For years, Nigerians have watched their leaders perform the same political drama: deny, deflect, dismiss — and then disappear when real solutions are needed. But the recent diplomatic tension between Nigeria and the United States has exposed this old playbook more starkly than ever.
When the U.S. publicly threatened to take direct military action against violent extremist groups operating within Nigeria, our political class reacted with predictable outrage. Suddenly, every microphone in Abuja was vibrating with warnings about “sovereignty,” “foreign meddling,” and “distorted narratives.” Committees were formed. Press statements were drafted. Analysts were sponsored to go on TV and reframe the conversation.
But beneath all of that noise, one question refused to go away:
Why are our leaders more angry at the United States for naming the terrorists than at the terrorists themselves for killing Nigerians?
It is a damning question — and yet a necessary one.
The Reality We Refuse to Confront
Let us start with the blunt truth:
Nigeria has a terrorism problem — and a leadership problem.
These violent groups didn’t emerge yesterday. They didn’t take root in secret. They didn’t gain territory by magic. They grew because our institutions were weak, our borders were unguarded, and our political class could not (or would not) take decisive action.
So when the U.S. labeled Nigeria again as a “country of particular concern” for religiously targeted violence and threatened possible intervention against extremist organizations, the Nigerian reaction should have been simple:
“Good. Help us defeat the killers.”
But instead, what did we hear?
“America is exaggerating.”
“They are insulting Nigeria again.”
“Those claims are Western propaganda.”
“They want to destabilize our sovereignty.”
Suddenly, the conversation shifted away from the terrorists themselves and became all about the feelings of politicians.
But here is the part that exposes everything:
The U.S. threat was not directed at the Nigerian government — it was directed at the terrorists.
Meanwhile, our leaders responded as if they were the ones under attack.
Why?
Narratives, Excuses, and the Habit of Protecting Failure
Whenever external pressure highlights Nigeria’s domestic failures, our political class immediately reaches for the same defensive script:
1. Rewrite the narrative
2. Blame a foreign enemy
3. Wrap themselves in nationalism
4. Confuse the public with half–truths
5. Position themselves as defenders of “sovereignty”
6. Avoid answering the real security questions
It is a well-known tactic:
If you cannot solve the problem, redefine it.
If you cannot protect citizens, distract them.
If you cannot meet global standards, accuse the world of bias.
The problem is not the United States. The problem is that this time, the U.S. highlighted something our leaders do not want examined in public: the scale of Nigeria’s internal decay and the government’s inability to keep its own people safe.
Our leaders can argue diplomacy all day — but one fact remains permanent:
Terrorists are killing Nigerians every week.
Foreign nations see it.
Our politicians pretend not to.
Are We Truly Angry at the U.S. — or at the Mirror They Are Holding Up?
Many citizens reacted with mixed emotions. Some felt insulted by the U.S. rhetoric, particularly its harsh description of Nigeria as a “disgraced nation.” Others agreed that the language was disrespectful but still acknowledged that the underlying truth is painful:
Have we not, as a nation, allowed insecurity to define us?
What exactly is the lie in what the U.S. said?
Are our communities not suffering mass killings?
Are kidnappings not rampant from Oyo to Borno?
Are churches, mosques, schools, and farms not being attacked?
Are terrorists not building revenue networks right under government systems?
Are security agencies not often overwhelmed or compromised?
So where is the falsehood?
What angers Nigerians most is not the U.S. statement — it is the fact that a foreign country had to say out loud what our leaders have refused to address sincerely.
The insult hurts because it is too close to the truth.
If the Government’s Reaction Is Fear, Then Something Is Wrong
Let us examine something suspicious:
If the United States says it wants to target terrorists — Why does the Nigerian political class respond with fear, panic, or hostility?
If you hear that thieves are coming for criminals in your neighborhood, and your first reaction is to defend the criminals…
…what does that say about you?
If we are more worried about the “narrative” than the killings,
If we are more concerned with “public relations” than public safety,
If we are more focused on “how the world sees us” than on how citizens live…
Then perhaps the world is not the guilty one.
Perhaps the guilt is coming from inside the house.
Complicity: The Question Nobody Wants to Ask
When leaders show more passion in refuting foreign criticism than in fighting domestic terrorism, citizens naturally begin to suspect the worst:
Are some people benefiting from insecurity?
When crises continue for years without resolution, it is often because:
budgets are being inflated, funds are being diverted, contractors are feeding fat, local politicians are gaining influence, and certain individuals exploit insecurity for power.
Are officials protecting terrorists?
History has examples of:
politicians using militant groups to intimidate rivals,
security officers being compromised by bribes,
powerful figures shielding violent actors due to ethnic or political loyalties.
Is the government afraid of exposure?
International intervention — even in intelligence sharing — often reveals:
negligence,
corruption,
internal sabotage,
unreported death tolls,
hidden security failures.
Thus, when the U.S. says it wants to “go after terrorists” and our leaders start shouting about sovereignty…
Sometimes, sovereignty is not what they are trying to protect. Sometimes, they are protecting secrets.
What True Leadership Would Have Done
A confident, committed leadership would have responded like this:
“We welcome any assistance that helps us defeat killers of innocent Nigerians. We will coordinate responsibly and transparently.
Our priority is the protection of Nigerian lives.”
Simple. Responsible. Patriotic.
Instead, what did we hear?
Emotional outbursts
Long grammar
Committees and communiqués
Blame-shifting
Nationalistic chest-beating
And zero serious action plans
This is not leadership.This is insecurity — not the physical kind, the political kind.
Citizens Must Demand Better — Loudly and Continuously. This moment should not be wasted. It is exposing the difference between:
Leaders who want to solve insecurity and
Leaders who want to manage the narrative of insecurity.
To reshape the future, Nigerians must demand:
1. A Transparent National Counterterror Strategy
Not PDP vs APC politics.
A real plan with timelines, monthly scorecards, and independent oversight.
2. Full disclosure of what assistance Nigeria accepts
No backroom deals.
No secrecy.
No manipulating the truth.
3. Accountability for compromised officials
Anyone supporting terrorists — directly or indirectly — must be exposed, removed, and prosecuted.
4. Community-centered protection systems
Local intelligence, local policing, rural investment, trauma support, and rapid response mechanisms.
5. Stop the propaganda culture. Governance is not theatre. Security is not PR. Nigerians deserve honesty, not staged outrage.
Conclusion: If Leaders Fear the Light, Then Darkness Is Their Comfort
The question no politician wants to hear is the question this moment is forcing us to ask:
Why are our leaders acting as if they are the ones the U.S. is coming for?
If America says it wants to confront terrorists and our leaders start shouting, then maybe the problem is not foreign intervention…
Maybe the problem is what intervention might expose.
We must stop protecting shadows.
We must stop defending narratives.
We must face our truth, fix our institutions, and demand a government that stands fearlessly on the side of its people.
Because if our leaders continue reacting like this, one conclusion becomes very uncomfortable but very possible:
Nigeria is not protecting its sovereignty —
Nigeria is protecting its terrorists.
0 Comments