Why’d Trump Bomb ISIS In Nigeria On Christmas?

This might not be a one-off attack for domestic political purposes but the beginning of a campaign aimed at wresting Nigeria away from BRICS and restoring its role as the West’s regional enforcer.

Trump surprised the world by announcing on Christmas that the US bombed “ISIS Terrorist Scum in Northwest Nigeria”, whose government cooperated with the operation. This follows him drawing global attention to the slaughter of Christians in Northern Nigeria last fall, which was analyzed here at the time. It was concluded that the US “might want the right to occasionally strike Islamists there, at least one military base, Nigeria distancing itself from BRICS, and Nigeria playing the role of the West’s enforcer”.

As it presently stands, the first of these objectives has been achieved. Waiting until Christmas to bomb ISIS in Nigeria was probably a political calculation by Trump for maximally appealing to his base. The timing also makes it difficult for his opponents to criticize it too. This might therefore be more than a one-off attack for domestic political purposes. While US boots on the ground are ruled out, more attacks are possible, and these could be carried out in coordination with Nigerian ground operations in the area.

The new National Security Strategy declares that “we must remain wary of resurgent Islamist terrorist activity in parts of Africa while avoiding any long-term American presence or commitments” so it makes sense to work in coordination with local forces instead of unilaterally trying to thwart these threats. An unofficial US military presence, possibly comprised of special forces and/or intelligence agents, could help coordinate a campaign in Northern Nigeria and thus achieve the second identified objective.

In exchange for helping Nigeria defeat at least some of the terrorists that have been causing trouble for a while already, which the national armed forces have thus far been unable to due to corruption to poor leadership, the US likely expects privileged access to its emerging mining industry. This was also touched upon in the analysis hyperlinked to in the introduction and pairs with the third objective of Nigeria distancing itself from BRICS in the sense of the US beating China to the chase with this opportunity.

The attainment of the three prior objectives would lead to the fourth and final one whereby Nigeria could then restore its regional leadership role under America’s aegis. The US is uncomfortable with the Russian-allied Sahelian Alliance/Confederation, whose members – Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger – just announced a joint military battalion after their latest summit for better tackling terrorist threats. While their anti-terrorist goals formally advance US interests, the multipolar example set by them doesn’t.

The spree of patriotic military coups that swept across those countries removed French and therefore Western influence from their armed forces and political leaderships. This in turn led to enormous mining opportunities for Russia, including uranium in Niger, which borders conflict-afflicted Northern Nigeria. Therefore, it should be assumed that the US envisages “Leading from Behind” as Nigeria reasserts Western influence over the Sahel on its behalf, but likely after some time and not right away.

It’s premature to predict whether this could lead to a US-backed Nigerian invasion of Niger like what was in the cards right after the latter’s coup in summer 2023. Co-opting its junta or orchestrating another coup, after all, would be easier ways to sever its relationship with the Sahelian Alliance/Confederation. That said, the US’ anti-ISIS strikes were carried out in proximity to the Nigerien border, so it’s possible that they could expand across it for softening Niger up ahead of a US-backed Nigerian invasion one day.