Tag: Trump

  • Oshiomhole hails Trump’s recognition of First Lady

    Oshiomhole hails Trump’s recognition of First Lady

    Sen. Adams Oshiomhole (APC-Edo North) says U.S. President Donald Trump’s public recognition of Nigeria’s First Lady, Mrs Oluremi Tinubu, carries a strong message of diplomacy, unity, and national cohesion.

    He spoke on Friday to State House correspondents after a meeting with President Bola Tinubu at the Presidential Villa, Abuja, describing the encounter as cordial and respectful.

    Oshiomhole highlighted that Trump’s remarks emphasise religious harmony, noting that Tinubu is a Muslim, while his wife is a Christian pastor, symbolising Nigeria’s religious diversity.

    “The recognition shows Trump understands that the Nigerian President is a Muslim, but he celebrates his Christian wife, who is also a pastor.

    “So there can be no tension between the Qur’an and the Bible,” Oshiomhole explained, saying the message is a model for peaceful coexistence.

    He stressed that the development should remind Nigerians to cooperate for the common good, overcome national challenges collectively, and strengthen unity across all regions and communities.

    Oshiomhole said governance must deliver benefits fairly to all citizens, noting that shared progress is essential for social stability and national development.

    The senator revealed he visited President Tinubu to greet him and wish him a happy new year, having not seen him since the start of 2026.

    He also congratulated the President over Trump’s respectful comments about the First Lady, describing her as responsible, respectable, and an inspiration to Nigerians nationwide.

    “The public applause following the recognition reflects the positive impression created. For me as a Nigerian, that is worth celebrating,” Oshiomhole said, urging unity and national pride.

    (NAN)

  • Trump deletes posts depicting Barack, Michelle Obama as monkeys

    Trump deletes posts depicting Barack, Michelle Obama as monkeys

    American President Donald Trump yesterday deleted a video he posted and shared on Truth Social depicting former President Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama as apes.

    Trump deleted the AI-generated video after it had sparked outrage on social media, with most users accusing the president of racism.

    The clip was embedded in a minute-long video posted on Truth Social that contested the results of the 2020 election.

    The video cites a self-proclaimed cybersecurity expert who disassembles a machine used to count votes and claims they stopped counting to give former president Joe Biden an advantage.

    Read Also: FULL LIST: Top 10 states with highest FAAC allocation in 2025

    Seconds before the video ends, the AI-generated clip begins: “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” plays in the background, and apes with AI-generated Obama faces dance in the frame.

    The Obamas have not yet publicly addressed the president’s post.

    California Governor Gavin Newsom condemned Trump’s behaviour through his press office account on social media, writing: “Disgusting behaviour by the President. Every single Republican must denounce this. Now.”

    White House dismisses claims

    The White House dismissed claims that the video was racist, arguing that the clip came from a longer meme depicting Trump and Democratic politicians as characters from The Lion King.

    White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement that the meme depicts Trump as King of the Jungle and Democrats as other characters from the movie. The longer video also shows former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris depicted as zebras.“Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public,” she said.

  • Emerging world order and Africa’s lessons from the Trump era

    Emerging world order and Africa’s lessons from the Trump era

    By Oumarou Sanou

    The post–Cold War international order was never perfect, but it rested on an implicit bargain: economic integration, shared security frameworks, and a rules-based multilateral system that, however asymmetrical, offered predictability. Today, that fragile system is cracking. What we are witnessing is not merely a shift in global power centres; it is a contest for the very architecture that governs the relations between the powerful and the weak.

    In Davos earlier this year, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney delivered a speech that resonated far beyond Canadian audiences. He warned that the world is experiencing “a rupture, not a transition” in the international order—a rupture driven by great power rivalry, coercive economic instruments, and the abandonment of long-standing norms that underpinned international cooperation. Carney’s admonition was clear: “If we are not at the table, we are on the menu.”

    Carney’s words are particularly relevant in light of the behaviour of the United States under President Donald Trump. Whether it was threats of acquisition or control over Greenland, aggressive tariff wars, or overt economic coercion against traditional allies like Canada, Trump’s actions revealed a willingness to privilege raw national interests over collective stability and legal norms.

    Trump’s repeated threats to Greenland—suggesting the United States might pursue control of the territory and even floating military options—were not only alarming in themselves but illustrative of a broader willingness to subordinate sovereignty to strategic ambition. When such rhetoric comes from a self-described champion of “America First,” it sends a sobering message: might still make right in the world, even among countries that claim to champion democracy and the rule of law.

    Meanwhile, revelations that officials from Washington held private meetings with Alberta separatist activists in Canada stirred fears of foreign interference in a neighbour’s internal affairs. Critics in Ottawa denounced these contacts as a breach of Canadian sovereignty. Such actions, whether driven by geopolitical opportunism or domestic political theatre, further illustrate the weakening of mutual respect that once characterised Western alliances.

    Yet it is not only Western allies who have felt the tremors of this shifting order. Trump’s use of tariffs as negotiation tools—far beyond strategic trade leverage, extending toward punitive measures against Canada, Mexico, and other trading partners—underscored a willingness to weaponise economic integration itself. The result: fractured alliances, defensive economic posturing in Europe and Asia, and a deterioration of trust that had anchored global cooperation for decades.

    For Africa, these developments are not abstract. They serve as both a warning and a lesson.

    First, the era of assuming predictable behaviour from great powers—whether the United States, Europe, or others—is over. If a democracy like the US can threaten tariffs or territorial ambitions without significant institutional pushback, what then for African states facing far more powerful neighbours or external influences? Africa must understand that in a multipolar scramble, goodwill will not protect it. Sovereignty must be backed by strategy and diversified partnerships.

    Secondly, the Trump era illustrates the limits of aligning too closely with any one power. African nations have long faced pressure to choose between Western influence and alternative models—whether from Russia, China, or other actors. What Africa needs, as Carney suggested for middle powers, is “cooperation without subordination”: strategic alignment that preserves autonomy rather than replacing one patron with another.

    This is where many pseudo-pan-African narratives fall short. They paint Africa’s choices as binary—either anti-Western or pro-Russian/Chinese. Such framing is simplistic and dangerous. Africa’s challenge is not to replace one hegemon with another, but to craft an independent strategy rooted in its own developmental priorities, not the geopolitical interests of outsiders.

    Africa also faces internal vulnerabilities that external actors can exploit. Just as the alleged Trump administration’s interactions with Canadian separatists raised fears of meddling in domestic cohesion, many African states grapple with separatist movements, ethnic tensions, and governance deficits. These internal fractures could be manipulated by external powers seeking influence–be it the US, Russia, China, EU and the others. Nigeria’s own experience with separatist agitation, for example, could invite unwelcome foreign interest if not managed within a strong governance framework.

    Read Also: AfDB okays $3.9m to electrify homesin Nigeria, others

    The Trump era also underscores the importance of resilience in global institutions. Carney’s critique of the “rules-based order” highlighted how powerful states can weaken norms and leverage economic integration as coercion rather than cooperation. For Africa, which relies on international norms for trade, security, and diplomacy, this erosion is dangerous. It means engaging not only in bilateral relationships but also strengthening regional architecture—from the African Union to ECOWAS and the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA)—to buffer external shocks and present collective leverage.

    Moreover, Africa must invest in economic self-reliance and intra-continental cooperation. Reliance on distant powers for security, investment, or economic growth leaves African states vulnerable to external shocks and policy whims. Strengthening intra-African trade, harmonising regulations, and building joint capacities in critical sectors can provide a foundation from which African states negotiate rather than capitulate.

    Finally, the African diplomatic corps must be modernised. Africa needs representation that not only attends global summits but actively shapes narratives and defends African interests. Just as Western powers deploy elaborate strategic communication and lobbying capabilities, African states must professionalise their diplomatic engagements to protect sovereignty and influence outcomes.

    The emerging world order is marked by competition, not cooperation. This reality will not change simply by wishing it so. Africa’s response must be pragmatic, strategic, and rooted in its own interests—not in reaction to external pressures but in pursuit of its own vision of prosperity, stability, and sovereign self-determination.

    •Sanou is a social critic, Pan-African observer and researcher focusing on governance, security, and political transitions in the Sahel. Contact: sanououmarou386@gmail.com

  • Tunji Olaopa, critical reforms and the Trump challenge (2)

    Tunji Olaopa, critical reforms and the Trump challenge (2)

    It is ironic that, even as he exerts all energy in actualising his agenda to ‘Make America Great Again’, President Donald Trump is also, perhaps inadvertently, unravelling the building blocks responsible for his country’s superlative attainments in the first place. For instance, some of his country’s most iconic institutions of higher learning are under siege from the Trump administration as MAGA doctrine seemingly has little patience both for theory and theoreticians. Scientific certainties and proven verities on climate change, reproductive health, vaccines and public health among others are held hostage to rigid ideological stances of dubious intellectual and utilitarian value.

    No less damaging are the massive ongoing purges in the public sector under Trump thus eroding the certainty and security of tenure that enabled public officers to be true to their oath of office and stand fearlessly in defence of the public good in the discharge of their duties. It would appear that personal loyalty to Trump has become the most critical factor in being appointed to public office and the key to remaining in such offices. The consequence is the degeneration to the most comical forms of sycophancy and obsequiousness in American political life.

    Obviously lost on President Trump is the irony of his offering assistance to protesters against the Islamic Republic in Iran even as officers of the ICE operate like some Hitlerite gestapo gang in Wisconsin and other American cities – an anomaly in the expiring America we used to know. And in his rabid, no-holds-barred clampdown on ‘illegal immigrants’, which, of course, can be defensible in some respects, Trump is undermining the rich diversity of a specialist, skilled immigrant base partly responsible for America’s greatness. And there is the Trump administration’s total withdrawal from or undisguised undermining of several humanitarian organisations that underlay the ‘soft power’ that inspired Ronald Reagan’s description of America as the city on a hill beaming inspirational rays of light to the world. Unfortunately, clouds of darkness have begun to eclipse any such radiance.

    As this column has often reiterated, Trump’s unhidden disdain for the weak, poor, vulnerable and feeble of the earth or his contemptuous dismissal of the ‘shit-hole’ countries of Africa should not evoke responses of anger or fury. In any case, such negative emotions would be at best exercises in impotence in the face of a global power behemoth like America. In a way, we should even be grateful that Trump, through his undisguised forthrightness and penchant for telling the truth as he sees it, shorn of all hypocritical posturing, has issued a wake-up call to Africa and the continent’s leaders. You either shape up or face the existential evaporation of your countries as sovereign entities in a world increasingly impatient with failing states that sit atop buoyant resource bases that can be put to better use by better organised and managed polities.

    In the first part of this piece, we contended that resetting Nigeria and indeed Africa on the path of socio-economic and political resurgence, a task that has become imperative and inescapable, is no rocket science. It is a feat that can be achieved by doing a number of simple things that elevate merit in the functioning of the public sphere, ensure persistence on the path of this ethical rectitude and being focused not just in effecting seemingly small but impactful changes as well as being diligent in implementing the diverse aspects of the grand visions we conjure of the future flourishing society of our dreams.

    We noted that the Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC) under the leadership of Professor Tunji OLAOPA is already showing the light for us to find the way in this regard. In the first place, it is significant that President Bola Tinubu appointed unarguably the country’s leading authority on public sector reforms as Chairman of the Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC). Apart from the plethora of books he has written on public service reforms in Nigeria and Africa, Professor Olaopa rose to the Pinnacle of his career in the Civil Service where he was a federal Permanent Secretary. He has brought both his theoretical grounding and practical experience to bear on the execution of his mission at the FCSC.

    For instance, in September 2025, Professor Olaopa revealed, at an FCSC Strategic Plan Stakeholder Validation Workshop in Abuja, a new Strategic Plan to guide the operations of the FCSC between 2026 and 2030. Speaking on the occasion, he stressed that “This plan is our response to the President’s charge for us to reposition the Federal bureaucracy, making the Commission a catalyst for deepening and consolidating ongoing transformation efforts”. The unpretentious intellectual that he is, Olaopa admitted that the reform trajectory over the last one year had revealed certain limitations and shortcomings which had to be decisively addressed.

    In his words, “It became clear that our roadmap needed more evidence -based concrete strategies, change management programs, and carefully crafted projects to truly assure a transformative journey”. Towards this end, the remodeled strategic plan focuses on six key areas which include strengthening the FCSC ‘s constitutionally mandated independence, oversight of Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs), and public accountability mechanisms; according appropriate priority to reinforcing meritocracy through competitive promotion exercises, structured interviews, and transparent digital recruitment platforms that facilitate nationwide examinations; and, in conjunction with the Office of the Head of the Civil Service, institutionalizing performance -based career management systems that “link promotion and career progression to key performance indicators, citizen feedback, and revised annual appraisal reports fundamental for enhancing accountability”.

    Other aspects of the strategic master plan include improving on ethical frameworks, internal audit systems and whistleblower protections, as well as deepening the meritocratic and transparent implementation of the federal character principle, as well as ensuring fair representation for women and persons with disabilities in line with the constitution. According to Olaopa, “These six strategic emphases are lessons drawn from global best practices, especially from Commonwealth Civil Service Commissions in countries such as the UK and Canada…We must recover lost legal and operational independence to shield career management from political interference. Opaque manual processes will be replaced by digital recruitment platforms and performance -based promotions to deepen meritocracy and transparency”.

    The Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Mrs Didi Walson – Jack expressed optimism that the FCSC Strategic Plan transcends beyond guiding the Commission alone but will also serve as an enabler for the wider Federal Civil Reform Agenda. Emphasising the shared vision by all stakeholders in developing a world-class public service characterised by professionalism, accountability, meritocracy, and performance orientation to fast-track national development, she stressed that the FCSC Strategic Plan, alongside the Federal Civil Service Strategy and Implementation Plan (FCSSIP), would go a long way to help achieve these objectives.

    A significant development under Olaopa ‘s leadership at the FCSC has been the resuscitation of the annual National Council of Civil Service Commissions of the Federation. The highest consultative and advisory platform for strengthening institutional capacy, operational efficiency and governance culture among Federal and Civil Service Commissions in the country, this all important council had not convened for over ten years before the present dispensation. The theme of the 2025 edition of the Council was ‘Repositioning Civil Service Commissions in Nigeria as a Hub of Professionalism in Public Service Human Resource Management’.

    Read Also: Nigeria, Saudi Arabia move to strengthen housing, construction technology

    A perusal of the communique issued at the end of the 44th annual Council of the Federal and State civil service commissions, which was held in Umuahia, Abia State, revealed a number of heartwarming trends. First, there is the evolution of a more robust relationship and interaction between the federal and state civil service commissions. Second, is a joint deliberation on as well as inclusive input into the emergence and subsequent implementation of the Strategic Master plan of the FCSC (2026-2030). Third, there is the increased tempo of the participation of state civil service commissions in the deliberations of the council, with positive implications for the overall performance of the body at the federal and state levels.

    It is not surprising that the emphasis in much of the points articulated in the communique stresses more qualitative and rigorous recruitment and promotion processes; higher levels of organizational accountability, transparency and efficiency especially through enhanced use of technological innovations and digital platforms; enhancing the organizational autonomy of the Federal and State civil service commissions from partisan meddling to enhance Professionalism and meritocracy in the pursuit of their respective mandates in the public interest.

    Attaining higher and more qualitative standards of governance in the public sphere is a necessary condition for Nigeria and other African countries to escape the demeaning characterisation of such countries as ‘shit-hole’ entities. The standards of performance set in the public sphere have positive or negative implications for public education, healthcare, urban planning, environmental control and waste management, housing, public infrastructure, as well as national security, to name a few. Indeed, the quality of service delivery in different areas of the private sector depends substantially on the quality of governance in public sector regulatory agencies.

    Perhaps one of the most significant highlights of the deliberations at Umuahia as captured in the communique was the declaration of support by the State Civil Service Commissions for steps being taken by the FCSC to bring other Human Resources Management institutions in the public service such as the Police Service Commission, National Assembly Service Commission, Federal Judicial Service Commission, the Civil Defence, Correctional and Immigration Services Board among others within a networking arrangement to share knowledge, engage in peer review and deepen the common pool for the generation and implementation of ideas, plans and strategies. If accomplished, this will be a major turning point in the qualitative deepening of the various federal and state civil service commissions across the country.

    No less critical was the call for the encouragement of State Civil Service Commissions to join the forum of the Association of African Public Service Commissions (AAPSCOMs) as an avenue for enlarging their learning network, broadening their professional outlook and expanding their sphere for peer collaboration. Incidentally, Professor Olaopa is the Vice President of the Association for the West Africa Region.

  • Nicki Minaj shows off Trump’s ‘Gold Card’, fast-tracks US citizenship

    Nicki Minaj shows off Trump’s ‘Gold Card’, fast-tracks US citizenship

    Trinidad-born rapper Nicki Minaj has received a Trump Gold Card, a high-profile investor visa offering a fast-track path to US residency and citizenship.

    The card, which typically requires a $1 million contribution to the US Treasury and a $15,000 processing fee, was shared by Minaj on social media.

    She wrote on X, “Residency? Residency? The cope is coping. Finalizing that citizenship paperwork as we speak, as per MY wonderful, gracious, charming President. Thanks to the petition. I wouldn’t have done it without you. Oh, CitizenNIKA, you are the moment. Gold Trump card free of charge.”

    Read Also: Why I’m Trump’s number one fan – Nicki Minaj

    Minaj, who has lived in the US since she was five, has been a lawful permanent resident but not a US citizen.

    She recently expressed support for President Donald Trump, calling herself his “number one fan” at an event promoting Trump’s government-backed investment accounts for children.

    The Trump Gold Card program has faced criticism for favouring wealthy immigrants, with some arguing it undermines the traditional immigration process.

  • Why I’m Trump’s number one fan – Nicki Minaj

    Why I’m Trump’s number one fan – Nicki Minaj

    Global rapper Nicki Minaj has declared herself Donald Trump’s “number one fan”, stating that criticism of him only strengthens her support.

    She made this declaration at the Trump Accounts Summit, where she also announced support for the “Trump Accounts” initiative, which provides trust funds for children.

    Minaj, who wore a furry white coat, said: “I will say that I am probably the president’s number one fan, and that’s not going to change. And the hate or what people have to say, it does not affect me at all.

    Read Also: Trump warns Iraq not to reinstate al-Maliki as Prime Minister

    “It actually motivates me to support him more. He has a lot of force behind him and God is protecting him. Amen,” she added.

    Trump, who had earlier joked about growing his nails to emulate Minaj’s style, held her hand as she spoke.

    Minaj has pledged to contribute $150,000 to $300,000 to the Trump Accounts program, which aims to provide financial support to children.

    In November she made a surprise appearance at the United Nations to call for an end to faith-based persecution in Nigeria, an allegation by the Trump administration which the Nigerian government denied.

  • Trump warns Iraq not to reinstate al-Maliki as Prime Minister

    Trump warns Iraq not to reinstate al-Maliki as Prime Minister

    U.S. President Donald Trump has threatened to withdraw the U.S. support from Iraq if former Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, is reinstated to the post.

    “Because of (al-Maliki’s) insane policies and ideologies, if elected, the United States of America will no longer help Iraq.

    “If we are not there to help, Iraq has ZERO chance of Success, Prosperity, or Freedom,” Trump said in a post on his Truth Social platform.

    “Last time Maliki was in power, the Country descended into poverty and total chaos.That should not be allowed to happen again,” Trump said.

    He added that Iraq would be making “a very bad choice by reinstalling Nouri al-Maliki as Prime Minister.”

    Around two and a half months after parliamentary elections in Iraq, the ruling Shiite alliance nominated al-Maliki as its candidate for the office of prime minister a week ago.

    Iraq’s parliament on Tuesday was supposed to elect a new president, who would then nominate the prime minister.

    However, according to media reports, the election of the president was postponed due to disagreements over the candidate.

    Al-Maliki, 75, was head of government in Iraq from 2006 to 2014 after the fall of long-time dictator Saddam Hussein.

    Critics, including representatives of the U.S. leadership has accused him, among other things, of being responsible for the success of the extremist militia organisation Islamic State due to poor governance.

    Many in Iraq consider him one of the country’s most corrupt politicians.

    Al-Maliki and his Shiite party alliance have close ties to neighbouring Iran.

    More than 20 years after the U.S. invasion and the overthrow of Hussein, and years of terrorist rule by Islamic State in parts of the country, stability in Iraq remains fragile.

    Both the U.S. and Iran are trying to assert their influence in the country.

    Given the tensions between different ethnic and religious groups, corruption and ongoing violence, many people’s distrust of politics runs deep.

    (dpa/NAN)

  • Between Trump’s genocide claim and The New York Times’ Onitsha trader narrative

    Between Trump’s genocide claim and The New York Times’ Onitsha trader narrative

    • By Yushau A. Shuaib

    Public debate in Nigeria is increasingly shaped not just by facts but also by emotion, identity, and organised outrage. My recent short Facebook post reacting to The New York Times (NYT) report on an Onitsha-based trader and activist triggered an avalanche of hostile responses — many from individuals identifying as Igbo and largely sympathetic to IPOB and the quest for Biafra.

    What shocked me was not disagreement; that is part of democratic discourse. It was the coordinated pattern of abuse, libellous language, and unrelated propaganda, even after I deleted some of the very offensive posts of online cabals. A closer look revealed what I often call social media warriors from digital pressure groups — mobilised from coordinated platforms, less interested in dialogue than in silencing alternative views.

    Surprisingly, my harmless Facebook post that sparked the anger was a simple paragraph, which reads: “They attacked us for calling out the reckless claim of ‘Christian genocide’ that painted all Muslims as guilty. Now they insist that The New York Times report on the Onitsha trader who urged an American strike on the Sokoto Caliphate is an editorial attack on Igbos. Haba! So they finally get the point.”

    The inciting and provocative reactions to the post underscore a deeper national tension about narrative ownership.

    When U.S. President Donald Trump raised the inflammatory claim of “Christian persecution” and “genocide” in Nigeria, many Nigerians — Muslims and Christians alike — rejected that sweeping characterisation. The Nigerian government rejected it. Distinguished Christian voices such as Bishop Matthew Kukah warned against framing Nigeria’s complex insecurity through a purely religious lens.

    Yet some local actors from particular sections of the country, based on their ethno-religious agitations, amplified Trump’s claim, using it to cast suspicion and aspersion on Nigerian Muslims collectively, as if millions were complicit in terrorism. That dangerous generalisation, strangely, was also applauded in some quarters.

    During that debate, I wrote “Genocide Claim: President Trump, Ribadu’s Team and the Saudi Prince,” arguing that Trump’s claim was politically motivated, selective, and detached from Nigeria’s security realities. That article, too, drew coordinated attacks. The goal appeared clear: intimidate dissent. Unfortunately for the attackers, I can’t be intimidated but laugh at their folly.

    Trump’s foreign policy record — including his warm relations with Saudi Arabia — suggests strategic and financial calculations rather than religious solidarity. Nigeria’s insecurity, while grave, stems from criminality, weak governance, and socio-economic pressures, not a state-driven religious extermination.

    Now the debate has shifted following The New York Times report, which referenced Emeka Umeagbalasi, head of the Onitsha-based NGO Intersociety, whose claims about Christian killings reportedly influenced U.S. political conversations.

    Curiously, rather than engaging with the substance of the report through a reasoned rejoinder, much of the anger on social media was directed at Taiwo Aina, the New York Times photographer credited under one of the images. She became the target of sustained online attacks because of her Yoruba name from many users who identified as Igbo.

    What made their reaction even more troubling was that other journalists involved in the report — Saikoh Jammeh, Dionne Searcey, Ismail Auwal, and David Chidi Eleke — whose names were clearly listed, faced no comparable backlash. The selective outrage, especially against a female photojournalist whose role is largely technical and visual, says more about the emotional climate of the debate than about the report itself.

    Before the NYT report, the BBC Global Disinformation Unit had investigated Intersociety’s figures and found them unverified and inflated. Despite the lack of verifiable data, such claims fed into U.S. conservative political narratives and Trump’s rhetoric. Independent conflict trackers such as ACLED consistently show that violence in Nigeria affects multiple communities, not Christians alone.

    Read Also: Trump, Hitler: eerie leadership parallels

    The BBC report noted that Intersociety’s narratives are shaped by southeastern political grievances and often align with IPOB-linked activism. PRNigeria’s earlier independent analysis similarly observed Intersociety’s shift from governance advocacy to persecution-focused messaging. That BBC investigation — authored by Olaronke Alo, Chiamaka Enendu, and Ijeoma Ndukwe — also attracted fierce backlash.

    The pattern is troubling. When international actors portray Nigeria through a narrow religious-genocide frame, local extremists feel validated. But when global media question the credibility of those claims, it is suddenly labelled ethnic profiling. You cannot condemn collective labelling only when it affects you.

    Even more disturbing is the symbolism emerging online: viral videos of groups dressed in white garments, flanked by U.S. and Israeli flags, calling on Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to “rescue” them from Nigeria. Such appeals reflect deep frustration — but also dangerous faith in foreign intervention. History shows external powers act primarily in their own interests.

    Nigeria’s unity debate is valid, and reforms like restructuring and federalism deserve serious discussion. But misinformation, hate narratives, and appeals to foreign powers will not bring justice — they only deepen mistrust.

    We must ask: Who benefits from calling Nigeria a religious genocide zone? Who gains when neighbours become enemies? Who profits when foreign powers exploit our crisis? Our insecurity is real, but it demands facts, responsible leadership, and national cohesion — not propaganda and sickening fake news by enemies of our unity.

  • UK, U.S. leaders talk after Trump’s remarks on NATO’s role in Afghanistan spark outrage

    UK, U.S. leaders talk after Trump’s remarks on NATO’s role in Afghanistan spark outrage

    British Prime Minister Keir Starmer held a call at the weekend with United States President Donald Trump after the president’s remarks about NATO’s role in Afghanistan sparked outrage in the UK.

    Starmer cited British and American soldiers “who fought side by side in Afghanistan,” according to a statement by the UK premier’s office.

    It came after Trump said Thursday that NATO troops stayed “a little off the front lines” during the war in Afghanistan.

    The president’s claim has sparked backlash in the UK, with Starmer calling it “insulting and frankly appalling.”

    But Trump on Saturday praised the UK soldiers on who fought in Afghanistan, calling them “very brave.”

    Read Also: Shell Global CEO hails Tinubu, says leadership driving planned $20bn investment

    “The great and very brave soldiers of the United Kingdom will always be with the United States of America,” he wrote on his social media platform Truth Social.

    During the call, the pair also discussed Ukraine as both agreed on the need to see progress toward a sustainable ceasefire.

    “Whilst diplomatic efforts continue, the Prime Minister reiterated that international partners must continue to support Ukraine in its defence against Putin’s barbaric attacks,” according to the statement.

    Turning to security in the Arctic, the pair pointed out the need for bolstered security, while Starmer highlighted that the issue is an “absolute priority” for his government.

    “The leaders discussed the importance of the UK-U.S. relationship, which continues to stand the test of time,” added the statement.

  • Trump, Hitler: eerie leadership parallels

    Trump, Hitler: eerie leadership parallels

     It was not just Greenland over which he tried to muscle Europe into acquiescence, or Venezuela where the killing of about 75 security agents meant nothing to him in the process of subjugating that Latin American country, or Iran where he fearfully needed to latch on to Israeli aerial triumphs to enact his own heroics, or Ukraine which he gleefully and fiendishly throws under the bus while denigrating President Volodymyr Zelensky and idolising Russia’s Vladimir Putin, or many world leaders whom he bullied, insulted, and scorned. For United States president Donald Trump, there is so much more about his politics and leadership style, so much more that it eerily reminds the world of World War II German leader, Adolf Hitler, whose narcissistic and megalomaniacal style drove the world into unprecedented bloodletting that caused the death of more than 60 million people.

    After his most recent rant over Greenland, an icy expanse in the Arctic which he has now obviously failed to add to his vainglorious collections, it is time the world began drawing a parallel between Mr Trump and the Fuehrer, as nightmarish as that comparison may seem. The two leaders look alike politically, sharing disturbing proclivities in a ghoulishly familiar way. Hitler burnt down the Reichstag and used it as a casus belli for the overthrow of democracy; Mr Trump inspired the storming of Capitol Hill, the home of the US parliament. Hitler dreamt up schemes for personal enrichment, such as embossing his image on stamps in order to attract royalties; Mr Trump has cajoled foreign leaders to gift him airplanes and invest in his crypto company (World Liberty Financial), amassing millions of dollars in the process, with the company now valued at some $3bn. Hitler lacked empathy and enthusiastically embraced warmongering; Mr Trump excels in both departments. Hitler had an insatiable appetite for foreign land acquisitions, which he couched as lebensraum (living space for Germans); Mr Trump exemplifies the same medieval land-grabbing propensity completely out of tune with modern realities.

    Mr Trump does not merely fit into Mr Putin’s expansionist worldview, or China’s Xi Jinping’s ogling of Taiwan, or the late Italian leader Benito Mussolini’s fascist leadership style, he is much more. He combines their greed so exquisitely with their weaknesses, and blends and unifies them in his eclectic and anachronistic perception of ‘strong leadership’. He is not making America great again, as he myopically reasons, assuming he is capable of any form of rational thinking; he is in fact corroding the American essence in an irreparable way. Venezuela was too divided to stand up to him; China is too strong for him to trifle with; Russia, despite its humiliation in Ukraine, is too unpredictable for him to dare; Nigeria was and remains too religiously, politically and ethnically divided to resist him. But a clearly exasperated Europe, long used to short cuts and dangerous appeasements that fostered two World Wars, has finally dared him over Greenland and tariffs threats, and won.

    Read Also: FG positioning youths as active partners in transforming Nigeria’s learning system – Alausa

    Struck with the grim similarity between Mr Trump and Hitler, this writer looked up an AI overview of the leadership style of Hitler and found the following on the internet. “Adolf Hitler’s leadership style was primarily autocratic, centered on absolute power, control, and the Führerprinzip (leader principle), demanding total obedience and eliminating dissent, combined with powerful charismatic manipulation through propaganda, mass rallies, and emotional appeals to build intense loyalty and a cult of personality, ultimately driven by his racist ideology, territorial expansion goals, and a task-oriented, directive approach that ignored empathy and input from others.” If a reader was not told whose character was being portrayed, someone unfamiliar with the history of World War II might confidently conjecture that Mr Trump was the subject matter. As enlightened as Germany was in the early 20th century, they democratically voted Hitler into office, enabled and applauded his madness, and even after the terrible tragedy enacted upon their country, some Germans regretted only the loss of the war, not the racism, the purges, and the genocides.

    After World War II propelled the US into global military leadership and in scholarship, it easily became the undisputed number one in virtually everything, its worldview unquestioned and revered, and its culture eagerly adopted as the avatar. The US gifted the world their philosophic founding fathers, made global legends out of Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt, and hoisted dozens of literary icons who penned what could be regarded as universal classics into worldwide fame; and despite personifying contradictions between ideas it eminently propagated and the practice it embarrassingly submitted to, it also gifted the world men and women who nurtured science, shaped ideas, pricked conscience over racial injustice, and nudged the world to nirvana, the American dream. But that same US, citing fear of racial eclipse and apocalypse, has, through undisputed elections, projected and enabled Mr Trump’s ‘malignant narcissism’, thereby enthroning probably the worst American and Western leader ever. Like Hitler, his policies have engendered surplus for the American economy and reminded the world that militarily the US is incomparable and unstoppable. But in the long run, the incalculable damage now in gestation will reach its apogee in the years and decades ahead as the world scrambles to find alternative financial tools, military alliances, inspire a new arms race, and unleash an assemblage of Barbarians at the Western gates of Rome as well as Ottomans at the Eastern gates of Byzantium.