New Delhi: On December 25, 2025, the United States military executed a targeted airstrike against Islamic State (ISIS) militants in Sokoto State, Nigeria, following an official request from the Nigerian government. The operation marks a significant escalation in U.S. counterterrorism efforts in West Africa and raises legal and diplomatic considerations for both nations.
Strategic Operation in Sokoto
According to a press release issued by the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), the strike was carried out at approximately 10:26 p.m. local time in Jabo, a rural community within Tambuwal Local Government Area of Sokoto State. The operation was authorized by Donald Trump and coordinated with Nigerian security authorities.
AFRICOM confirmed that the strike targeted ISIS camps and resulted in the deaths of multiple militants. The U.S. Department of Defense stated that the mission was executed using precision-guided munitions launched from unmanned aerial vehicles. Intelligence reports had identified the presence of ISIS-affiliated fighters in the region, allegedly involved in attacks against Christian communities. The Nigerian government formally requested U.S. assistance following a series of violent incidents attributed to the group.
This marks the first confirmed U.S. military strike in Nigeria under the Trump administration. The operation follows months of diplomatic engagement and intelligence sharing between Washington and Abuja. A now-deleted post from AFRICOM on the social media platform X had earlier acknowledged Nigeria’s request for intervention, further corroborating the coordinated nature of the strike.
The legality of the operation hinges on several international and domestic legal principles. Under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, a nation may request assistance from another state to defend against armed threats. Nigeria’s formal request for U.S. military support satisfies this criterion, rendering the operation lawful under international law.
Domestically, the U.S. President is empowered under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) to target terrorist groups linked to al-Qaeda and its affiliates. While ISIS is not explicitly named in the original AUMF, successive administrations have interpreted the mandate to include ISIS operations globally. Legal scholars note that the strike in Nigeria falls within this expanded interpretation, though it may invite scrutiny from Congress regarding oversight and transparency.
In Nigeria, the Constitution permits the President to invite foreign assistance in matters of national security. The Nigerian Ministry of Defence confirmed that the request was made through official diplomatic channels and that Nigerian forces were briefed ahead of the operation. Security forces in Sokoto were placed on high alert following the strike, and local authorities have initiated post-strike assessments to ensure civilian safety.
Regional Implications and Security Response
The strike has prompted increased military activity across northwest Nigeria. Nigerian Armed Forces have reportedly intensified surveillance and ground operations in Sokoto and neighboring states to prevent retaliatory attacks. A senior military source told BusinessDay Nigeria that the airstrike was part of a broader strategy to dismantle ISIS infrastructure in the region.
Human rights observers have called for transparency in casualty reporting and urged both governments to ensure that civilian populations are protected. As of December 26, no civilian casualties have been reported, and AFRICOM maintains that the strike was conducted with strict adherence to the Law of Armed Conflict.
President Trump, in remarks made earlier in October, had warned of an “existential threat” to Christianity in Nigeria and suggested potential U.S. intervention if Nigerian authorities failed to curb violence against religious minorities. The December 25 strike appears to be a direct response to those concerns, though Nigerian officials have not publicly endorsed the characterization of the conflict as religiously motivated.
The Nigerian government has reiterated its commitment to combating terrorism while maintaining national sovereignty. In a statement released on December 26, the Ministry of Information emphasized that the strike was a “joint effort to neutralize a clear and present threat” and affirmed that further cooperation with international partners would be guided by constitutional and diplomatic protocols.
