Lawmakers, religious leaders, and senior US officials traded sharply different views on Thursday as the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa examined President Donald Trump’s decision to redesignate Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC) over what he described as the “ongoing genocide” against Christians.
The designation, announced alongside a threat that the US military would enter Nigeria “guns-a-blazing” to “wipe out Islamic terrorists,” dominated the tense hearing in Room 2172 of the Rayburn Building, where witnesses were split over whether Washington was confronting a religious persecution crisis or inflaming an already volatile situation.
A hearing shaped by stark warnings
Opening the session, the committee chair, Chris Smith, cited figures claiming that 89% of Christians killed for their faith worldwide were murdered in Nigeria—more than 52,000 people since 2009. He accused militant Fulani herders of acting with “total impunity” and blamed previous US administrations for weakening pressure on Abuja.
Smith insisted the attacks were “unequivocally religiously motivated” and said the US “will not be silent while people are persecuted.”
Jonathan Pratt, Senior Bureau Official for African Affairs at the State Department, told lawmakers the violence now stretched far beyond the Boko Haram-ravaged North-East, warning that extremist groups and criminal militias were driving killings across the Middle Belt. Christian communities, he said, were often “deliberately targeted,” and the Nigerian government had failed to prioritise their protection.
Although he acknowledged Nigeria’s cooperation following the CPC designation, Pratt said Washington was preparing an inter-agency plan—including possible Treasury and Department of War involvement—to compel Abuja to strengthen security for Christian communities.
Lawmakers pull in opposite directions
Several Republicans framed the crisis as an urgent, religiously motivated slaughter demanding a decisive US response.
Representative John James described Nigeria as “the deadliest place on earth to be a Christian,” citing 17,000 killings since 2019. He linked religious persecution to political repression, referencing the detention and conviction of IPOB leader Nnamdi Kanu as proof of Nigeria’s “selective enforcement of the rule of law.”
Bill Huizenga delivered an emotional critique of what he called “radicalised Islamists” terrorising Nigerians, accusing both Congress and the US media of downplaying the scale of religious violence. He questioned whether US humanitarian assistance to displaced people in Benue and Taraba was remotely adequate.
Johnny Olszewski, a Democrat, warned against casting Nigeria’s crisis as a simple Christian-versus-Muslim narrative. While acknowledging that Christian communities were suffering “massacres” and “constant fear,” he stressed that extremist groups had also devastated Muslim populations. Nigeria’s problem, he said, was “capacity, not intent”—a hollowed-out state unable to protect anyone.
He urged Washington to offer support rather than threats. “Are we offering real partnerships,” he asked, “or just threatening airstrikes and sanctions?”
Representative Pramila Jayapal echoed that warning, criticising Trump’s threat of military action as legally dubious and dangerously inflammatory. She said threats of US airstrikes had already heightened tensions within Nigeria. “It feels reckless,” she said. “Distorting this into a solely religious narrative makes it harder to find real solutions.”
A bishop’s grim testimony
One of the most forceful interventions came from Bishop Wilfred Anagbe of Makurdi, who painted a devastating picture of Christian communities on the brink of extinction.
“Christianity risks elimination in parts of Northern and Middle-Belt Nigeria within a very short time,” he told the panel, describing mass killings, sexual violence, and forced displacement as a “systematic effort” to destroy Christian life and identity.
He cited multiple recent attacks—including the killing of relatives in his hometown and the massacre of 278 villagers in Benue—accusing the Nigerian government of “silence” and “abandonment.”
Anagbe called for targeted sanctions, humanitarian assistance and the passage of a proposed Nigerian Religious Freedom and Accountability Act. “Inaction emboldens extremists,” he said. “We cannot afford to wait any longer.”
A dangerous policy crossroads
Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly pressed State Department officials on whether Nigerian institutions had been infiltrated by extremists—an allegation Pratt categorically denied—and how Abuja had responded to the CPC designation.
Pratt said Nigeria had taken the label “very seriously,” sending a senior delegation to Washington and showing “positive cooperation” so far.
But divisions remained deep. Some lawmakers demanded aggressive US intervention; others warned that militarising US policy risked worsening the crisis, undermining Nigerian sovereignty, and endangering civilians.
Congresswoman Sara Jacobs issued perhaps the clearest caution: “You cannot solve problems created by men with guns by turning to men with guns for the solution.”
As the hearing closed, it was clear that Washington faces an increasingly fraught question: how to confront rising atrocities in Africa’s most populous country without triggering the very instability it seeks to avert.
