in multiple zones across Northern Nigeria and the Middle Belt is not sporadic violence, but an orchestrated campaign amounting to Christian genocide.
Distortion Allegation: CAN Responds to Presidency’s Narrative
On Monday, Daniel Bwala, Special Adviser to the President on Media and Policy Communication, released a press communique titled “Presidency Debunks Western Christian Genocide Narrative in Dialogue with CAN Leadership.” In it, Bwala claimed that during a bilateral meeting, CAN leaders had referred to the killings as a “so-called Christian genocide”—a purported minimization of the brutality.
CAN has now responded forcefully, declaring that those claims are “completely false and grossly unfair.” Archbishop Daniel Okoh, CAN’s President, affirmed that at no point did he or any other CAN official use the term “so-called genocide.” He emphasized that the organization’s long-standing position remains intact: Christian populations in Northern and Central Nigeria face repeated, targeted, violent attacks—with thousands dead, villages razed, displaced families, and churches destroyed.
During the meeting, CAN’s Director of Planning, Research and Strategy, Bishop Mike Akpami, reportedly presented data from the Observatory on Religious Freedom in Africa (ORFA), underscoring a consistent pattern of violence targeting Christians. CAN also noted that audio/video records from the meeting are preserved by its media team, affirming no derogatory term like “so-called genocide” was uttered.
In its statement, CAN urged officials and media professionals to exercise care in speech, warning that careless or malicious wording deepens wounds and dilutes the suffering of victims.
Global Echoes: U.S. Voices, Accusations, and Official Pushback
The controversy over Nigeria’s Christian killings took on an international dimension when U.S. Senator Ted Cruz called for Nigeria to be declared a Country of Particular Concern (CPC) under the International Religious Freedom Act, alleging “Christian mass murder” is underway. Cruz’s rhetoric has gained amplification in U.S. media and in advocacy circles, with supporters citing numbers like “over 50,000 Christians killed since 2009.”
The Nigerian government has swiftly pushed back. Federal officials, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, have characterized the genocide claims as exaggerations and distortions. They reaffirm that Nigeria is committed to protecting all citizens—regardless of religious affiliation—and accused foreign actors of engaging in coordinated disinformation to paint Nigeria as a sectarian battleground.
In addition, analysts have called attention to data published by the ACLED (Armed Conflict Location & Event Data) Project showing that from January 2020 through September 2025, there were 385 attacks identified as targeting Christians—resulting in 317 deaths—compared to 417 deaths among Muslims in 196 reported attacks. This has led some to argue that while religion is often a factor, the broader dynamics are tied to resource conflict, weak institutions, and uneven enforcement of justice.
Yet CAN and allied Christian voices reject framing debates in observational statistics alone; they view the repeated targeting and destruction of Christian communities—especially in known flashpoint zones—as integral to a pattern of religious persecution.
On-the-Ground Reality: What the Violence Looks Like
The bloodshed is not theoretical. In June 2025, the Yelwata massacre claimed the lives of over 100 individuals from a Christian community—some estimates range between 100 and 200 deaths—with several thousands displaced. The assailants struck in the pre-dawn hours, burning houses and killing residents amid chaos.
Earlier in April, a Fulani-herder assault in Zike, Plateau State resulted in at least 40 dead within a Christian farming settlement. Homes were razed, looting occurred, and survivors were left reeling. Local groups report that between December 2023 and February 2024 alone, more than 1,300 people lost their lives in Plateau’s rural communities — yet accountability remains minimal.
In April 2025, northern Nigeria recorded over 150 fatalities across several states, especially in Benue and Plateau, in what analysts have described as the deadliest month in recent memory. This wave of violence rivals the human toll in earlier years and brings into sharp focus the failure of successive administrations to permanently reverse the trend.
These attacks, often perpetrated via nighttime raids, arson, and gunfire, consistently target Christian-majority farming communities. Villages are razed, survivors flee to camps, and local security responses are slow or ineffective.
The Stakes: Narrative, Accountability, and National Cohesion
At the heart of this conflict lies a battle over narrative and recognition. CAN argues that labeling the violence as “Christian genocide” is not hyperbole but an attempt to convey a trajectory of extermination through neglect, complicity, or selective enforcement. On the other hand, the Presidency and its supporters contend such framing is divisive, exaggerated, and politically motivated, accusing foreign voices of weaponizing religious tensions for geopolitical leverage.
Critics warn that inflating the case to genocide without meeting legal definition risks oversimplifying a multifaceted security crisis spanning ethnicity, climate-induced resource scarcity, terror actors, and communal rivalry. Indeed, under the UN Convention on Genocide, there must be proof of intent to destroy a protected group, which analysts argue is lacking.
Yet CAN and many Christian communities say the persistent pattern, concentrated geography, and perceived government inaction amount to an implicit strategy of elimination. The difference matters: if the attacks are seen simply as criminal acts, then the state’s response defaults to policing. But if viewed as persecutorial genocide, there is a clarion call for emergency measures, international pressure, and structural reforms.
Looking Ahead: What to Watch
1. Presidency-CAN dialogue: Will Bwala or other presidential aides clarify or retract the mischaracterization? CAN has demanded public corrections and apologies.
2. U.S. Congressional action: Senator Cruz’s bill to reclassify Nigeria as a CPC is pending. Its passage could lead to diplomatic consequences.
3. Accountability on the ground: Are security forces or local governments investigating and prosecuting perpetrators in hotspots like Plateau, Kaduna, Benue, and Zamfara?
4. Data transparency: Independent verification from groups like ACLED, ORFA, and local NGOs will be pivotal to either validating or challenging claims of mass religious targeting.
5. Media framing: Who controls the narrative in Nigeria’s media and global discourse may influence public sympathy, policy leverage, and international intervention.
0 Comments