Fresh reports of United States airstrikes targeting terrorist elements in northern Nigeria have raised questions over why Sokoto State—rather than the country’s worst-hit terror zones—was chosen as the initial target.
According to Emmanuel Ogebe, an international human rights lawyer and bilateral affairs expert, the location of the strikes appeared to reflect strategic familiarity rather than the scale of violence.
Ogebe, according to News Express, noted that Sokoto had previously been the site of a U.S. military operation during former President Donald Trump’s first term, when American special forces rescued U.S. citizen Philip Walton from kidnappers in 2020, killing six terrorists in the process.
He described Sokoto as an “unusual choice” for an opening strike, given that it was neither the epicentre of global jihadist activity in Nigeria’s North-East—where a deadly suicide bombing was recently recorded in Borno State—nor the North-Central region, where armed herdsmen attacks have claimed lives in Benue State.
“The North-West appears to be a safer operational bet for the U.S., given prior boots-on-ground experience and institutional memory from earlier missions,” Ogebe said.
He added that proximity to Niger Republic, where the U.S. until recently maintained military bases, might also have influenced the decision, as American forces are more familiar with the terrain and intelligence architecture in the region.
The Nigerian government has since stated that the operation was conducted jointly with the United States and other allies. Ogebe said this claim was credible, citing lessons from the 2020 Walton rescue operation, which nearly failed due to the absence of confirmed Nigerian airspace clearance.
According to accounts in former U.S. Defence Secretary Mark Esper’s memoir, American aircraft carrying Navy SEALs were already airborne when it was discovered that Nigerian approval had not been secured, raising the risk of the planes being intercepted or shot down. Clearance was reportedly granted at the last minute, allowing the mission to proceed.
“This history makes it unlikely that the U.S. would conduct strikes on Nigerian soil today without full coordination,” Ogebe said.
He further pointed to the loss of U.S. military bases in Niger following a pro-Russia military coup as another factor shaping Washington’s current operational choices, noting that the U.S. has since adjusted its surveillance and strike capabilities in the wider Sahel region.
However, Ogebe questioned the broader impact of the Sokoto strikes, arguing that the region is not responsible for the bulk of mass civilian killings, particularly against Christian communities in Nigeria’s Middle Belt.
He cited figures indicating that more than 600,000 Christians have been displaced in parts of Benue State alone—numbers comparable to displacement across multiple North-Western states combined.
Ogebe also raised the possibility that the strikes may be linked to concerns over the abduction of American missionary pilot Dan Rideout in neighbouring Niger Republic, amid fears he could be trafficked to terrorist groups operating in the region, similar to the Walton case.
“From a strategic standpoint, Sokoto does not explain itself unless there is a specific American interest being protected,” he said.
Ogebe is an award-winning international human rights lawyer based in Washington, D.C., and has played a role in shaping U.S. congressional and foreign policy on Nigeria. His advocacy contributed to the U.S. designation of Boko Haram as a foreign terrorist organisation in 2013 and Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern in 2020.
Credit: Vanguard
