Afenifere Warns Against Full-Scale US Military Strikes To Tackle Nigeria’s Terrorism

A faction of the pan-Yoruba socio-political group Afenifere said on Tuesday that a conventional “war approach”, including heavy external military strikes, is not the right way to confront the terrorism afflicting parts of Nigeria.

In a statement issued in Ibadan, the group’s National Publicity Secretary, Jare Ajayi, argued that conventional warfare presumes an identifiable enemy and clearly defined battle lines, conditions not present in Nigeria’s complex security environment.

The statement responded to recent international reporting and comments by foreign leaders.

Afenifere referred to U.S. President Donald Trump’s declaration of Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern” and his pledge to protect Christians he said were being persecuted.

“There Is Genocide in Nigeria, President Tinubu Can Fix It – Bishop Francis Wale Oke

The group noted that successive Nigerian governments have denied accusations of faith-based persecution, but said such denials have not deterred what it described as U.S. determination to intervene.

Ajayi warned that proposed U.S. options reported by The New York Times, described in the paper as “heavy” (fighter jets/long-range bombers), “medium” (armed drones with U.S. intelligence support), and “light” (intelligence sharing, logistics and joint operations), risk escalating the conflict.

He said the report’s suggestion that limited air operations might be insufficient and could lead to a “full-scale campaign similar to those in Iraq or Afghanistan” was particularly alarming.

Afenifere urged a different course: sustained intelligence work, strategic mutual cooperation, diplomatic engagement, and an unwavering commitment to protect all law-abiding citizens regardless of faith.

“The approach to defeating terrorists in Nigeria requires tact, hard-track intelligence, diligence, commitment and sincerity on the part of those deployed to fight them,” the statement said.

The group also cautioned against an overreliance on bombs, noting that air strikes often cannot reliably distinguish between militants and civilians.

Instead, Afenifere recommended targeted intelligence operations designed to minimise collateral damage, stronger community engagement, especially from local elders, and a focus on dismantling the networks and sponsors that enable violence.

While Afenifere acknowledged that Christians and other targeted communities need protection, it framed the problem as one of resource-driven terrorism as much as religious persecution.

The organisation called for “a total war on terrorists who prioritize resources over faith” coupled with community-led efforts to restore security and resilience in affected areas.