Ademola Oshodi, senior special assistant to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on foreign affairs and protocol, has said Nigeria remained fully in charge of decisions that led to recent United States air strikes against ISIS-linked fighters in Sokoto State.
Gatekeepers News reports that Oshodi said the operation showed a shift in security cooperation between Nigeria and the US, built on coordination rather than external control. He explained that the strikes were carried out following long-standing intelligence-sharing and joint planning between the two countries.
The US action followed earlier statements by President Donald Trump, who had warned of possible military intervention after redesignating Nigeria as a “country of particular concern” over claims of a Christian genocide. Oshodi said such comments damaged diplomatic trust and created tension between the two governments.
He said, “This signified pressure, not partnership”, while stressing that Nigeria later “reasserted the primacy of diplomacy, institutional process, and sovereign consent” under President Tinubu.
According to Oshodi, the Christmas Day air strikes were not unilateral. He said they were carried out after sustained intelligence exchanges, command-level coordination, and agreed rules of engagement that respected Nigeria’s constitution and military authority.
He said, “It was defined, time-bound cooperation in which Nigeria retained decision-making control. That distinction is critical.”
The presidential aide added that Nigeria’s focus remains on preserving its independence while dealing with terrorism that operates across borders and in poorly governed areas.
He said, “For Nigeria, the significance lies in maintaining strategic autonomy while confronting asymmetric threats across borders and ungoverned spaces.”
Oshodi noted that foreign support only benefits the country when it is properly monitored and aligned with national institutions.
He said, “External cooperation strengthens national capacity only when bound by clear oversight, transparent objectives, and accountability to Nigerian institutions.”
Oshodi also said the US stood to gain diplomatically from working alongside Nigeria rather than acting alone.
He said, “For the United States, this cooperation offers more than tactical success. It reflects an understanding that counter-terrorism efforts detached from local ownership often fail operationally and politically.”
“Acting with Nigeria, rather than over Nigeria, preserves diplomatic credibility where perceptions of external intervention carry lasting consequences.”
Oshodi said the development shows a careful adjustment in Nigeria–US relations, but warned that trust must be maintained through consistency and respect for Nigeria’s leadership role in West Africa.
He said, “The question is not whether Nigeria should cooperate with partners, but how such cooperation is governed, limited, and aligned with our strategic interests.”
“Security partnerships must strengthen sovereignty and remain accountable to the citizens in whose name they operate. Under what conditions should external military cooperation be deemed necessary, and at what point does it undermine the stability it seeks to protect?”
