Description
Conflicts in most West African states are internally motivated, hence, they often attract less international intervention. However, what the Nigerian political elites and citizens did not envisage was the sudden declaration of Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern” (CPC), followed by a threat of possible military intervention by the President of the United States, Donald Trump. Preliminary investigation shows that the military intervention is intended to stop the ongoing “Christian genocide” in Northern Nigeria (as asserted by the US). However, other factors, such as Nigeria’s diplomatic ties with Russia and China, including a 5% increase in tax on exported oil, might have triggered the US's sudden talks of an invasion. The announcement was received with a mixed reaction (among the political elites, civil society organisations, the international community and the citizens), sparking debates for and against the implications of a US military intervention in an already divided country.
Drawing from the aftermath experiences of US interventions in countries like Libya and Syria, should a US intervention be considered a lasting solution to the killings of Christians in Nigeria? Is there a significant rise in Christian killings that warrants a sudden intervention? Is the military intervention motivated by a deep sense of concern or a strategy to establish a US military presence in Nigeria following the fear of Russia and China’s dominance in West Africa? This paper will speak on motives for all parties involved, citizens' response to a US military intervention, and lastly, the concerns about “responsibility to rebuild” if a US military invasion happens.
