A Nigerian scholar and Islamic propagator, Ambassador Mallam Ibrahim Agunbiade, has cautioned against what he described as the dangerous and misleading framing of Nigeria’s security crisis as a religious genocide, warning that such narratives distort reality and risk deepening sectarian tensions in the country.
In a statement issued on January 11, 2026, Agunbiade criticised recent remarks attributed to former United States President Donald Trump, who reportedly acknowledged that Muslims are also being killed in Nigeria but continued to describe the violence as being “mostly Christians.” According to Agunbiade, while the recognition that Muslim victims exist is a step toward accuracy, the persistence of a religious framing remains deeply problematic.
Agunbiade, who is affiliated with Taalib Jami’ei Islamic Propagation in Rabwa, Saudi Arabia, said Nigeria’s security challenges are far more complex than a simplistic religious narrative suggests. He argued that branding the violence as a “Christian genocide” is not only inaccurate but also potentially harmful in a multi-religious and plural society like Nigeria.
He recalled arguments he had earlier advanced in a previous intervention titled Misguided Bombs and Dangerous Narratives, where he stressed that insecurity in Nigeria is largely driven by criminality, terrorism, and regional instability rather than a coordinated religious war. According to him, violent actors operating across different parts of the country do not target victims based on faith alone but attack communities indiscriminately.
“Nigeria’s tragedy is not a religious war,” Agunbiade stated. “Terrorists and bandits kill without regard for whether their victims are Muslim or Christian. Both communities have suffered devastating losses, and to pretend otherwise is to deny the lived reality of Nigerians across the country.”
He warned that continuing to frame Nigeria’s insecurity through a religious lens risks inflaming passions and hardening divisions in an already fragile environment. Agunbiade noted that such narratives, when amplified internationally, could embolden extremists, provoke reprisals, and undermine efforts at national cohesion.
According to him, the use of religious labels to explain mass violence in Nigeria also carries the risk of legitimising ill-informed external interventions. He argued that when foreign leaders and commentators rely on inaccurate descriptions, they may push policy responses that fail to address the root causes of insecurity or, worse, aggravate the situation.
Agunbiade urged international actors, particularly influential political figures, to abandon what he described as “religious colouration” in discussing Nigeria’s crisis. He said the violence should instead be recognised for what it is: widespread criminal brutality and terrorism that amounts to mass killing of innocent civilians, irrespective of faith.
“What Nigeria faces is human genocide,” he said. “It is the mass killing of innocent people by violent non-state actors driven by greed, power, and criminal ambition. Weaponising religion to describe or respond to this crisis invites misinformation and endangers lives.”
He stressed that accurate diagnosis is critical to effective solutions, noting that mislabelling violence can distract from the structural drivers of insecurity, including weak governance in some areas, proliferation of small arms, poverty, and the breakdown of local conflict-resolution mechanisms.
Agunbiade also warned that portraying the crisis as a predominantly Christian tragedy risks marginalising Muslim victims whose suffering is often overlooked in international discourse. He said such selective narratives can deepen feelings of injustice and exclusion, further complicating efforts to build trust among Nigeria’s diverse communities.
According to him, the reality on the ground shows that attacks by insurgents, bandits, and criminal gangs have affected villages, towns, and highways across the country, cutting across religious and ethnic lines. From the North-East to the North-West and parts of the Middle Belt, he noted, civilians of all backgrounds have been killed, displaced, or kidnapped.
He called on Nigerian leaders, civil society actors, and the international community to promote narratives grounded in facts and empathy rather than ideology or political convenience. Agunbiade said solidarity with Nigeria must be based on an honest understanding of the crisis, not slogans that oversimplify a complex problem.
“Nigeria needs solidarity grounded in facts, not rhetoric,” he said. “Accuracy saves lives. False labels put them in danger.”
The scholar also appealed to global media organisations to exercise caution in their reporting on Nigeria, urging journalists to avoid framing violence in ways that could inflame religious sentiments or mislead audiences about the nature of the conflict.
He argued that responsible reporting should reflect the multi-layered dimensions of Nigeria’s insecurity, including criminal networks, local conflicts over land and resources, and the activities of extremist groups that exploit existing grievances.
Agunbiade concluded by reaffirming that Nigerians of all faiths share a common fate in the face of insecurity and must resist narratives that pit communities against one another. He said lasting peace would only be possible through unity, honest dialogue, and policies informed by truth rather than fear.
The statement was issued from Ibadan, Oyo State, in Nigeria’s South-West, where Agunbiade said he felt compelled to speak out in defence of accuracy and responsible discourse at a time when misinformation could have far-reaching consequences.
