New U.S law on Shari’a ban rattles Northerners

…as President Trump’s Republican conservatives pile pressure over Nigeria

Even as Washington’s strategic attention remains heavily focused on the escalating confrontation with Iran and tensions in Cuba, a growing bloc of conservative voices in the United States is urging President Donald Trump to direct more attention toward Nigeria, arguing that Africa’s most populous country could become the next major geopolitical flashpoint.

At the centre of this campaign are conservative activists, lawmakers, and faith-based organisations who say Nigeria is facing an escalating crisis of terrorism and religious violence that demands stronger American engagement.

Among the most vocal is Mike Arnold, founder of Africa Arise International and author of EPICENTER, who recently sent a detailed policy memorandum to the White House outlining what he described as “the biggest win on the board” for American foreign policy.

Arnold’s memo, circulated among senior officials in Washington, argues that Nigeria represents both the greatest security threat and the greatest strategic opportunity for the United States in Africa.

“Mr. President, you are doing what no president has had the courage to do – confronting Islamic terrorism head-on around the world,” Arnold wrote. “But there is a bigger play sitting on the table, and nobody else sees it. Nigeria.”

Nigeria as “the epicenter”

Arnold’s message is rooted in a worldview increasingly shared by conservative activists in Washington, who believe Nigeria sits at the intersection of global terrorism, strategic minerals, religious freedom, and great-power competition.

In the memo addressed to Trump and copied to senior foreign policy officials, Arnold describes Nigeria as a country with immense geopolitical stakes.

Islamism Coupled With Resources

With a population of about 230 million and projected to become the third-largest country in the world by 2050, Nigeria possesses vast reserves of oil, rare earth minerals, and a rapidly expanding youth population. According to Arnold, these factors make the country pivotal not only for Africa, but also for the global balance of power.

He argued that China is already exploiting the situation, claiming that tens of thousands of Chinese nationals are extracting billions of dollars’ worth of minerals annually while instability spreads across the country..

“Right now, China has 150,000 nationals looting $9 billion a year in minerals while jihadists slaughter Christians and the government covers it up,” Arnold wrote.

While critics dispute many of the claims contained in the memo, its central thesis has resonated within conservative policy circles, that Nigeria could become the world’s largest terror state if its security crisis worsens.

Arnold cited projections suggesting that the number of radicalized fighters in the region could grow dramatically by the end of the decade.

“A jihadist-controlled Nigeria would command more money, more people, and more resources than ISIS ever dreamed of,” he warned..“The largest terror state in history – on track to happen unless someone stops it.”

Push for electoral oversight

Beyond security concerns, Arnold’s memo proposes a direct American involvement in ensuring the credibility of Nigeria’s electoral process. His proposal calls on the Trump administration to push for international oversight of Nigeria’s elections and support the drafting of a new constitution that would be ratified by Nigerians through a referendum.

“The task is simple: guarantee a free and fair Nigerian election,” he wrote. According to Arnold, Nigeria’s current constitutional structure, introduced under military rule in 1999, centralizes political power and prevents genuine democratic competition.

He argued that a transparent election monitored by international observers could fundamentally reshape the country’s political trajectory.

“Remove the stranglehold and they will build a powerhouse,” he wrote. “A model nation. A booming economy. America’s strongest African ally.”

Outrage in The North

Arnold’s proposal has sparked debate among analysts, who view such ideas as potentially infringing on Nigeria’s sovereignty, even as supporters argue that international oversight could strengthen democratic institutions. Riley

Moore leads congressional pressure has also drafted a law for passage in Congress to effect to their demands.

While Arnold represents the activist wing of the movement, the push within Congress is being led by Riley Moore, a Republican lawmaker from West Virginia, who has emerged as one of the most prominent voices in Washington advocating stronger American intervention in Nigeria.

Moore recently delivered a report to the White House outlining what he and other lawmakers describe as “Christian persecution” in Nigeria and recommending a sweeping overhaul of US-Nigeria relations.

The report followed months of congressional hearings, investigative visits to Nigeria, and consultations with religious leaders and humanitarian organisations.

According to Moore, the findings show that Nigeria has become “the deadliest place in the world to be a Christian,” a claim that has been strongly disputed by Nigerian officials and Islamic religious leaders.

The lawmaker has repeatedly highlighted attacks carried out by terrorist groups, such as Islamic State West Africa Province and armed militias across the country’s northern and Middle Belt regions.

In one recent statement reacting to the killing of 27 Christians in Adamawa State, Moore said the violence underscores the urgency of stronger international action.

“Christians continue to be explicitly targeted for their faith in Nigeria,” he wrote. “ISIS-West Africa is slaughtering Christians and telling others they must convert or die.”

Moore has also linked the crisis to global geopolitical competition, alleging that Chinese mining operations in Nigeria are indirectly financing extremist groups.

“Chinese operators are paying protection money to radical Islamic terrorists, who use that money to finance persecution,” he claimed. “This cannot continue.”

Calls for Sweeping Policy Changes

The congressional report goes beyond condemnation, and proposes an extensive list of policy actions aimed at reshaping U.S engagement with Nigeria. Among the recommendations are sanctions against individuals accused of tolerating religious violence, visa bans, and asset freezes.

The report also proposes a comprehensive bilateral security agreement between Washington and Abuja that would expand counter-terrorism cooperation, provide American military equipment, and strengthen intelligence sharing.

Other proposals include increased humanitarian assistance for internally displaced persons and support for land reforms and ranching initiatives designed to reduce conflict between farmers and herders.

At the same time, lawmakers suggested measures aimed at limiting Nigeria’s reliance on Russian military hardware and encouraging deeper defence ties with the United States.

The recommendations reflect a broader strategic vision that sees Nigeria not only as a humanitarian concern, but also as a critical arena in global power competition.

Military Cooperation Expanding

In many ways, Washington’s involvement in Nigeria has already begun to deepen. The Trump administration redesignated Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern” over religious freedom issues in October 2025, a move that signaled renewed scrutiny of the country’s internal security challenges.

Two months later, on Christmas Day 2025, American forces carried out targeted strikes against terrorist positions in cooperation with Nigerian authorities. The operation was accompanied by the deployment of additional U.S military advisers and equipment to support counter-terrorism operations.

Although details remain limited, security analysts say the move marked one of the most significant expansions of U.S military engagement in Nigeria in years. Still, for activists like Arnold and lawmakers, such as Moore, these steps do not go far enough.

Their argument is that while the United States has been willing to deploy force in the Middle East, it has yet to develop a comprehensive strategy for Nigeria.

Competing Priorities in Washington

The challenge for the Trump administration is that Nigeria must compete for attention in a crowded geopolitical landscape. The ongoing confrontation with Iran has dominated American foreign policy in recent months, drawing military resources and diplomatic focus to the Middle East.

Tensions with Cuba and ongoing rivalry with China have also complicated the administration’s global agenda. Yet, conservative policy groups argue that ignoring Nigeria could prove costly.

They warn that instability in the country, combined with its population size and economic potential, could reshape the security landscape across West Africa and beyond. For that reason, they believe Washington must begin treating Nigeria not as a peripheral issue, but as a central front in the global fight against terrorism and ideological extremism.

A debate just beginning

As these debates intensify in Washington, the push for stronger American involvement in Nigeria is beginning to reverberate far beyond Capitol Hill.

From calls for constitutional reforms to proposals targeting religious laws in northern Nigeria, the ideas circulating among U.S conservatives are already generating strong reactions across the country.

In particular, proposals to abolish Shari’a law and criminal blasphemy statutes, central elements of the congressional report, have triggered fierce opposition from Islamic scholars and political leaders in northern Nigeria.

Among the recommendations submitted to the White House by lawmakers led by Moore is a call for Nigeria to abolish Shari’a criminal codes and anti-blasphemy laws as part of a broader framework aimed at addressing what the report describes as systematic persecution of Christians.

The congressional document argues that such laws are used to silence dissent, target religious minorities and justify convictions without due process in some northern states.

For Moore and his colleagues, repealing those laws is essential to what they describe as resetting relations between Washington and Abuja around religious freedom, security cooperation and economic partnership.

It also urges Nigeria to reduce reliance on Russian military equipment and instead deepen defence cooperation with the United States through expanded arms sales and training programmes. For Moore and other supporters of the initiative, confronting these overlapping threats – terrorism, religious persecution and geopolitical rivalry – is essential to safeguarding both American and Nigerian interests.

But in Nigeria, the recommendations have triggered sharp pushback, particularly from religious leaders and political figures in the North.

Northern backlash

Islamic scholars and organisations have rejected the calls for abolishing Shari’a law, describing them as an unacceptable intrusion into Nigeria’s internal affairs. The Supreme Council for Shariah in Nigeria said the proposal misunderstands the country’s legal and religious framework.

In a statement issued by its secretary-general, the council insisted that Shari’a law forms an integral part of the lives of Muslims in the country and is protected under Nigeria’s constitutional provisions on religious freedom.

“No power or authority can arrogantly make Muslims relinquish its practice in response to external pressure, misinformation, or political intimidation,” the council said.

The body also rejected claims that Nigeria is experiencing a religious genocide against Christians, arguing that the country’s violence stems from terrorism, banditry and governance challenges that affect people of different faiths.

Similarly, a coalition of Islamic scholars in Kano warned that foreign pressure to dismantle Shari’a institutions could undermine fragile interreligious coexistence in the country.

The group described the proposals as “provocative interference” and insisted that institutions, such as the Hisbah religious police operate legally under state laws passed by elected assemblies.

For many northern leaders, the debate touches on sensitive questions of sovereignty and religious identity.

Hakeem Baba-Ahmed, a former spokesperson of the Northern Elders Forum, described the recommendations emerging from Washington as deliberately provocative.

According to him, attempts to abolish Shari’a law or restrict Nigeria’s relations with countries, such as China and Russia could signal a deeper strategic agenda.

“These proposals represent a dangerous escalation of opportunism in Nigeria and West Africa,” he said.

Baba-Ahmed also warned that portraying Nigeria’s security crisis as a one-sided religious genocide risks inflaming tensions between communities that have historically coexisted despite recurring violence.

“We are a country designed to coexist and share in fortunes and setbacks,” he said.

A Delicate Geopolitical Balancing Act

Observers say the controversy highlights the increasingly complex dynamics shaping U.S-Nigeria relations. “On one hand, Nigeria remains one of Washington’s most important partners in Africa, particularly in counterterrorism operations against groups, such as Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province,” said Anthony Chidi, a lawyer and analyst based in Abuja.

“The presence of American military advisers and equipment in the country – expanded after targeted strikes against terrorist positions in December 2025 – reflects the growing security cooperation between the two nations.

But on the other hand, he said, “the political framing of Nigeria’s internal conflicts within American domestic debates – especially around religious persecution – has complicated diplomatic engagement.”