Fears Grow As US Moves To Break Up Nigeria

Concerns are mounting in Nigeria following reports that a United States lawmaker, Congressman Riley Moore, is planning to introduce a bill in the US Congress proposing the breakup of Nigeria under the guise of protecting Christians from alleged genocide by Islamist extremists.

The proposed legislation, according to available information, is framed as a response to claims of widespread persecution of Christians in Nigeria. Congressman Moore, alongside US Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and Mike Arnold, described as the mayor of a small town in Texas, have been vocal proponents of the narrative that Christians in Nigeria are victims of genocide.

Their campaign has reportedly gained traction in Washington, influencing former US President Donald Trump’s decision to designate Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern” (CPC) over religious freedom issues. Following that designation, Trump was said to have approved airstrikes on suspected terrorist camps in Nigeria.

Critics, however, argue that the latest move—advocating for Nigeria’s disintegration—represents a dangerous escalation that disregards the country’s sovereignty and the potential consequences for millions of Nigerians.
Of the trio championing this position, Congressman Moore has emerged as the most vocal. Moore is a first-term lawmaker representing West Virginia’s second congressional district and has limited experience in US foreign policy. By profession, he is a welder and has not served on key congressional committees such as Foreign Affairs or Intelligence.

Observers note that Moore’s constituency is overwhelmingly white and affluent, with minimal representation from African American or Latino communities. West Virginia’s history of racial discrimination, particularly during the era of slavery and segregation, has also been cited by critics questioning Moore’s moral authority to champion divisive policies concerning an African nation.

Questions have been raised about why a relatively inexperienced lawmaker appears so deeply invested in Nigeria’s internal affairs, prompting some to ask whether he represents a US district or is acting as though he were a legislator in Nigeria itself.

Meanwhile, critics point to unresolved social and human rights challenges within the United States, including ongoing protests over alleged police brutality and civil rights violations. They argue that American lawmakers pushing for drastic measures in Nigeria have failed to adequately address racial tensions, inequality, and law enforcement abuses within their own country.

Congressman Moore recently visited Nigeria on what was described as a fact-finding mission. However, critics say his subsequent recommendation for Nigeria’s breakup suggests a lack of understanding of the country’s complex history, culture, and socio-political dynamics.

Analysts question whether the US Congress has any legal or moral authority to determine Nigeria’s territorial integrity, noting that Nigeria is a sovereign nation and not an American territory or dependency.

While many Nigerians welcome international support in addressing insecurity, poverty, and infrastructural decay, commentators insist such assistance must come through constructive engagement with Nigerian authorities rather than prescriptions that could deepen instability.

Nigeria is currently grappling with multifaceted security challenges, economic hardship, and widespread poverty. Reducing these issues to a single religious narrative, critics argue, oversimplifies a complex situation and risks worsening existing tensions.

There are growing warnings that external actors advocating extreme solutions while remaining insulated from their consequences are engaging in political opportunism rather than genuine concern for Nigeria’s welfare.

As debate continues, many Nigerians are urging vigilance, warning against what they describe as foreign interference disguised as moral intervention. They stress that Nigeria’s challenges can only be resolved through internal unity, responsible governance, and inclusive national dialogue—not by external calls for disintegration.