U.S. draws up military plans for Nigeria after Trump’s order

The United States military has begun drafting possible intervention plans for Nigeria after President Donald Trump ordered the Pentagon to prepare “immediate action” to protect Christians targeted by militants.

But senior American defense officials told The New York Times that a U.S. operation would likely have little impact on Nigeria’s decades-long insurgency unless Washington committed to a major campaign similar to the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan — something they said no one was seriously considering.

“It would be a fiasco,” retired Maj. Gen. Paul D. Eaton, who led U.S. training efforts in Iraq, told the newspaper. He warned that airstrikes alone would achieve little, likening them to “pounding a pillow.”

According to the Times, the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), based in Stuttgart, Germany, has drawn up three escalating options — “light, medium, and heavy” — now being reviewed by the Pentagon’s Joint Staff.

The light option involves what officials described as partner-enabled operations — where American forces provide intelligence and limited logistical support to Nigerian troops fighting Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP). These groups have waged a nearly 20-year insurgency in Nigeria’s northeast, attacking and kidnapping both Christians and Muslims.

The medium option would authorize U.S. drone strikes on militant bases and convoys in northern Nigeria using MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1 Predator aircraft. But that plan faces logistical hurdles. The Times reported that the U.S. withdrew from its two main drone bases in neighbouring Niger earlier this year, and Russian forces now occupy those sites. The nearest American facilities that could support drone operations are in southern Europe and Djibouti, both far from Nigeria’s conflict zones.

The heaviest option, which officials consider unlikely, would see an aircraft carrier group deployed to the Gulf of Guinea to launch airstrikes deep into Nigeria. However, U.S. military planners have indicated that such a move is not a 2025 national security priority.

Repeated Attacks

Mr. Trump’s directive, posted on social media over the weekend, instructed the “Department of War” to prepare for possible action. “Yes, Sir,” replied Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

The order followed repeated attacks on Christians, although the violence in northern Nigeria has long involved overlapping ethnic, religious, and land disputes. Militant groups like Boko Haram and ISWAP and the so-called bandits have also targeted Muslims.

Nigeria’s government has done little to contain the problem, and attackers are not always punished. Following President Trump’s order, the State Security Service (SSS) on Tuesday gave a unusually detailed update on the trial of suspects involved in several major terrorist attacks, including the 2011 bombing of the United Nations House in Abuja.

The government has welcomed foreign help against Islamist militants but insists that any intervention must respect the country’s sovereignty.

While U.S. officials say they can carry out limited strikes or joint raids with Nigerian forces, they acknowledge that without a long-term ground presence, any military action would do little to resolve the deeper causes of Nigeria’s unrest — corruption, land conflict, and weak governance.

“The American public has no appetite for another Iraq or Afghanistan,” General Eaton said, noting that even within the Pentagon, enthusiasm for a direct intervention in Nigeria remains very low.