In a sharp diplomatic exchange that has ignited discussions on religious violence and international oversight, Bayo Onanuga, a prominent presidential aide to Nigerian President Bola Tinubu, has vehemently opposed the United States' decision to label Nigeria a "Country of Particular Concern" (CPC). The designation, announced by US President Donald Trump on Friday, October 31, 2025, cites widespread killings of Christians by Islamic extremist groups as the primary justification. Onanuga's rebuttal, delivered via a public response on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), underscores a broader narrative of mutual victimization across religious lines in Nigeria, insisting that Muslims are equally targeted by extremists in certain regions.
The controversy erupted following Trump's official statement, which was released through the White House press office. In it, the US president articulated that the CPC status— a classification under the International Religious Freedom Act— was imperative due to what he described as "systematic and egregious violations of religious freedom." Trump specifically highlighted "mass killings of Christians by Islamic groups" in Nigeria's northern and central states, pointing to ongoing attacks attributed to organizations like Boko Haram and Fulani herdsmen militias. This move aligns with the US State Department's annual reporting mechanisms, which allow for sanctions, diplomatic pressure, or other measures against nations deemed to severely restrict religious practices or tolerate persecution.
Supporting Trump's announcement, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio amplified the decision in a post on X. Rubio's statement reiterated the administration's commitment to defending religious minorities globally, framing the CPC designation as a necessary step to address "the slaughter of innocent Christians in Nigeria at the hands of radical Islamic elements." He emphasized that the US would not remain silent amid reports of church burnings, abductions, and targeted assassinations, drawing on data from human rights organizations and intelligence assessments.
It was against this backdrop that Onanuga, known for his role as Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, fired back directly in response to Rubio's post. Quoting the Secretary's message, Onanuga wrote: "Muslim lives matter too. There is no ongoing slaughter of Christians in Nigeria." He argued that the violence plaguing the country is not unidirectional but affects multiple faiths, with Muslims falling victim to extremist attacks in states such as Zamfara, Katsina, and Sokoto. Onanuga's retort challenges the US narrative by portraying the conflicts as complex inter-communal clashes exacerbated by banditry, resource disputes, and insurgency, rather than a targeted anti-Christian campaign.
This exchange has been widely shared and dissected online, with the full thread reading as follows:
Marco Rubio (@SecRubio): "Proud to stand with President @realDonaldTrump in designating Nigeria a Country of Particular Concern. The mass killing of Christians by Islamic groups cannot be ignored. America will defend religious freedom worldwide. #ReligiousLiberty"
Bayo Onanuga (@BayoOnanuga) (replying to Rubio): "Muslim lives matter too. There is no ongoing slaughter of Christians in Nigeria. Extremists are killing Muslims in some states as well. This designation is misplaced and ignores the full picture of security challenges we face."
Onanuga's phrasing echoes global slogans like "Black Lives Matter" but adapts it to highlight perceived imbalances in international attention to religious casualties. His assertion that there is "no ongoing slaughter of Christians" directly contradicts reports from groups such as Open Doors, Amnesty International, and the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), which have documented hundreds of Christian deaths annually in Nigeria. For instance, USCIRF's 2025 report, released earlier in the year, recommended Nigeria's CPC status for the fifth consecutive time, citing over 5,000 Christian fatalities in the preceding 12 months alone, largely in the Middle Belt region.
However, Onanuga's defense aligns with the Nigerian government's longstanding position that the violence stems from socio-economic factors, including farmer-herder conflicts over land and water resources, rather than purely religious motives. President Tinubu's administration has repeatedly attributed the insecurity to criminal elements, promising enhanced military operations and community dialogues. In states like Plateau and Benue, clashes between predominantly Christian farmers and Muslim Fulani nomads have indeed resulted in deaths on both sides, with official figures from Nigeria's National Emergency Management Agency indicating thousands displaced regardless of faith.
The US action under Trump marks a revival of aggressive religious freedom advocacy, reminiscent of his first term when Nigeria was first placed on the CPC list in 2020 before being removed by the Biden administration in 2021 amid lobbying efforts. Trump's return to office has seen a swift reinstatement, signaling a policy shift. Potential consequences for Nigeria include restrictions on certain US aid, though waivers for national security interests—common in past designations—could mitigate impacts.
Critics of the US move, including some Nigerian analysts, argue that it oversimplifies a multifaceted crisis involving ethnicity, poverty, climate change-induced migration, and porous borders facilitating arms smuggling. Proponents, meanwhile, view it as essential accountability, preventing Nigeria from sliding into further instability. Human rights advocates point to specific incidents, such as the Christmas 2023 attacks in Plateau State that killed over 200, mostly Christians, or the abduction of schoolgirls in northern states by Boko Haram affiliates.
Onanuga's public dissent is notable as it comes from a high-ranking official, potentially straining US-Nigeria relations at a time when bilateral ties are crucial for counterterrorism cooperation. Nigeria remains a key partner in the fight against ISIS-West Africa and other jihadist factions. The aide's emphasis on Muslim victims—evidenced by attacks on mosques and Sufi communities by hardline groups—seeks to reframe the discourse, urging a holistic approach to peacebuilding.
As the debate unfolds, social media users have polarized along predictable lines. Supporters of Onanuga hail his response as a bold assertion of national sovereignty, accusing the US of neo-colonial interference. Detractors label it denialism, insisting that the scale of anti-Christian violence warrants international intervention. Hashtags like #NigeriaCPC and #ReligiousViolenceNG have trended, amplifying voices from affected communities.
In broader context, Nigeria's religious landscape is delicately balanced, with Christians comprising about 50% of the population (predominantly in the south and middle belt) and Muslims around 45% (mainly in the north). The country's federal structure and history of post-colonial tensions have often turned local disputes into national flashpoints. Efforts like the National Peace Committee and interfaith initiatives continue, but persistent governance gaps in security and justice fuel the cycle.
Trump's designation, backed by Rubio, places Nigeria alongside nations like China, Iran, and Pakistan on the CPC list, potentially opening doors to targeted sanctions or diplomatic isolation. Yet, Onanuga's counter-narrative insists on nuance: "Extremists are killing Muslims in some states as well." This plea for equitable recognition of suffering could resonate in multilateral forums like the United Nations, where Nigeria has advocated for global anti-terrorism support without stigmatization.
Ultimately, this transatlantic spat highlights the challenges of addressing religious freedom in conflict zones. While the US leverages its influence to spotlight perceived persecutions, Nigerian officials push back against what they see as selective outrage. As investigations and responses evolve, the hope remains for data-driven dialogue that prioritizes saving lives over scoring geopolitical points. The exchange between Rubio and Onanuga serves as a microcosm of these tensions, underscoring the need for collaborative solutions to Nigeria's enduring security woes.
