US Strikes in Nigeria Spark Confusion and Criticism Over Targets and Civilian Impact

US air strikes in northwestern Nigeria caused confusion after Washington and Abuja gave differing accounts of the targets hit. The operation, delayed by President Donald Trump to coincide with Christmas, was said to target Islamic State-linked fighters, but details remained unclear and nearby villages were affected by debris. Trump’s public claim of responsibility raised concerns about Nigeria’s sovereignty and drew criticism from opposition figures. Analysts questioned the choice of location and the lack of transparency, while both countries said further strikes were possible.

Immediately after the surprise United States strikes directed at militant positions in Nigeria, uncertainty continued to surround exactly what — or who — had been hit, as officials in Washington and Abuja released accounts that differed in important details. The situation was further complicated by revelations that American President Donald Trump had personally delayed the operation, reportedly so that the attack could coincide with Christmas Day for symbolic effect, and by allegations that Washington withdrew from plans to issue a joint statement with Nigerian authorities.
Although both governments agreed that the strikes were aimed at targets linked to the Islamic State group, neither side initially identified which of Nigeria’s numerous armed factions had been attacked or where the main casualties occurred. Activist and former presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore criticised the lack of transparency, saying that even twenty-four hours after the bombing, neither Nigeria nor its so-called international partners could provide clear and verifiable information about what had actually been struck.
Nigeria is currently fighting several jihadist organisations, including multiple groups associated with Islamic State, while neighbouring countries are also engaged in battles against IS-linked militants. There are increasing concerns among security analysts that these conflicts are spilling across borders into Nigeria, widening the country’s already complex security challenges. Late on Friday, Information Minister Mohammed Idris said the operation targeted ISIS fighters attempting to infiltrate Nigeria through the Sahel corridor, offering the first official hint about the intended targets.
More details emerged on Saturday when presidential spokesman Daniel Bwala told AFP that the strikes were aimed at Islamic State militants who had entered Nigeria to collaborate with the Lakurawa jihadist group and various armed bandit gangs. According to Bwala, all three groups were targeted and casualties were recorded, though he said it was still unclear exactly who had been killed and which group the victims belonged to, leaving key questions unanswered.
The controversy deepened when President Trump publicly claimed responsibility for the strikes on social media on the night they occurred, becoming the first to acknowledge the operation. His announcement, referring to overnight Thursday-to-Friday attacks in northwestern Sokoto State, sparked unease among Nigerians who feared that their country’s sovereignty may have been compromised. Trump later told the US news outlet Politico that the strikes had originally been planned for an earlier date but that he insisted on postponing them, saying, “Let’s give a Christmas present,” a remark that drew criticism for trivialising a serious military action.
Nigeria’s opposition People’s Democratic Party condemned the government for allowing foreign powers to announce security operations before Nigerian officials did, accusing the authorities of failing to protect national dignity and transparency. In response, Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar insisted early on Friday that the mission had been a joint operation, authorised by President Bola Tinubu and guided by Nigerian intelligence. Tuggar later told Arise News that while speaking with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio shortly before the strikes, they had agreed to issue a joint statement, but Washington rushed out its own announcement without coordination.
Nearly a full day after the strikes, Nigerian officials finally provided more clarity about the intended targets. Idris said the attacks hit two major Islamic State terrorist enclaves in Tangaza district of Sokoto State. However, he acknowledged that debris from the explosions struck several surrounding villages, raising concerns about civilian harm and collateral damage. Images taken by an AFP photographer in Offa, in neighbouring Kwara State, showed collapsed buildings, streets littered with rubble, roofs torn open and personal belongings scattered among the ruins, illustrating the destructive impact of the blasts.
Residents in other areas also reported shock and confusion. In Jabo town in Sokoto State, explosions believed to have been caused by falling debris rattled the community. Local resident Haruna Kallah told AFP that the blasts were especially surprising because the area had never been considered a stronghold for armed groups, highlighting fears that innocent communities may have been affected by a strike aimed elsewhere.
Confusion persisted over the type of weapons used in the operation. The US military released a video showing a naval vessel launching what appeared to be missiles, suggesting a sea-based strike. Idris said the attacks were launched from maritime platforms stationed in the Gulf of Guinea, but he also stated that sixteen GPS-guided precision munitions were deployed using MQ-9 Reaper drones, raising questions about whether the operation involved ships, drones, or a combination of both.
Security analysts were also puzzled by the choice of targets in Nigeria’s northwest, since most jihadist activity in the country has historically been concentrated in the northeast. Some researchers have recently linked members of the Lakurawa group — the main jihadist organisation operating in Sokoto State — to Islamic State Sahel Province, though other experts dispute those connections, saying the evidence remains inconclusive.
The strikes came against the backdrop of a recent diplomatic dispute between Washington and Abuja after Trump described the violence in Nigeria as “persecution” against Christians, a narrative promoted by parts of the US religious right. Nigerian officials and independent analysts strongly rejected that framing, arguing that the conflict is driven by complex security and criminal dynamics rather than religious persecution.
Taken together, the religious framing of the violence, the lack of clear information about the targets, and the deliberate timing of the strikes for Christmas have fuelled criticism that the operation may have been motivated more by symbolism than by strategic military necessity. Despite the controversy and lingering questions, both the United States and Nigeria have indicated that further strikes remain possible, signalling that the campaign against militant groups in the region is far from over.