From Boko Haram to herder–farmer clashes, Nigeria’s crises are complex. Simplistic genocide claims fuel propaganda.
By GIMBA KAKANDA
In recent days, coordinated attacks on Nigeria’s nationhood have swept across social media, blogs and television outlets, alleging a so-called “Christian genocide”. These attacks, driven by foreign actors, mischaracterise Nigeria’s domestic conflicts, ignore its complexities and manipulate longstanding ethnic and resource-based tensions to advance sectarian agendas.
One of the figures driving this propaganda is American comedian and television host Bill Maher, who used his show to deliver a sensationalised account alleging the systematic slaughter of Christians in Nigeria. “I’m not a Christian, but they are systematically killing the Christians in Nigeria. They’ve killed over 100,000 since 2009. They’ve burned 18,000 churches. These are the Islamists, Boko Haram,” he said. “This is so much more of a genocide attempt than what is going on in Gaza. They are literally attempting to wipe out the Christian population of an entire country.” His sources are largely fabricated claims and manipulated images from unverified outlets. These distorted narratives drew applause from his audience, while Fox News, true to form, amplified them.
This misinformation – aimed at maligning Nigeria as much as undermining the gravity of the situation in Gaza – is linked to Nigeria’s position at the 2025 United Nations General Assembly. By reaffirming support for a two-state solution to the Palestinian conflict, Nigeria challenged powerful interests invested in one-sided narratives. Delivering the statement on behalf of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on September 24, Vice President Kashim Shettima stressed Nigeria spoke for peace, not partisanship. He framed Nigeria’s stance through its history as a nation that survived civil war and deep tensions, observing that “such bitter experience has taught us that such violence never ends where it begins”. He also drew on Nigeria’s struggle with violent extremism to argue that “military tactics may win battles measured in months or years, but in wars that span generations, it is values and ideas that deliver the ultimate victory”.
The mischief-makers who claim Nigeria ignored its own pressing challenges simply because Palestine was mentioned in only one of the 25 paragraphs could not have built their case on a shakier foundation. Nigeria’s statement was structured around four clear priorities: a demand for a permanent Nigerian seat on the UN Security Council as part of broader institutional reform; a call for urgent action on sovereign debt relief and expanded access to trade and finance; an insistence that host countries of critical minerals should benefit fairly; and an appeal to close the digital divide, echoing the secretary-general’s reminder that “AI” must stand for “Africa Included”.
These points, along with the cautionary lessons shared, were twisted by those urging Nigeria to ignore the violence in Gaza and elsewhere. This is blackmail and trivialises the genocide in Gaza. Citizens of afflicted nations may choose to ignore conflicts abroad, but state actors cannot. Nigeria, as a UN member state, bears the cost of violence in other regions, having participated in 51 out of 60 UN peacekeeping operations since its independence in 1960. Every country at the UN faces domestic challenges, yet many stood firmly with the people of Palestine. In acknowledging this, Nigeria offered one of the assembly’s deepest truths, declaring that “None of us is safe until all of us are safe,” and reminding the world that “None of us can achieve a peaceful world in isolation”.
Claims of a religious war between Muslims and Christians in Nigeria are simplistic and betray ignorance of the country’s internal dynamics. Over the decades, both Muslim and Christian communities have at times alleged “genocide” during crises. For instance, Muslim leaders claimed genocide in clashes around Jos in Plateau State, while some Christian leaders accused Muslims of campaigns against Christians in the North Central region, often called the Middle Belt, to resist being categorised as part of the Muslim-majority North. These mutual accusations show how the term “genocide” has often been invoked without credible evidence, inflaming tensions.