The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Trump

Trump vows economic boom, blames Biden in address to nation

U.S. President Donald Trump promised Americans an economic boom in an address to the nation on the night of Dec. 17, while blaming Democratic predecessor Joe Biden for high prices that have hit the Republican’s popularity.

“Good evening, America. Eleven months ago, I inherited a mess, and I’m fixing it,” the 79-year-old said in his live speech from the White House at the end of his first year back in power.

Trump faces growing voter anger over the issue of affordability despite his efforts to dismiss it as a “hoax” by Democrats, sparking Republican fears they could be punished in the 2026 mid-term elections.

The billionaire president insisted that prices of gas and groceries that have worried Americans were “falling rapidly, and it’s not done yet. But boy, are we making progress”.

In a surprise announcement, Trump said that 1.45 million United States military service members would each receive “warrior dividend” bonus checks for 1,776 dollars (S$2,295) before Christmas, paid for with revenues raised from tariffs.

He added that the specific amount was in honour of the year of the founding of the United States, the 250th anniversary of which the country will celebrate in 2026.

Trump then promised that “we are poised for an economic boom the likes of which the world has never seen” in 2026, when the United States will co-host the FIFA World Cup, with Canada and Mexico.

But while the White House had billed the speech as a chance for Mr Trump to set out his economic agenda for the rest of his second term, much of it consisted of attacks on familiar targets.

He repeatedly raged against Mr Biden, the Democrats, and migrants whom he said “stole American jobs”.

Mr Trump’s speech comes at the end of a whirlwind year in which he has launched an unprecedented display of presidential power, including a crackdown on migration and the targeting of political opponents.

Many economists say Trump’s tariffs have contributed to higher prices for some goods, though the overall impact has been much less than many forecasters predicted earlier this year.

Trump, on Dec. 17, argued his tariffs are delivering economic gains and luring investment in domestic manufacturing.

Read Also: FULL LIST: Trump imposes U.S. entry restrictions on Nigeria, 23 other countries

Still, Mr Trump’s speech offered a muddled message on price levels.

He said at one point that he was “bringing them down very fast,” while later acknowledging ongoing inflation, he said was outpaced by wage growth.

Mr Trump also heralded his tariff barrage, indicating it would fund the payments to military members and had been a useful cudgel in settling conflicts abroad – though the levies are import taxes that historically raise costs.

Adding to his woes, U.S. hiring has been lacklustre in recent months, with any gains largely propelled by steady hiring in health care.

The latest jobs report showed employers added 64,000 jobs in November, thanks to health care hiring and the strongest advance in construction employment in more than a year.

Manufacturers, however, shed jobs for a seventh straight month.

Polls show that Americans are most concerned about high prices, which experts say are partly fuelled by the tariffs he has slapped on trading partners around the world.

The inflation problem also dogged Mr Biden as he tried to heal the U.S. economy after the Covid-19 pandemic, and the Democrat unsuccessfully tried similar arguments with voters about economic good times to come.

Mr Trump got his worst approval ratings ever for his handling of the economy in a PBS News/NPR/Marist poll published on Dec. 17, with 57 per cent of Americans disapproving and expressing concerns about the cost of living.

A YouGov poll published Dec. 16 showed that 52 per cent of Americans thought the economy was getting worse under Mr Trump.

He has also faced criticism from his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement for focusing on peace deals in Ukraine and Gaza and on tensions with Venezuela, instead of domestic issues.

There are signs that Trump’s team has had a wake-up call on the economy in recent weeks, with the midterm elections in 2026 for control of Congress already looming.

Republicans lost heavily in elections in November for the mayor of New York and governorships in Virginia and New Jersey, while Democrats ran them close in a previously safe area in Tennessee.

The president is now ramping up his domestic travel to push his economic message.

Last week in Pennsylvania, he promised to “make America affordable again,” and on Dec. 12, he is due to give another campaign-style rally in North Carolina.

Vice-President JD Vance – who is rapidly becoming Trump’s messenger on the issue as he eyes his own presidential run in 2028 – also urged voters to show patience during a speech on Dec 16.

(Reuters/NAN)

December 18, 2025
FULL LIST: Trump imposes U.S. entry restrictions on Nigeria, 23 other countries

United States President Donald Trump on Tuesday announced an expansion of entry restrictions on foreign nationals from 24 countries, citing what his administration described as “persistent and severe deficiencies” in screening, vetting, and information-sharing that pose risks to U.S. national security and public safety.

The decision was outlined in a fact sheet published on the White House website titled “President Donald J. Trump Further Restricts and Limits the Entry of Foreign Nationals to Protect the Security of the United States.”

The fact sheet emphasises that these measures “are necessary to prevent the entry of foreign nationals about whom the United States lacks sufficient information to assess the risks they pose” and to enforce immigration laws while protecting American citizens.

According to the document, the new Proclamation places a full suspension of entry on eight countries and partial restrictions on 16 others, affecting both immigrant and non-immigrant travellers. The affected visa categories include B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2 (business and tourism), as well as F, M, and J visas for students and exchange visitors.

The administration said the measures were aimed at preventing the entry of individuals for whom the United States lacks sufficient information to adequately assess security risks, while also strengthening enforcement of immigration laws.

Security Incident Fuels Policy Shift

The announcement follows heightened security concerns after two U.S. National Guard soldiers were shot near the White House in November. Authorities confirmed that one soldier was killed, while a suspect was arrested shortly after the incident.

In response, Trump said he would suspend migration from what he described as “third world countries,” a day after U.S. officials alleged that the shooting was carried out by an Afghan national. The comments marked a further escalation in Trump’s hardline immigration stance during his second term, which has been characterised by a mass deportation campaign.

U.S. officials later identified the suspect as a 29-year-old Afghan national who had previously worked alongside American forces in Afghanistan. According to AfghanEvac, an organisation that supports Afghans resettled in the U.S. after the Taliban takeover in 2021, the individual was granted asylum earlier this year but did not hold permanent residency.

Review of Green Card Holders

In the first week of December, the Trump administration also announced a review of the immigration status of all permanent residents, commonly known as Green Card holders, from Afghanistan and 18 other countries following the attack.

The review builds on a June executive order signed by Trump that classified 19 countries as “Countries of Identified Concern.” That order imposed entry bans on nearly all nationals from 12 countries, including Afghanistan.

The countries listed under the June ban include Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Congo-Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.

Barely two weeks after the order, Trump also initiated plans to impose a general visa ban on Nigerian nationals.

Wider Visa Restrictions Considered

A report by The Washington Post revealed that an internal memo signed by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio proposed visa restrictions or entry bans on up to 36 additional countries. The memo indicated that the affected nations were given a 60-day deadline to meet new U.S. State Department requirements or face possible travel restrictions.

However, reports indicate that the deadline elapsed in August 2025, with the new Proclamation only being issued four months later.

Understanding Full and Partial Restrictions

Under the Proclamation, full suspensions generally bar citizens of affected countries from entering the United States and halt the issuance of most new immigrant and non-immigrant visas. Limited exemptions may apply to lawful permanent residents, diplomats, and specific protected categories.

Partial restrictions, on the other hand, limit or suspend specific visa classes, such as tourist, student, or exchange visas. They may also involve stricter vetting procedures, reduced visa validity periods, and enhanced screening requirements before entry is granted.

Here are 24 affected countries

JUSTIFICATION FOR FULL SUSPENSION

Burkina Faso

According to the Department of State, terrorist organizations continue to plan and conduct terrorist activities throughout Burkina Faso. According to the Fiscal Year 2024, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Entry/Exit Overstay Report (“Overstay Report”), Burkina Faso had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 9.16 percent and a student (F), vocational (M), and exchange visitor (J) visa overstay rate of 22.95 percent. Additionally, Burkina Faso has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.

Laos

According to the Overstay Report, Laos had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 28.34 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 11.41 percent. According to the Fiscal Year 2023, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Entry/Exit Overstay Report (“2023 Overstay Report”), Laos had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 34.77 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 6.49 percent. Additionally, Laos has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals.

Mali

According to the Department of State, armed conflict between the Malian government and armed groups is common throughout the country. Terrorist organizations operate freely in certain areas of Mali.

Niger

According to the Department of State, terrorists and their supporters are active in planning kidnappings in Niger, and they may attack anywhere in the country. According to the Overstay Report, Niger had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 13.41 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 16.46 percent.

Sierra Leone

According to the Overstay Report, Sierra Leone had a B-1/B-2 overstay rate of 16.48 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.83 percent. According to the 2023 Overstay Report, Sierra Leone had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 15.43 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.83 percent. Additionally, Sierra Leone has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals.

South Sudan

According to the Overstay Report, South Sudan had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 6.99 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 26.09 percent. Additionally, South Sudan has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals.

Syria

Syria is emerging from a protracted period of civil unrest and internal strife. While the country is working to address its security challenges in close coordination with the United States, Syria still lacks an adequate central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures. According to the Overstay Report, Syria had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 7.09 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 9.34 percent.

Palestinian Authority Documents

Several U.S.-designated terrorist groups operate actively in the West Bank or Gaza Strip and have murdered American citizens. Also, the recent war in these areas likely resulted in compromised vetting and screening abilities. In light of these factors, and considering the weak or nonexistent control exercised over these areas by the PA, individuals attempting to travel on PA-issued or endorsed travel documents cannot currently be properly vetted and approved for entry into the United States.

JUSTIFICATION FOR PARTIAL SUSPENSION

(Immigrants and Nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J Visas)

Angola

According to the Overstay Report, Angola had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 14.43 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 21.92 percent.

Antigua and Barbuda

Antigua and Barbuda has historically had Citizenship by Investment (CBI) without residency.

Benin

According to the Overstay Report, Benin had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 12.34 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 36.77 percent.

Cote d’Ivoire

According to the Overstay Report, Cote d’Ivoire had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 8.47 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 19.09 percent.

Dominica

Dominica has historically had CBI without residency.

Gabon

According to the Overstay Report, Gabon had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 13.72 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 17.77 percent.

The Gambia

According to the Overstay Report, The Gambia had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 12.70 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 38.79 percent. Additionally, The Gambia has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.

Malawi

According to the Overstay Report, Malawi had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 22.45 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 31.99 percent.

Mauritania

According to the Overstay Report, Mauritania had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 9.49 percent. According to the Department of State, the Government of Mauritania has little presence in certain parts of the country, which creates substantial screening and vetting difficulties.

Nigeria

Radical Islamic terrorist groups such as Boko Haram and the Islamic State operate freely in certain parts of Nigeria, which creates substantial screening and vetting difficulties. According to the Overstay Report, Nigeria had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 5.56 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 11.90 percent.

Senegal

According to the Overstay Report, Senegal had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 4.30 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 13.07 percent.

Tanzania

According to the Overstay Report, Tanzania had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 8.30 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 13.97 percent.

Tonga

According to the Overstay Report, Tonga had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 6.45 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 14.44 percent.

Turkmenistan

Since the issuance of Proclamation 10949, Turkmenistan has engaged productively with the United States and demonstrated significant progress in improving its identity-management and information-sharing procedures.

The suspension of entry into the United States of nationals of Turkmenistan as nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is lifted. Because some concerns remain, the entry into the United States of nationals of Turkmenistan as immigrants remains suspended.

Zambia

According to the Overstay Report, Zambia had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 10.73 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 21.02 percent.

Zimbabwe

According to the Overstay Report, Zimbabwe had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 7.89 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 15.15 percent.

December 17, 2025
Trump trumping democracy

The last 30 years or thereabout saw the resurgence of democracy in Africa, principally because of pressure from the United States of America (USA) and other western European countries. With the USA and its allies breathing down the neck of despots across Africa, the local pro-democracy activists courageously pursued their democratic enterprise. In Nigeria for instance, the maximum ruler, Sani Abacha out of fear of the western alliance turned into a recluse and when he suddenly died, Gen Abdulsalami Abubakar who took over power foreswore any hanky-panky and quickly handed over to a democratically elected president in 1999.

What happened in Nigeria happened across several African nations as any undemocratic country was treated as a pariah. Trump’s predecessor, on two different occasions, Barack Obama and Joe Biden, both of the Democratic Party, never ceased to use the banner of democracy to further American interests across the world. It was substantially the same with those who came before them in the 1990s and beyond. With America breathing down the neck of African despots, democracy of all sorts began to take place in the continent and before long, all nations were considered as running some form of democracy.

But that hard earned “democracy” across Africa, especially in West Africa, is now in retreat because the hitherto moral leader of the world, the USA, now has President Donald Trump, who is somewhat amoral in charge. Donald Trump, the world famous dealmaker, who has cut peace deals between nations in the Middle East, Asia and Africa, appears ready to make deal with democracy. Between Israel and Palestinians, Trump was able to make peace at very heavy cost of human lives. This writer doubts if there is any other leader in modern history that would have the courage Trump had to allow the carnage that took place in Gaza, just to achieve relative peace.

Using Israel as a lightning rod, in the Middle East, the ambivalent Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthi rebels, and Syrian despotic leadership, are all in retreat. In Africa, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda, who have disgustingly been fighting over control of natural resources, in DRC, were arm-twisted to make peace deal. Trump is also arm-twisting Russia and Ukraine to make peace at any cost, against the weaker Ukraine. He barely listens to the anguish of Europe that sacrificing Ukrainian territory to make peace amounts to submitting to Russian expansionist militancy.

Trump also has very demeaning regards for poor third world countries, especially those whose citizens have become some form of nuisance in the USA. He has no diplomatic niceties in describing them. He called Nigeria names and most recently called Somalians ‘garbage’. He had used worse epithets for other nations on the same pedestal with Nigeria and Somalia.

So, the world may not be surprised that despite the turmoil democracy is facing in West Africa, the USA President has not taken any strong stance against the military adventurists that have been ravaging the region. It will be strange to his predecessors that democracy in Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and Guinea Bissau were overthrown without any threat or even warning from the USA state department. In the past, the state department would have sent strong warning to the coup plotters in Mali and perhaps the follow up in Burkina Faso and Niger would never had happened.

Unlike his predecessors, Trump apparently ranks democracy lower than his other interests. His undemocratic policies at home suggest that. Take for example how he tried to browbeat the USA Congress to do his bidding, with respect to the recent budget impasse. When a congressman or woman of even his party disagrees with him, the least the person gets is severe tongue lashing. Clearly, Trump does not suffer any person he disagrees with gladly, and he surely believes the third world countries should stay in their ‘shit hole country’.

Trump also flirts with autocratic leaders, and has no complaints about the lack of democracy in their respective countries. In all his dealings with Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, he never waves the lack of democracy in that country; rather he uses words that depict the leader as strong. Even the more autocratic despot, the leader of North Korea, Kim Jong Un is called smart, without any denunciation about his despicable repression records against his country men and women. Trump has even shown willingness to do deal with the Korean leader, without minding the poor state of rule of law in that country.

Unlike his predecessors, Trump rarely questions the human rights integrity of the nations’ across the world. May be he sees those democratic principles as empty sloganeering by the western nations? Recall that former President Obama, insisted that Nigeria should not use military aircraft bought by Nigeria, to fight insurgency in certain parts of the country in defence of human rights, and because the bandits have not been declared terrorists. This strange posture was pursued by America, even when glaringly, the bandits were doing as much or more grievous damage to Nigeria’s security than the terrorists.

In faraway Afghanistan, while Trump is mad against his predecessor, Joe Biden, for authorizing the USA military to leave that strategic country, he has not raised any complaint about the ongoing repression against the citizens especially women by the Taliban regime. Even now he is threatening to invade Afghanistan again, he does not give the excuse that he wants to save the human rights of the citizens, rather he says he wants to have a military base in the country so he can from there confront the Islamist extremists and other enemies of his country in that part of the of the world.

Read Also: Dayo Amusa emerges national vice president of Actors Guild of Nigeria

So, with Trump as president of the world’s most powerful democracy, that preferred system of government across the world is clearly in retreat. Sadly, because of the economic challenges facing most countries in Africa, the young and unknowledgeable youthful population foolishly see the military intervention in governance as the solution to the socio-economic problems of their countries. But as most citizens of the military-led Mali and Burkina Faso may have seen, the economic challenges facing their country have gotten worse than before.

It was that supposed preference for military adventurism that led the young military officers in Benin Republic to attempt to topple democracy in their country, last week. But for the swift intervention of the Nigerian military, those misguided soldiers would have been lying to their country men and women that they have solutions to all their economic and social challenges. As some have rightly argued, it would have been strategically risky for Nigeria to allow itself to be encircled by undemocratic nations, more so with Cameroon tethering under pseudo democracy.

This column urges African democratic leaders to understand that it is Africans that can save democracy in their continent. The way to go is to practice real democracy and not the quasi-democracy we see in many countries. If they ignore the warning signs, the alternative sadly may be the military interventions that we now see.

December 9, 2025
Insecurity: The fault, dear Trump, is not in our stars

Nigeria’s political elite have since the run up to independence freely deployed religion and ethnicity as weapons for political bargaining. In this regard, the 1953 Kano riot was Ahmadu Bello and his fellow NPC’s response to Anthony Enahoro’s motion for independence in 1956, the January 3, 1966 military coup was Zik’s response to his 1964 constitutional defeat by Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa, the July 29, 1966 counter coup tagged ‘vengeance coup’ was northern rejection of Decree 34 unification decree and Zik’s January 1966 pyric victory. The annulment of 1993 MKO Abiola’s pan Nigeria mandate signifies the coming together of two of Nigeria dominant ethnic groups with a common world view of how Nigeria should be run against the other dominant group with a divergent view. The illegal introduction of sharia as a state religion by Ahmed Sani of Zamfara in 1999 had nothing to do with religion but everything to do with balance of power. Therefore, much as President Trump may love Nigeria, he needs a fair understanding of the nature of our crisis of nation building if he is not to end up just as a bully. I am not sure he can love Nigeria more than the man Nigeria elected as their president.

President Tinubu no doubt must have gone through great stress and strain in the last two years over his inability to secure justice for victims of herdsmen violent killings condemned to IDP camps in Benue and Plateau states. It has even been said that one of the reason Donald Trump thinks President Tinubu is not doing enough about terrorists’ violent killings in Nigeria was because of his inability to resettle those marooned in IDP camps back to their homes after two years.

Benue State hosts about 500,000 of these victims who are daily confronted with overcrowded shelters, lack of water, sanitation, and health care and food shortages. On its part, Plateau, to the credit of the killer herdsmen, has about 500 seized and renamed ravaged villages.

Much as President Tinubu wishes the chalice would pass by him, kidnapping of school girls, killings and periodic harvest of deaths continued with new intensity forcing Nobel-prize for peace-chasing Donald Trump to declare Nigeria a “country of particular concern” in November 2025, threatening to come to Nigeria gun a blazing to seek justice for their beloved Christians” if President Tinubu failed to stop Christian genocide in Nigeria.

However, while Trump maintains his strangle-hold on the necks of our president and Senate President Godswill Akpabio, his last week announcement, through Marco Rubio, his secretary of state, of a new policy targeting sponsors of mass killings by radical Islamic terrorists, Fulani militias, and other violent groups in Nigeria is a welcome development. This followed a briefing, chaired by House Appropriations vice chair and National Security Subcommittee Chairman, Mario Díaz-Balart, attended by other house members including Representatives Robert Aderholt, Riley Moore, Brian Mast, Chris Smith, and some others. The new policy is about visa restrictions for individuals who have “directed, authorized, significantly supported, participated in, or carried out violations of religious freedom,” and their families.

It does not matter at this stage that President Tinubu has pushed back arguing that “the US characterization of Nigeria did not reflect the country’s reality or values’ or that Moore’s data which shows that non-state actors have attacked both churches and mosques in Nigeria did not support his generalized claim that “Nigerian Christians are being killed at the rate of about 35 a day.” Trump listens to no one but self.

But I think Trump deserves some credit for this new initiative about visa denial to sponsors of terrorism in Nigeria and Rubio’s decision to publish their names. I believe it will be a ‘win-win’ for everyone starting with the president. He has been accused of not doing enough to stem the spate of violence without finding out his challenges. As many have argued, Trump’s intervention was a wake-up call for President Tinubu who is now under the watch of the international community.

The naming and shaming will also lay to rest the argument about who has the custody of an earlier list allegedly given to late President Buhari some years back. Rubio’s publication of the names will help whoever has the old list do some of his dirty job. Rubio’s publication will also bring some relief to many Nigerians who feel embarrassed by the spate of killing of innocent Nigerians, diminished by actions of animals who routinely kidnap our daughters from their hostels, and cowards who attacked subsistence farmers and their family members at night.

Of course it is also a win-win for President Trump and Rubio. They will now have a fresh opportunity to take advantage of knowledgeable members of American House of Representatives to have a proper understanding of the nature of Nigerian crisis of nation building. Many have pointed out that some of the dangers of single story can lead to default assumptions, misconceptions and stereotypes.

For instance, Nigeria political elite have often deployed religion and ethnicity in their battle for political power. Anyone not familiar with Nigerian politics trying to interpret the 1953 Kano riot that led to the death and castration of over 40 people with over hundred injured would focus on northern political elite’ claim of preventing desecration of Islamic religion by unbelievers from the south or trying to prevent the spread of Awo’s crusade of free education to the north. Those were what could be drawn out from Malam Inua Wada, Local Member House of Representatives, and Kano Native Authority information and adult education that NPC mandated to mobilize Kano ‘Hausa ‘mahaukata’ mad men that unleashed terror using machete on Igbo considered as ‘tools of the crusaders’ and Yoruba armed with Dane guns.

Read Also: Dayo Amusa emerges national vice president of Actors Guild of Nigeria

It was not until during the debate that followed four days later where Yahaya Gusau speech rejected commitment to 1956 or any other fixed date for self-government’ and the Sardauna’s insistence that self-government can only come after northernisation and efficient local government had been attained that it became clear the battle was over self-government motion Enahoro had earlier moved for 1956 in Lagos

The January 3, 1966 coup which eliminated non-Igbo political and military leaders while sparing theirs was celebrated as a pan Nigeria coup. An insider will however understand that it was Zik’s response to his 1964 constitutional defeat by Tafawa Balewa. He had in the midst of the crisis approached the military for support as commander in chief. His request was politely turned down because the military constitutionally was responsible to the Prime Minister.

While claiming he was going on sick leave, he was seen in a cruise ship to South America. The younger and more radical elements in the army struck and the Igbo senate president, Nwafor Orizu who was acting for Zik manipulated Ironsi to power. Ironsi’s first action was promulgation of Decree 34 that turned a multi-ethnic federal Nigeria into a unitary state. This was a world view, Zik and supporters had propagated from 1940 to 1957 London constitutional conference.

The July 1966 coup was tagged ‘vengeance’ coup when in fact it was designed to end Zik’s January 1966 pyric victory. MKO Abiola’s pan Nigeria victory was annulled by Ibrahim Babangida. We have since learnt both the north and the east did not want a Yoruba president with Nzeribe placing a full page advert in the paper declaring Igbo do not want a Yoruba president while Evans Enwerem who later became senate president under Obasanjo presidency threatened that Igbo would go to war if the annulment of Abiola election was reversed.

At the birth of the fourth republic in 1999, for anti-Obasanjo forces in the north, Sharia which had since the 1914 amalgamation been part of Nigerian penal code restricted to Muslims as a customary law on matters of marriage, gift, will, succession etc. binding only on adherents of Islamic religion, became a veritable weapon for political bargaining, when Ahmed Sani, governor of Zamfara, in breach of Nigerian constitution, launched Sharia as a state religion on October 27 1999.

Finally, let us remind those who want to help us wage our wars. Of the three dominant ethnic groups in Nigeria, the Yoruba want a federal system which guarantees unity in diversity with each group developing at its own pace without interference from others. The Igbo want a unitary system which will allow them trade anywhere without hindrance. The Fulani ruling northern elite want a Nigeria that will be home to all stateless Fulani across West Africa. We already have ECOWAS protocols as a guide.

December 9, 2025
Trump, Saudi Arabia shock the world

US president Donald Trump has hosted all sorts of foreign leaders in his uninspiring pursuit of economic diplomacy and personal self-aggrandisement. Some of them he disrespects so intensely that it borders on bigotry, and some others he snivels before them that it is so befuddling. Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky and South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa are examples of leaders who could not seem to place a foot right; but Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman al Saud (famously called MBS), Qatar’sTamim bin Hamad Al Thani, and Syria’s new leader and former al-Qaeda-affiliated operative, Ahmed al-Sharaa, are examples of the other class whose business deals with Mr Trump appear to expiate their dangerous predilections.

Mr Ramaphosa is of course completely innocent of the accusation of white genocide against White farmers, and Mr Zelensky is fighting for the freedom and independence of Ukraine. On the other hand, MBS, answering questions during his November visit to the White House, acknowledged that the murder of Saudi journalist and Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Turkey in 2018 was a ‘painful mistake, but denied ordering it. Despite US intelligence confirming MBS ordered the hit, Mr Trump did not so much as wince during the interaction. Instead, he growled at the journalist who asked the crown prince the question. Al Thani has many question marks on his head regarding his links to jihadist groups, but his plane gift to the US president obviously absolves him of every allegation. And Syria’s al-Sharaa, despite his past as an al-Qaeda commander, received the backing of MBS who goes on to orchestrate the former’s November visit to the White House.

Read Also: Wanted: legislative action on state/council joint account provision

What probably shocked the world the most was how cavalierly and spontaneously Mr Trump came to the defence of MBS. He asked the reporter who queried MBS on the murder not to embarrass the Saudi crown prince, declared that MBS knew nothing about the crime, and dismissively suggested that Mr Khashoggi was controversial and not liked, and ‘things happen’. No one ever thought the day would come when an American president would treat murder so offhandedly. Well, the promise of ‘nearly $1 trillion Saudi investments in new US partnerships are obviously capable of rewriting American and global jurisprudence and moral code.

December 7, 2025
No objection, Mr. Trump
- America’s decision to impose visa ban on Nigerians with link to terrorism is welcome
I wholeheartedly welcome President Donald Trump’s decision to restrict visas to Nigerians who violate religious rights. The U.S. Department of State said in a statement titled: ‘Combating Egregious Anti-Christian Violence in Nigeria and Globally,’ that the U.S. was taking a decisive action in response to the mass killings and violence against Christians by radical terrorists, ethnic militia and other violent actors in Nigeria and beyond.

“A new policy under Section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act will allow the State Department to restrict visa issuance to individuals who have directed, authorised, significantly supported, participated in, or carried out violations of religious freedom and, where appropriate, their immediate family members.”

It added that “As President Trump made clear, the ‘United States cannot stand by while such atrocities are happening in Nigeria, and numerous other countries.’ This policy will apply to Nigeria and any other governments or individuals engaged in violations of religious freedom.”

I would indeed appreciate it if the World’s Number One Citizen could extend such punishment to those responsible for corruption and bad governance generally because they are the ones that are making Nigeria and Nigerians a laughing stock all over the world, because of their exodus to places outside their God-chosen country, for sanctuary.

Trump’s latest decision must have been informed by his unbending belief that there is religious genocide in Nigeria, despite the denials by the Federal Government and some other groups in and outside the country. Mr Trump is entitled to his opinion and I would not even mind whatever sanctions he applied to people violating religious rights because this is an inalienable right that even God Almighty had in His wisdom given to all humans, without exception. When He created us, he did not impose any particular religion on anyone. Indeed, God gave us the Free Will to decide between good and evil; including the freedom of what or which God or god to worship.

I do not therefore know how some misguided, ill-educated individuals would impose it on themselves the power to want everybody else to sleep and face where they are facing religion-wise. Those who had been so indoctrinated constitute the chunk of those now troubling the nation. Unfortunately, what is paining me in all of these is the fact that it is the whole country that is picking the avoidable bills for such indoctrinations that were done with selfish class motives by some religious and political interests in the North for decades. People had been fed all manner of lies in the name of religion, whereas at the bottom of it all is the intention to keep the misguided perpetually ignorant and unable to differentiate their left from their right hand.

We have seen the consequences of religious hate in several countries like Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, Central African Republic (CAR), Lebanon, India and Pakistan, to mention only a few. Their experiences are not the kind of thing one would wish for Nigeria or even an enemy country. So, if help is going to come by way of sanctions for elites, political or religious, that fan the embers of such dichotomies, I have nothing against it. This is especially so in a situation where nothing else seems capable of checking such trend. Nigeria’s elites must be some of the most in the world that cannot do without travelling to the United States, and Trump knows this insatiable appetite on their part.

Read Also: Wanted: legislative action on state/council joint account provision

I cannot understand, for instance, a situation like that which happened to Deborah Samuel Yakubu in 2022. That it could happen at all in 21st Century Nigeria was bad enough. It pained me to the marrows the more as a Christian. How could life just be snuffed out of a 21-year-old second-year student by her Muslim classmates who accused her of posting a “blasphemous” comment against the Islamic Prophet Muhammad in a student WhatsApp study group? She felt such a platform should be for sharing of things having to do with their studies only; a not particularly illegitimate statement.

To think that this was the reason she was dragged out from the security post at Shehu Shagari College of Education in Sokoto, where she had been hidden, and stoned to death while her body was then set ablaze, took something off our humanity as a nation. Those who committed the heinous murder even had the temerity to exhibit their barbarity online by showing the video to the world. And that in a state where there is a sitting governor with all the instruments of power. That those accused of her murder are still walking free three years after leaves a sour taste in the mouth. This was despite the national outrage and international condemnation, highlighting ongoing issues with religious violence and blasphemy laws in the country.

The governor of the state where such grievous harm was done may not have been guilty of directing or authorising violations of religious freedom; he is certainly guilty of vicariously supporting such violations by his inability to bring such murderers to justice. They are murderers; it is when Nigerians want to deodorise crimes that they look for all manner of technical subterfuge to describe it in order to lessen the import of the crimes. They cannot hide behind one finger by saying Miss Samuel’s killers did it for their religion. I do not know of any religion that permits people to take the lives of others in the name of blasphemy.

So, if sanction like the one that Trump just came up with will help rein in such barbarity by preventing the governor of such a state from entering a place like the United States where our big people crave to enter, so be it. May be that would force them to recall those they had fed with all manner of wrong indoctrinations so they could make them regurgitate them and now feed them aright spiritually.

Every Nigerian would benefit from such re-indoctrination because it would save us the enormous costs we are spending to prosecute this needless war against banditry, terrorism and allied crimes. These are resources we could jolly well have deployed for the general good in the areas of power, health, roads, energy, and what have you.

That the Deborah Samuel incident was not an isolated one is indeed depressing. There had been several other such incidents in parts of the North that went the way of Samuel’s. These are some of the things that many outsiders are seeing and calling genocide against Christians in Nigeria.

AI overview defines genocide as ”the deliberate, systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, encompassing acts like killing, causing serious harm, imposing harsh living conditions, preventing births, or forcibly transferring children, all with the specific intent to eliminate the group as such, as defined by the UN Genocide Convention. Coined by Raphael Lemkin, it’s an international crime targeting a group’s identity, not just its members”. The operational word that many people look for in genocide is ‘mass killing’ or ‘mass murder’, or mass whatever that can systematically lead to the extermination of a particular group. Unfortunately, this is not the definition under International Law. Mass killing is not a mandatory element for the crime of genocide.

It is little drops of water such as the Deborah Samuel’s that many people are now adding together to make up the mighty ocean of what they call genocide. It is not just the attacks on churches or abduction of students and children in Christian schools. These seemingly isolated cases are a national tragedy because it is their aggregate that is giving Nigeria the bad name or reputation of ‘Country of Particular Concern’. Unfortunately, too, many of what eventually led to such classification are politically motivated. This is why the Federal Government cannot stand aloof and see these cases as a matter concerning the states where they occur alone. It is the Federal Government that is absorbing the shocks of the inactions in states where these incidents occur. It is the one feeling the heat.

There is no doubt that there is general insecurity in the land that has claimed many lives and we are probably still counting. Which is condemnable all the same. Not even the Federal Government is denying this fact. And, to the extent that provision of adequate security for all citizens is a cardinal duty of government, the government has an abiding responsibility to protect them, irrespective of their faith or lack of it.

All said; whether it is insecurity or genocide, the government has a duty to ensure safety of all citizens. And it must continue to do that. But not many Nigerians are happy that the real big names behind terror in the country are not made public, not to talk of prosecuting them. Nigerians and indeed the international community would appreciate if these people can be named and shamed, and have their day in court. Terror is like fire; take out oxygen and the fire gets extinguished. Take out the financiers, it is a matter of time; terror itself would dry to its root.

But what the terrorists and their promoters do not seem to understand is that no particular religion has a monopoly of violence. The only thing is that the teachings of the religions differ. So many Christian leaders have been expressing frustration on these unprovoked attacks that have been given the country a name that is not its own. Some have told their members to be coming to church armed. The other day, one even went to the extent of telling his members to (ti ese ile bo) ‘look inwards’, that is take to unorthodox means to respond to the situation.

What they are all saying is that the government has to be more drastic on this matter if we are to get out of it anytime soon. Two major sources of illicit funds for some people were erased when the Tinubu administration came in 2023. People that were benefitting from the fuel subsidy fraud and floating of the foreign exchange market have since been rendered jobless. Since nature abhors a vacuum, they must find an alternative source of illicit profits which the terror war promises to be, especially with sundry crimes like kidnapping for ransom, etc.

Such people would look for all manner of ways to keep the war alive. But, can Nigeria continue to pour libation on this their new-found sources of illicit profits? I don’t think so. Even if the country is, it is unlikely the international community is. Terror against one, the world seems to have realised, is terror against all. That seems the message Trump has been harping on. If ‘protecting’ Christians provides a convenient excuse for that, why not exploit it?
December 7, 2025
Trump wins inaugural FIFA Peace award

President Donald Trump has been awarded with the inaugural Peace Award by received FIFA chief Gianni Infantino during the World Cup Draws in Washington D’C., honouring his connection with the 2026 global football event.

While accepting the award, comprising a golden trophy, a medal, and a certificate, Trump asserted that his diplomatic efforts had saved lives by averting wars before they could erupt.

Trump stated he had saved “tens of millions of lives” through diplomatic interventions and had “stopped wars happening just before they started”.

“This is truly one of the great honours of my life,” Trump said, before claiming that the 2026 World Cup has set a new record for ticket sales.

“Gianni has done an incredible job. It is a nice tribute to you and the game of football, or as we call it soccer. It is beyond the numbers we thought were possible,” Trump said.

Read Also: FULL LIST: Countries banned, excluded from FIFA World Cups (1938- 2026)

“The world is a safer place now. The USA was not doing well a year ago; now we are the hottest country in the world right now.”

The 2026 World Cup, co-hosted by the United States, Canada, and Mexico, will run from June 11 to July 19.

Trump returned to the stage with Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum and Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney to take part in the ceremonial opening of the draw.

Each of the three leaders selected the ball representing their own nation, whose group placements had already been determined. They then joined Infantino for a selfie to mark the moment.

Mexico will compete in Group A and host the tournament’s opening match, Canada will play in Group B, and the United States will feature in Group D.

December 5, 2025
Trump brokers peace deal between DR Congo, Rwanda in Washington

U.S. President Donald Trump has brokered a peace deal between leaders of the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, Félix Tshisekedi and Paul Kagame.

The U.S. president facilitated the signing of a peace agreement in Washington aimed at ending more than three decades of conflict in mineral-rich eastern Congo.

The ceremony took place at the Peace Institute, recently renamed the Donald J Trump Institute of Peace.

Trump said the United States would conclude bilateral agreements with both countries on rare earth mining, adding that major U.S. firms would be sent to the region and “everybody’s going to make a lot of money.”

Eastern Congo’s vast deposits of strategic minerals have long fuelled the interests of foreign powers and armed groups.

Observers had speculated that the peace deal would align with U.S. economic priorities, with Washington applying political pressure to bring the presidents of Kinshasa and Kigali together – something African regional mediation efforts had failed to achieve.

Read Also: Marafa backs Trump’s plan to flush out terrorists in Nigeria

Rwandan President Kagame said previous attempts to end the conflict had faltered, but Trump had succeeded where others had not.

Congolese President Tshisekedi tagged the agreement the beginning of a new and difficult path.

The two leaders exchanged a few gestures and did not shake hands.

The accord builds on a preliminary peace framework reached several months ago, committing both countries to respect territorial integrity, halt aggression, and cease support for armed groups.

However, regional analysts say it is unclear whether the agreement will actually end the decades-long conflict.

More important than the deal, they say, are talks in Doha that include representatives of the Rwanda-backed M23 militia, which earlier this year seized the provincial capitals of Goma and Bukavu in the Kivu region and set up its own administration in the controlled territories.

(dpa/NAN)

December 5, 2025
Genocide claim: President Trump, Ribadu’s Team and the Saudi Prince
- Yushau A. Shuaib
When U.S. President Donald Trump recently renewed his fixation with what he described as “Christian genocide” in Nigeria—going as far as calling the country a “disgraced nation”—I couldn’t help but laugh. Not because Nigeria’s security challenges are trivial, but because Trump’s history of loud, reckless, and contradictory outbursts makes it difficult for any serious observer to take him at face value.

This is the same Trump who, during his first tenure, described Nigeria among African “shithole countries” and labelled then-President Muhammadu Buhari as “lifeless.” He once confronted Buhari with the question, “Why are you killing Christians?”, despite being widely known for superficial engagement with facts. No American leader in modern times has displayed Trump’s blend of theatrical tantrums, political sensationalism, and Hollywood-style dramatics.

Trump’s behaviour is often stranger than fiction. Before the New York mayoral election, he repeatedly attacked Zohran Mamdani, a Muslim politician of South Asian descent born in Uganda, Africa, calling him a “communist” and threatening to punish New York City if he won. Trump vowed to slash federal funding, deploy the National Guard, and even suggested arresting him over immigration disagreements. Yet despite Trump’s intimidation, Mamdani won—proof that Trump’s political threats often collapse under their own emptiness.

His track record is replete with contradictions. He loudly condemns alleged “Islamists” in Nigeria yet openly courted controversial figures abroad—including a former “terrorist leader” turned Syrian president, Ahmed al-Sharaa—meeting him both in Saudi Arabia and at the White House. Despite presenting himself as a defender of persecuted Christians, Trump’s positions are dictated more by political theatre and personal interests than principle.

He once peddled a fabricated narrative of “white genocide” in South Africa, later dismissed by experts as propaganda. For someone whose policies contributed to the Gaza Genocide against Palestinians and whose rhetoric often inflames divisions, it is astonishing that some Nigerians still treat his statements as gospel truth.

Yet, certain political actors and ethnic propagandists celebrated Trump’s threat to “invade Nigeria,” as though foreign military intervention were a badge of honour. Thankfully, prominent Christian voices—especially officials from the Middle Belt, including Benue State Governor Reverend Father Hyacinth Alia and Secretary to the Government of the Federation Senator George Akume, as well as vocal public commentators from Southern Nigeria such as Femi Fani-Kayode and Reno Omokri—firmly rejected the genocide narrative, affirming that violence in Nigeria affects Muslims and Christians alike.

Read Also: Play-Offs: NFF tips Super Eagles to subdue Panthers after pay dispute

Ironically, when Muslims attempted to counter the propaganda, some were accused of never condemning terrorism. But truth is not built on emotion. As a Muslim my writings over two decades—including 2003’s “Sharia: Between Civilisation and Belief,” 2006’s “Killing in the Name of the Devil,” 2012’s “Boko Haram and Political Elites in Northern Nigeria,” and 2018’s “Still on Murderous Fulani Kidnappers,” among others—demonstrate consistent condemnation of all violent crimes, irrespective of perpetrators’ religion or region. My blog further archives these personal opinion articles. Not everyone is a hypocrite. Some of us speak from conviction, not convenience.

Security as well as investigative media reports reveal that the so-called “Christian genocide” narrative was constructed mainly by disgruntled Middle Belt activists, IPOB sympathisers, and foreign lobby groups disguised as NGOs. While some Christian communities document every casualty, Muslim communities—who have suffered the brunt of Boko Haram, banditry and state violence such as the 2016 Zaria Shiite massacre—rarely do so. Terrorists have ravaged entire Muslim-majority towns in the North, but their tragedies lack global amplification because they do not fit a convenient foreign narrative.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu acted maturely by dispatching a delegation led by National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu to engage U.S. authorities. Observers noted that the Chief of Defence Staff, General Olufemi Oluyede, Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun and Chief of Defence Intelligence, Lt General Emmanuel Parker Undiandeye —all Christians—were on that delegation. If there were a coordinated genocide against Christians, would these respected top security chiefs be complicit?

After every engagement involving Nigeria’s delegation—including Attorney General Lateef Fagbemi and Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Bianca Ojukwu, —with American authorities, deeply irresponsible official statements followed. Freshman U.S. Congressman Riley Moore mentioned “Christians” eight times without acknowledging Muslims who are also terrorism victims. Similarly, U.S. Secretary of Defence/War Pete Hegseth’s office emphasised “protection of Christians” and “stopping violence against Christians in Nigeria.”

What about other Nigerians who suffer the same violence? What is the agenda behind this selective framing? Are Muslims and other communities expected to remain silent in the face of such reckless rhetoric? This one-sided narrative sends a troubling message—as though Muslim lives do not matter in the scheme to undermine Nigeria. Even more unfortunate is that some Nigerians are celebrating this distortion, as if the rest of us are no longer their brothers and sisters in nationhood.

Meanwhile, as Ribadu’s delegation sought to clarify Nigeria’s secular stance in the USA, Trump welcomed Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the White House. He approved a major defence pact, facilitated F-35 jet sales, and celebrated investment commitments worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Saudi Arabia—the spiritual heart of global Islam—was also designated a major U.S. ally, while Nigeria was labelled a “country of concern.” Trump’s selective morality is guided not by religious solidarity but by strategic and financial interests.

This makes one thing clear: Nigeria must resist being drawn into emotional propaganda. Americans, as responsible people, will never sanction the invasion of Nigeria over flimsy and concocted excuses as if we are a banana republic. Trump’s threats are mere bluster. The real danger lies in foreign-funded lobbyists—both locally and internationally—driving the genocide narrative. Once Nigeria ceases to trend, they will shift their campaign elsewhere.

It would not be surprising if, realising that Trump is not coming, the so-called Christian genocide claimants may turn to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with claims that Jews are persecuted in Nigeria. Such a scenario would be absurd, yet not impossible—even though the most vocal self-proclaimed “Nigerian Jew” is currently serving a terrorism sentence in Sokoto.

Nigeria’s security crises are real but not religious genocide. They stem from criminality, governance failures, climate pressure and economic distress—not state persecution. Nigeria must confront these challenges honestly, rejecting foreign labels designed to fracture our unity.

The question remains: Is Trump protecting Nigerian Christians—or his own political and business interests, often in competition with China?

_Yushau A. Shuaib is the author of “An Encounter with the Spymaster._

_Email: yashuaib@yashuaib.com_
November 30, 2025
Trump, Tinubu and insecurity: Matters of particular concern

By Allison Abanum

In October 2025, the United States President Donald Trump sparked a major diplomatic uproar when he issued a veiled military threat aimed at Nigeria, warning of “possible action” unless the Nigerian government curbed violence against Christians. He even instructed the Pentagon to prepare plans for intervention and threatened to cut U.S. aid if things didn’t change.

Trump framed his warning in stark, militaristic terms: “fast, vicious, and sweet … just like the terrorist thugs attack our cherished Christians,” he said.

To many Nigerians, this was more than bombast. It was an overt attempt to shape Nigeria’s internal security narrative — pressuring a sovereign nation on its homegrown conflict with an international gun to its head.

As a Nigerian and a proud Christian, I can testify that the insecurity is real, but it’s deeper than religion. Nigeria’s security challenges are severe. From banditry in the northwest to insurgency in the northeast and herder-farmer violence in the Middle Belt, violence has spiked and shows no signs of letting up.

But the blunt truth is that Trump’s religious framing mischaracterized the complexity of the crisis. While some attacks do target Christians, the violence is not exclusively religious: many incidents stem from economic desperation, resource competition, weak governance from the previous administration, and porous borders.

The issue is not neatly sectarian — it’s deeply political and socioeconomic. Groups like Boko Haram and the Islamic State in West Africa Province (ISWAP) do have ideological underpinnings, but banditry and kidnappings often have more in common with criminal networks exploiting state weakness than with religious war.

There’s a clear political undertone on all fronts to what is happening in Nigeria.

Diplomatic coercion under guise of human rights

Critics argue that Trump’s threat is less about protecting persecuted Christians than about exerting political leverage. By casting Nigeria as a ‘Country of Particular Concern’ on religious freedom, he amplifies pressure on the Tinubu government.

READ ALSO: Ulerawa: How Oyebanji’s reforms is turning Ekiti public hospitals into centre of hope

It’s observed that this might be a negotiating tactic — a way to force Nigeria into concessions while projecting moral high ground.

Beyond past experiences with foreign intervention on the continent, there is fear that such threats could unravel the country’s fragile stability.

There is also concern that military action — even threatened — could lead to escalated conflict, incentivising armed groups to act more aggressively or provocatively.

Insecurity has long roots in local governance failures: corruption, inadequate policing, an underfunded security apparatus, and political neglect of violence-prone regions.

By framing the issue as “terrorism against Christians,” Trump may be simplifying a far messier problem — one that the Nigerian government can solve, and the Tinubu-led Government is solving.

Beyond security, Nigeria is a major oil-producing nation. Some critics speculate about ulterior motives: is this moral outrage, or an opportunity for increased leverage in geopolitical and resource-based negotiations? Only time shall tell.

Tinubu inherited a nation weighed down by decades of neglect — A federation battling imbalance across regions. And crucially, he inherited a security landscape fractured by years of terror attacks, banditry, mass kidnappings, and the gruesome killing of Christians and other innocent citizens — the very crisis Trump referenced in his warning. Instead of pretending the problems were small or temporary, Tinubu did something unfamiliar in Nigerian politics: he confronted them head-on. That is what makes him the man of particular concern — not because he triggered the crisis, but because he is the first leader in a long time courageous enough to dismantle it.

One of Tinubu’s earliest and boldest moves was to overhaul the nation’s security architecture. He dissolved the old security hierarchy, appointed new service chiefs with proven field experience, restructured the Defence Headquarters, and insisted on accountability and measurable results. Under his directives, joint task forces were revived, air-ground synergy improved, and intelligence collaboration tightened. In just months, thousands of terrorists, kidnappers, and insurgents were neutralised or captured.

From the moment he assumed office, Tinubu made it clear that he was not interested in cosmetic leadership. Subsidy removal was not a political decision; it was a patriotic one. A country cannot move forward while financing a multi-billion-dollar black hole that empowers cartels and impoverished citizens. Tinubu took the risk. He chose truth over comfort. He knew the backlash would come, but he also knew Nigeria could no longer afford to live on economic lies. Today, the fiscal space created by that bold step is what states are using to pay salaries, fund projects, and revive governance.

Tinubu is cherished today not because he makes easy decisions, but because he makes necessary ones. He is a president who chooses responsibility over populism, honesty over deception, and long-term stability over short-term applause. Nigeria needed painful surgery; Tinubu did not shy away from the operating room. And that includes the security theatre — where he boldly dismantled lethargy, empowered the military with new equipment, restored morale, and demanded measurable victories against terrorists and criminals, and in the economic theatre, where he is redefining Nigeria’s investment climate. And in the national theatre, where he is stitching together a stronger, more united, more equitable republic.

This is why Tinubu is the man of particular concern — the leader bold enough to take Nigeria from warning to awakening, from discomfort to direction, and from concern to confidence.

Nigeria is an independent nation, and we don’t need any foreign Interference in our democracy.

The more reason why this issue of insecurity in Nigeria is more political than religious is that Trump made this statement at a time we were recovering from regular kidnapping, insurgency and bandits’ attacks. Immediately, Trump made the statements, and everything escalated again.

It is clear there is a political coup against our democracy and President Bola Tinubu-led government because it is expected that after Trump spoke of bringing military support, crime and kidnapping should decrease.

Instead of bandits being scared and running for their lives or reducing crime, it became worse; it clearly shows there is a conspiracy somewhere against the Tinubu-led Government and our democracy.

What made it more political than religious is that after Trump emphasised Christian genocide, the recent attacks and happenings are now only on the Christian schools and churches.

Most of the Northern politicians are not saying anything about all the recent killings and abductions because of their political pursuit. Most of them understand that Tinubu is very courageous, patriotic and very responsible. The only way is to destabilise and weaken him and want him to manage the situation as a politician and not tackle it as a leader, so it continues to be their bargaining strength politically after Tinubu leaves office.

Insecurity is a global challenge , even in countries like America, the United Kingdom, France, etc., they still have insecurity challenges.

I hereby charge all Nigerians not to be ignorant of the devices of the enemies of our democracy and the Tinubu-led government.

Nigerians should stand firmly by President Bola Tinubu; we should give him every needed support so he does not go down, as the enemies of our country continue to undermine him.

The world must acknowledge that Tinubu’s leadership is turning Nigeria into a country of particular interest- a country the world must watch, understand and finally respect, because what the enemies of Nigeria intended is becoming Tinubu’s opportunity to showcase Nigeria’s resilience under real reforms.

And in the grand irony of both local and global politics, the label that once signalled weakness is now the stage Nigeria’s strength is emerging.

Trump cannot call a man ‘Particular Concern,’ when the same man is the one turning concern into opportunity.

*Allison Abanum writes from Orogun, Delta State.

November 30, 2025