Shehu Sani to Washington Post: “Trump Was Misled by Anarchists; Nigeria Will Defeat Terrorism”

Former Kaduna Central Senator, Shehu Sani, has faulted former U.S. President Donald Trump over what he described as a “misleading narrative” about Nigeria’s internal security situation, stating that the country will eventually overcome terrorism despite challenges.

In an interview granted to the Washington Post, Sani stated that Trump had been “misinformed and misled by anarchists and propagandists” who distort Nigeria’s realities for political or ideological purposes.

According to the outspoken activist, “Trump’s views about Nigeria and its leadership were shaped by people who thrive in chaos and division. They present a one-sided picture of insecurity and ignore the courage and resilience of Nigerians confronting terrorism daily.”

Sani, who served in the 8th National Assembly and is a well-known human rights campaigner, emphasized that while Nigeria still faces serious threats from insurgents and bandits, the country’s security agencies and citizens remain united in their determination to restore peace and stability.

“Nigeria will defeat terrorism. It may take time and sacrifice, but the people have refused to surrender to fear,” Sani told the Washington Post. “Our diversity and democracy remain stronger than the hate and violence of extremists.”

He also urged the international community, including the United States, to avoid adopting biased reports and instead support Nigeria’s efforts through intelligence sharing, humanitarian assistance, and balanced diplomacy.

Sani further noted that the fight against terrorism requires both military strategy and social justice, stressing that addressing poverty, unemployment, and corruption is essential to achieving lasting peace.

The former lawmaker’s comments come amid renewed global attention to Nigeria’s security situation, following a series of foreign commentaries that have drawn mixed reactions from citizens and policymakers.

Sani concluded by warning against what he termed “weaponization of misinformation” against African nations, saying it undermines democracy and fuels instability.

“Nigeria’s story should be told by Nigerians, not by those who profit from its pain,” he said.

Group Calls on EU,China,UK , Canada to Deny visa to Their Attackers on Social Media platforms.

The Forum for Growth and Development of Nigeria (FGDN) has urged the European Union (EU), the United Kingdom (UK), the People’s Republic of China, and Canada to impose visa restrictions on individuals engaging in what it described as “coordinated social media attacks” against the organizations and its leadership.

In a statement signed by its National Coordinator, Signed by Dr Adams Shaiza Musa and made available to journalists in Kaduna, the group expressed deep concern over what it termed an increasing wave of “malicious and unhealthy” online campaigns targeted at both local and international organizations.

According to the statement, FGDN—known for its advocacy for national unity, good governance, and youth empowerment—said it has recently noticed some “unwarranted and orchestrated online assaults” aimed at discrediting the international organizations.

“We are disturbed by the level of hate speech and false narratives being peddled on social media against several organizations. These attacks are not only defamatory, but also capable of inciting divisions and discouraging civic engagement between among patriotic Nigerian and international communities.” the statement read.

While reaffirming support for the constitutional right to freedom of expression, the group stressed that such freedom must be exercised responsibly and within the bounds of truth and decency. It warned that the abuse of digital platforms to spread misinformation and launch personal attacks poses a threat to national unity and social cohesion.

“We call on the embassies of the EU member states, China, the United Kingdom, and Canada to take note of individuals who habitually use the internet to malign others. They should be denied visas and international privileges until they desist from such unethical conduct,” FGDN stated.

The group also called on relevant Nigerian agencies, including the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) and the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), to strengthen regulatory measures governing online communication in order to curb misinformation and cyberbullying.

However , it reaffirmed FGDN’s commitment to promoting development-oriented dialogue, civic education, and initiatives that foster peace and social progress across Nigeria.

“FGDN remains focused on its mission to contribute positively to national development. We will not support those who seek attention through baseless accusations. Our objective is to unite Nigerians with international communities around ideas that can move the nation forward,” he said.

The statement concluded with an appeal to media practitioners and social commentators to verify information before publishing or sharing it online, urging them to uphold ethics and professionalism in their work.

Nigeria’s Mining Policy Failures: A Sector Tilted Toward China, Strangling Small Miners and Fuelling Illicit Operations.
By Biliyaminu Suraj

biliyasuraj247@yahoo.com

Introduction

Nigeria’s mineral wealth — highlighted by lithium, gold, tin, and rare earths — has the potential to diversify the economy beyond oil. Yet despite high-profile policy announcements and international investment pledges, the country’s mining sector remains mired in structural contradictions: rising foreign dominance, weak enforcement, and an increasingly hostile environment for domestic small-scale miners.

Under Minister Dele Alake’s tenure at the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development, policy reforms have been headline-grabbing and frequent, almost to the degree of weekly announcements. They are invariably framed as transformative but lack detail and wreak of a poor understanding of the mining industry. Critics argue the so-called policy reforms are reinforcing dependency on Chinese capital, penalising local miners through excessive regulation and fees and failing to stem a surge in illegal mining and attendant insecurity.

There are four critical fault-lines that define Nigeria’s current mining policy confusion.

1. Policy Failures Favouring Chinese Interests

Since 2023, the Nigerian government has aggressively courted Chinese investors in the mining and mineral-processing sector. During a recent visit to China, Minister Dele Alake announced that Chinese-backed companies have invested over US $1.3 billion in Nigeria’s lithium-processing industry since September 2023.

According to Ministry-sourced reports, Nigeria was expected to commission four major Chinese-funded lithium-processing plants by 2025 representing a combined investment of about US $800 million.

While the investment figures are large in headline terms, the actual number of plants currently built and operating remains very limited. One facility in Nasarawa State has been commissioned — a Chinese-led plant processing lithium at “4,000 metric tonnes per day” capacity was inaugurated. Its likely capacity is closer to 3,000 tonnes per day if and when it reaches full production. At this point it is not in production.

But many of the other announced plants — such as the US$600 million facility near the Kaduna-Niger border and the US$200 million outside Abuja — are still described as “slated for commissioning this quarter” or “nearing completion”.

To be clear, they are not yet in production and, if they are anything like the Chinese processing plants in Australia, may never come into economically viable production. Australia has been badly caught out by the promises of large-scale Chinese mineral processing facilities. Australian companies have invested billions of dollars in Chinese technology to process critical minerals only to now find that their investments may have to be written off.

In effect, Nigeria’s mineral governance model risks sliding into what analysts describe as neo-extractivism: the state aligning with foreign capital to extract rents, without building sustainable domestic capacity or transparent oversight. Meanwhile, local and small-scale operators continue to face bureaucratic hurdles. “We have seen preferential treatment for Chinese firms, while local miners struggle to get licences or financing,” said a member of the Miners Association of Nigeria.

2. Licence Revocations and the Expansion of Illegal Mining

The Alake-led ministry’s campaign to “sanitise” the sector through aggressive licence revocations has generated uncertainty. Hundreds of exploration and small-scale mining titles have been revoked on technicalities or administrative delays, often without due consultation. While the government insists this will curb speculative holding and non-compliance, the result has been the opposite: a vacuum in tenure security that has encouraged illegal mining and worsened insecurity in mineral-rich regions.

Displaced operators and unemployed artisanal miners are migrating into informal mining camps, some of which are now dominated by Chinese buyers and middlemen.

3. Inflated Chinese Lithium Investments and the Mirage of Local Value Addition

Nigeria’s lithium boom should be a strategic opportunity to enter the global electric-vehicle supply chain. However, the scale and structure of the Chinese-backed investments invite scrutiny.

The announced figures — US$800 million for four processing plants, plus the broader corporate claim of over US$1.3 billion invested by Chinese firms — are large. Yet comparators suggest that many of these plants are not yet fully built or operational.

The publicly-known, functioning facility is the one in Nasarawa, and even that raises questions about transparency of terms, local-content obligations and community benefit.

Analysts at the Natural Resource Governance Institute (NRGI) warn that the Nigerian government has not published the contracts, environmental-impact assessments or local-content rules tied to these deals. Without such transparency, inflated valuations may conceal excessive profit repatriation or tax waivers favouring the investors.

The contradiction is stark: while the government revokes hundreds of local mining licences in the name of efficiency, it signs opaque, billion-dollar deals with foreign conglomerates that may offer minimal technology transfer or local capacity-building.
Nigeria risks falling into a pattern familiar across resource-rich African economies — outsourcing its industrial future to external partners while celebrating “investment” headlines that disguise long-term dependency. Worse still, history across Africa and Asian countries tells us that massive scale Chinese infrastructure development comes with massive repayment obligations which, when defaulted, see national assets under Chinese ownership.

4. Small-Scale Miners Punished by Escalating Tenement Fees

In mid-2024, the Ministry announced a sweeping revision of mining-licence fees and annual service charges hitting small and indigenous miners hardest. For example, the annual service fee for a Small-Scale Mining Licence (SSML) jumped to ₦260,000, while renewal fees rose to ₦420,000.

For artisanal and small-scale miners – who produce over 70 percent of Nigeria’s solid minerals – the impact has been devastating. Many operate on thin margins and lack access to formal finance.

“These new rates are impossible for us,” said a gold miner from Niger State. “They want to push us out so the big companies can take over.”

Industry lawyers have also criticised the abrupt fee escalation, warning it could drive legitimate operators underground and worsen illegal mining. By making formalisation unaffordable, the policy undermines its own objective of bringing artisanal and small-scale miners into the regulated economy.

Meanwhile, Chinese-backed operations appear largely unaffected, as their capital base allows them to absorb or negotiate favourable terms. The asymmetry reinforces perceptions that Nigeria’s mining reforms are designed to privilege Chinese state-owned investors at the expense of Nigeria’s domestic enterprise.

Conclusion: Reform or Regression?

Nigeria stands at a crossroads. Mining reforms under Minister Alake have been long on rhetoric and short on delivery. The government’s mining policies, though couched in the rhetoric of reform and industrialisation, risk deepening structural inequities. The tilt toward Chinese capital — with announced investment amounts well into the billions but very few operational processing plants so far — is a key concern.

Coupled with opaque licensing decisions and punitive costs for small miners, the reforms collectively undermine the stated goal of building a resilient, inclusive mining economy.

For Nigeria to truly benefit from its mineral wealth, three principles are essential: transparency, local empowerment, and institutional capacity.

Contracts with foreign investors must be publicly disclosed; fee regimes must reflect economic realities, not bureaucratic revenue targets; and the state must strengthen regulatory oversight to curb illegal mining rather than punish small-scale operators. Without such shifts, the mining sector will remain a cautionary tale-–of a nation rich in minerals, yet poor in governance.

God, Guns and Geopolitics: Trump’s Nigeria’s Gambit Rocks Diplomacy

By Aminu Hussaini Sagagi

“The U.S’s accusation of alleged “Christian Genocide” against Nigeria with a threat of possible military action against the country would constitute a breach of International Law.
Analysts warn that, without recourse to any United Nation’s declaration, however noble the US unilateral intervention might seem within the country’s public policy perspective, the “action” smacks of violation of the very principles that sustain the global order.
Barrister Aminu Hussain Sagagi in this article highlights why Kano State Government align with the Federal Government stand, examining how the US’s threat against Nigeria would further escalate strain relationship and the resultant effect may lead Nigeria to embrace alternative global partners such as China or Russia – a shift that could reshape the regional alliances”.

In a move that has sent ripples through diplomatic circles across Africa, U.S. President Donald J. Trump has designated Nigeria a “Country of Particular Concern” (CPC) under U.S. religious-freedom laws, alleging a “genocide of Christians.” He also warned of possible U.S. military action, a statement that has sparked intense debate over international law, sovereignty and the limits of moral intervention in global affairs.
Trump, speaking via his Truth Social platform, accused Nigeria’s leadership of “turning a blind eye” to the alleged killings of Christians, calling the situation “an existential threat to Christianity.” The U.S. Department of State confirmed that the designation was made under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, which enables sanctions against nations found to be violating religious freedom in a “systematic and egregious” manner.

The Federal Government of Nigeria, under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, has rejected both the allegations and the label, describing them as “misinformed and unfounded.” Officials insist that Nigeria remains committed to protecting citizens of all faiths and that the violence ravaging parts of the country stems from terrorism, banditry and resource competition, not state-sponsored religious persecution.

Amid the diplomatic storm, the Kano State Government, led by His Excellency, Alhaji Abba Kabir Yusuf, has declared its full solidarity with the Federal Government and the People of Nigeria. In a statement issued in Kano, Governor Yusuf reaffirmed the State’s unwavering loyalty to the Nigerian federation and condemned attempts to portray the nation as a site of religious genocide. “Nigeria is a united and resilient country where Christians and Muslims have lived together for generations,” the statement read. “Kano stands firmly with the Federal Government in defending our sovereignty, our diversity and our dignity in the comity of nations.”
While the CPC designation itself is primarily diplomatic, Trump’s accompanying threat of deploying U.S. forces has raised serious legal questions. Under Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, member States are prohibited from using or threatening force against the territorial integrity of another Member State unless in self-defence or with UN Security Council authorization. Without Nigeria’s consent, analysts warn, any U.S. military action would constitute a breach of International Law.
Nigeria is not a failed State; any unilateral intervention, however noble it may seem within the public policy perspective of the USA or Europe, would violate the very principles that sustain the global order.

The use of the term genocide is particularly contentious. Under the Genocide Convention of 1948, genocide requires proof of intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic or religious group. Human-rights organizations acknowledge that Nigeria faces severe insecurity – including attacks by Boko Haram, ISWAP and armed militias – but warn against oversimplifying the conflict as one of religion.
The violence affects Muslims and Christians alike. It’s driven by a noxious mix of poverty, climate stress, extremism and weak governance – not by any single religious agenda.

The U.S. move risks straining one of its most strategic relationships in Africa. Nigeria is a key partner in counterterrorism, regional stability and economic development. The Nigerian Senate has called for calm diplomacy, urging engagement with Washington. The African Union has also expressed concern, warning that “unilateral actions under humanitarian pretexts” could undermine African sovereignty and set troubling precedents.
Should relations deteriorate further, experts warn, Nigeria could pivot toward alternative global partners such as China or Russia – a shift that could reshape regional alliances.
Trump’s rhetoric has revived the age-old debate about the intersection of morality and power in international relations. Proponents say Washington is right to speak out against persecution, while critics argue that selective interventions erode credibility and risk weaponing human rights.
“Religious freedom is an important value,” says Dr. Samuel Adebayo, a Nigerian diplomat and governance scholar. “But turning moral advocacy into a pretext for coercion blurs the line between protection and interference.”

For now, Nigeria’s leadership – buoyed by broad domestic support, including that of Kano State and other subnational governments – appears united in rejecting the U.S. narrative. While sanctions or diplomatic restrictions could follow, actual military action remains unlikely and legally indefensible without UN approval or Nigerian consent.
As Nigeria continues to confront terrorism, inequality and communal conflicts, its leaders insist that reform and reconciliation must come from within – not through threats from abroad. The unfolding episode, analysts say, will test not just Nigeria’s resilience, but also the world’s commitment to the delicate balance between sovereignty and global conscience.

Barrister Aminu Hussaini is a Special Adviser on Justice/Constitutional Matters to His Excellency, the Executive Governor of Kano State, Alhaji Abba Kabir Yusuf

Ex-Councilors Demand Expulsion of U.S. Ambassador Over Alleged Genocide Claims

The National Forum of Ex-Councilors in Nigeria has called for the immediate expulsion of the United States Ambassador to Nigeria, accusing him of complicity in what they described as a conspiracy against the country following allegations of genocide against Christians in Nigeria.

Speaking at a press conference in Kaduna on Monday, the National President of the Forum, Ambassador Hon. Auwal Hassan Kasim, dismissed the U.S. government’s claims of genocide and described the move as a calculated attempt to destabilize Nigeria.

Kasim, who was flanked by several Christian members of the association, alleged that the United States was attempting to sow discord and recreate in Nigeria the kind of chaos seen in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya through “subtle and deceptive means.”

He accused American officials and their embassy in Abuja of misleading former U.S. President Donald Trump with false information about Nigeria’s security challenges, instead of presenting him with accurate facts and figures.

“It is absurd and mischievous for anyone to believe that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, whose wife, Senator Oluremi Tinubu, is a pastor in the Redeemed Christian Church of God, would permit any form of religious persecution against Christians,” Kasim said.

The forum’s president added that both Christians and Muslims have coexisted peacefully in Nigeria for decades without foreign interference and accused Trump of harboring personal grudges against President Tinubu.

According to him, the alleged rift stems from Tinubu’s refusal to accept deported Venezuelans, Mexicans, and other South American migrants into Nigeria, despite the financial incentives attached to the proposal.

Kasim concluded by urging Nigerians to unite in support of President Tinubu’s administration and to resist any foreign attempts to undermine the nation’s peace and sovereignty.

Signed:
Hon. Amb. Auwal Hassan Kasim
National President, National Forum of Ex-Councilors
📞 08023444205

Jalingo Chair Race: Dantsoho Promises Kefas-Level Governance, Training for Youths

A frontline chairmanship aspirant under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and former member representing Jalingo I Constituency in the Taraba State House of Assembly, Hon. Nuru Dantsoho, has pledged to replicate Governor Agbu Kefas’ governance model in Jalingo Local Government if elected.

Addressing supporters, Dantsoho said his leadership blueprint is anchored on the five-point agenda of Governor Agbu Kefas, which include:

• Security, peace and unity
• Economy and job creation
• Education
• Healthcare
• Women and youth empowerment

He vowed to strengthen unity and peaceful coexistence among residents, emphasising that genuine development can only thrive in a harmonious environment.

“Our local government will reflect the peaceful, people-focused leadership style of His Excellency, Dr. Agbu Kefas,” Dantsoho said. “We will bring unity to our communities and uphold respect for our traditional institutions.”

Dantsoho also promised massive investment in youth empowerment by sponsoring young people for vocational training and providing working tools for them afterward.

“No youth under my administration will be left idle,” he said. “We will build a skilled generation capable of creating wealth and contributing to Taraba’s development.”

He further assured traditional rulers of greater honour and support, describing them as strategic custodians of culture and peace at the grassroots.

With the general election held on Saturday, November 8, Dantsoho’s candidacy has continued to galvanize support across Jalingo, as his grassroots experience and alignment with Gov. Kefas’ development vision fuel optimism for sustained transformation at the local level.