Editorial: Religious freedom, not ‘guns a-blazing’ in Nigeria

I support and protest President Trump’s words this week.

I support his designation of Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern. The unchecked violence against Christians in the Middle Belt and Northern states of Nigeria warrants this designation.

I protest his threats of military action in Nigeria and his blanket disparagement of the country.

What I support

My support for Trump designating Nigeria a Country of Particular Concern is based primarily on historic Baptist principles—namely, our centuries-long commitment to religious freedom—and secondarily on law—specifically, the International Religious Freedom Act.

Egregious violations of religious freedom and human dignity have occurred in Nigeria for many years—against Christians and Muslims. Our Christian brothers and sisters in Nigeria have been crying out for an end to violence against them. I heard them do so while I was in Lagos, Nigeria, in 2024.

Designating Nigeria a Country of Particular Concern enables the U.S. government to apply additional pressure on the Nigerian government to put a stop to the ongoing violence. The options for additional pressure outlined in IRFA are significant and should be exhausted before even a suggestion of military action. But Trump blew past mere suggestion this week.

Yes, we want to see an end to violence against Christians and others in Nigeria. The Baptist Standard has carried several reports over the last several years reporting on that violence. Just search “Nigeria” on our website.

We also want to see an end to violence against Christians and others in Burma/Myanmar, Iran, Pakistan, China, Russia, India and elsewhere—without warfare.

We have been aware the violence in Nigeria is not limited to Christians and is more than strictly religious in nature, as the Nigerian government would like us to make clear. Those realities don’t minimize our concern for our fellow Christians in Nigeria and for religious freedom there. But how we carry out our concern matters.

What I protest

I protest how Trump carried out such concern on social media this week.

I protest Trump calling Nigeria a “disgraced country.”

To apply “disgraced country” as a blanket label to Nigeria is to disparage more than 232 million people in one swipe. It is to reject the honorable lives of millions of Nigerians in their own country and throughout the world—including our Nigerian brothers and sisters in Christ.

It may be Trump meant to disparage only the Nigerian government, in which case he simply could have left off “now disgraced:” “The U.S.A. … may very well go into that country,” or better: “The U.S.A. … may very well go into Nigeria.”

But for reasons beyond this editorial—such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam, to name only three—the U.S.A. should not go into Nigeria militarily.

That said, I protest Trump’s threats to “go into [Nigeria] ‘guns a-blazing’” and to carry out a “fast, vicious, and sweet” attack. There are many reasons to reject such language—moral, political, tactical and otherwise. My principal reason is Christian.

No attack is “sweet.” To call an attack “sweet” is to revel in violence, which is its own disgrace.

Furthermore, to threaten a “fast, vicious, and sweet” attack with “guns a-blazing” may endanger “CHERISHED Christians” in Nigeria even further. “The terrorist thugs,” so labeled, may go further to make good on the label. Such language is irresponsible and unnecessary provocation.

Support and protest

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom first recommended Nigeria for Country of Particular Concern designation in 2009 for reasons we have reported on several times.

Prior to that, Nigeria was on the Special Watch List described in the International Religious Freedom Act. Countries the U.S. president determines do not meet the threshold for CPC designation, but where serious religious freedom violations are taking place, can be placed on the Special Watch List.

For multiple reasons—even broader than Nigeria—the situation in the middle and northern parts of Nigeria has not improved since 2009. Our brothers and sisters in Christ there have been crying out. We need to hear them.

We can agree with President Trump’s designation of Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern at the same time we disagree with his characterizations of Nigerians and descriptions of warfare. And we should. Our commitment to religious freedom compels us.

Brief explainer

To learn more about the Country of Particular Concern designation, you can read the International Religious Freedom Act here. IRFA passed into law by the U.S. Congress in 1998 and was amended in 2016 and again in 2024.

IRFA gives the U.S. president authority to designate a country as a Country of Particular Concern if “the government of that country has engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom … during the preceding 12 months or longer.”

IRFA Section 2(3) provides a foundation for the act. Section 3(13) defines “particularly severe violations of religious freedom,” and Section 3(16) defines violations of religious freedom.

IRFA Section 405 outlines seven presidential actions a U.S. president may employ with Countries of Particular Concern. They are summarized in this 2021 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom fact sheet.

Presidential actions available for a CPC designation include withdrawal or denial of financial, commercial or security assistance.

Eric Black is the executive director, publisher and editor of the Baptist Standard. He can be reached at eric.black@baptiststandard.com. The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the author.