Connect with us

News

Killings, abductions soar after U.S. airstrikes as terrorists kill 183, abduct 366 in 27 days

Published

on

WHEN American warplanes struck suspected terrorist enclaves in Sokoto State on Christmas Day, December 25, 2025, the Federal Government welcomed the intervention, which it said has its imprimatur as a boost to its war against terror.

But less than four weeks after the foreign bombs landed, Nigeria has descended into a more complex nightmare.

From Kaduna to Zamfara, Niger to Sokoto, Borno to Plateau, etc, armed groups have unleashed a wave of killings and mass abductions that have arguably exposed a frightening reality: The strike did not end terror, it rearranged it.

Today, the world’s largest black nation is confronting not just Boko Haram, bandits or emerging groups like Lakurawa but also a dangerous fusion of terrorism and organised crime, spreading faster than her capacity to contain it.

Tellingly, the U.S strikes appear to have become a catalyst for domestic chaos.

The strike that shook Northern Nigeria

On December 25, U.S. forces launched rare airstrikes on alleged Islamic State-linked targets in Sokoto state, North-Western Nigeria.

Washington described the operation as a decisive blow against jihadist networks operating beyond the traditional Boko Haram theatre.

From the beginning, the operation raised troubling questions. Who exactly were the targets? How many terrorists or bandits were killed? Were civilians affected? Did the strike degrade terrorist capacity or provoke retaliation?

Official answers were scarce but events on the ground began to speak louder than statements.

Within 24 hours of the strike, armed attacks intensified across multiple states on a daily basis as if the terrorists are daring the U.S to launch more airstrikes.

From airstrikes to anarchy

The North-West, already Nigeria’s most volatile region, became the epicentre of renewed bloodshed. States in North-Central and North-East zones were not spared as well.

Between December 26, 2025 and January 21, 2026, villages were raided in Kaduna, Katsina, Zamfara, Sokoto and Niger states.

Dozens were killed in coordinated attacks on rural communities, and hundreds were abducted in mass kidnapping operations.

Kaduna emerged as ground zero

In one of the most shocking incidents, armed gangs stormed three churches during worship on January 18 and abducted 177 worshippers in a single operation. And on January 21, five soldiers were killed and scores were injured when a Boko Haram suicide bomber rammed into a military convoy in Timbuktu Triangle in Borno State.

See also  See why Wole Soyinka snubbed US Embassy’s summons

Security analysts believe bandits exploited the post-strike confusion to expand operations, seize territory and increase ransom revenue.

“The strike disrupted some jihadist cells, but it also created a power vacuum,” a security source told Saturday Vanguard.

“Bandits moved quickly to fill that space.”

Boko Haram, ISWAP refuse to retreat in N-East

Contrary to expectations, jihadist groups in the North-East did not retreat after the U.S. intervention. Instead attacks on military positions continued, rural communities remained under threat, and insurgents maintained mobility across Borno and neighbouring states. As it panned out, foreign bombs did not dismantle local insurgency. Rather, Boko Haram and its splinter factions adapted as they have done for over a decade.

Rise of Lakurawa in Sokoto

Perhaps, the most disturbing development since December 25 is the expansion of Lakurawa, an emerging armed group operating along Nigeria’s north-western border.

Unlike traditional bandits driven purely by profit, Lakurawa combines ideology with criminality.

It imposes taxes on communities, recruits local youths, launches coordinated raids, and establishes territorial influence. Security officials fear that Lakurawa represents a bridge between Sahelian jihadist networks and Nigeria’s bandit economy. If unchecked, it could transform the North-West into a new insurgency theatre similar to the North-East.

The shocking numbers

Although official statistics remain fragmented, data compiled from security reports, humanitarian organisations and media reports reveal a grim picture: Between December 25, 2025 and January 21, 2026, no fewer than 183 people have been killed and 366 people were abducted.

The worst-hit states are Kaduna, Niger, Zamfara, Katsina, Sokoto, Borno and Plateau. These figures are conservative because

many rural attacks go unreported or under-reported. Some accounts are denied or suppressed by the authorities like the latest Kaduna abductions.

In some communities, survivors bury their dead in silence.

Before U.S. airstrikes

Before foreign bombs landed Nigeria has been a killing field for over two decades with the situation assuming a dangerous dimension since 2014.

According to the National Bureau of Statistics, NBS, 614,937 people were killed between May 2023 and April 2024 and 2,236,954 people were kidnapped within the period Nigeria.

Although, kidnapping incidents reportedly decreased by 16.3 per cent in 2024, the terrorists upped their deadly game in 2025 as no fewer than an estimated 6,800 deaths were recorded in the first half of 2025
Specifically, April 2025 witnessed 570 deaths and 278 abductions, and in August 2025, there were 545 violent incidents, 732 deaths and 435 abductions.

See also  Why we will resist our ancestral home renaming — Lagos community

Timeline of violence after U.S. strikes

A day after the U.S. airstrikes, armed militia on December 26, attacked Bokkos/ Barking Ladies in Plateau State and killed 16 persons.

On the same day, bandits attacked rural communities in Nigeria State, murdered persons and kidnapped 12.

On December 27, bandits attacked communities in Anka LGA, killed five persons and abducted 20.

December 28: Three persons were killed and 15 kidnapped by bandits I Giwa LGA, Kaduna State

December 29: Boko Haram/ISWAP terrorists killed four persons in Gwoza, Borno State.

December 30: Bandits killed two person and abducted 10 at Faskari LGA, Katsina.

December 31: Lakurawa terrorists killed six persons at Tangaza LGA, Sokoto State

January 1: Bandits attacked a market village in Niger State, killed 30 persons and kidnapped 15

January 2: One died and eight were kidnapped by bandits at Chukun LGA, Kaduna State.

January 3: Bandits killed seven persons at Maru LGA, Zamfara State.

January 4: Bandits raided a village in Niger State, killed 30 and kidnapped many people estimated at 40

January 5: Boko Haram killed three persons in Maiduguri, Borno State.

January 6: Bandits attacked rural communities in Kaduna killed two persons and kidnapped 24.

January 7: Bandits killed four persons and abducted nine at Kankara LGA, Katsina State.

January 8: Six persons lost their lives to Bandits’ onslaught at Tsafe LGA, Zamfara State

January 9: Lakurawa attacks left 10 persons dead at Gwadabawa LGA, Sokoto State.

January 10: Five persons were killed and 18 kidnapped by bandits at Shiroro LGA, Niger State.

January 11: Bandits killed three persons and abducted 12 at Birnin Gwari, Kaduna State.

January 12: ISWAP attack left six dead at Marte LGA, Borno State.

January 13: Bandits ginned down two and abducted seven at Danmusa LGA, Katsina State.

January 14: Armed militia killed killed nine persons at Mangu LGA, Plateau State.

January 15: Bandits killed two and abducted six at Kagarko LGA, Kaduna State

January 17&18: Bandits attacked three churches in Kajuru LGA, Kaduna State and abducted 177 worshippers. In a follow-up raid three persons died and 10 were kidnapped.

See also  May Day: Akpabio promises workers living wage

January 19: Bandits attacked a community in Rafi LGA, Niger State killed four and kidnapped nine

January 21: Five soldiers were killed and scores were injured when a Boko Haram suicide bomber rammed into a military convoy in Timbuktu Triangle in Borno State.

War without frontlines

Currently, Nigeria’s security crisis has mutated into something more complex than the Boko Haram insurgency of the 2010s. The conflict has morphed into three overlapping layers:

•Terrorists

Boko Haram, ISWAP and jihadist networks pursuing ideological goals.

•Bandits

Criminal gangs driven by ransom, arms trafficking and territorial control.

•Hybrid Groups

Emerging actors like Lakurawa, blending ideology with organised crime. The result is a multi-front war without clear battle lines. Bombing one group often strengthens another.

A senior military officer admitted in confidence: “We are fighting shadows. When you hit one camp, three new groups emerge elsewhere.”

Kidnapping as an Industry

Perhaps, the most dangerous trend since December 25 is the industrialisation of kidnapping. Bandits now operate like corporations: Intelligence units identify targets; Strike teams execute abductions.

Negotiators handle ransom talks; Logistics networks transport victims across forests; and Ransom payments fund weapons, recruit fighters and sustain criminal economies.

The end result: Nigeria has become one of the world’s leading kidnapping hotspots leading observers to wonder if the U.S. strike was not a mistake

Opinions among experts are divided.

While some argue that the strike was necessary to curb transnational jihadist expansion, others warn that it exposed Nigeria to the risks of becoming a new battlefield in global counterterrorism wars.

Clearly, the strike may have weakened specific militant cells but it also accelerated the fragmentation of armed groups, making Nigeria’s conflict more diffuse and harder to defeat.

Dangerous crossroads

Beyond the bombs and bullets lies a deeper crisis. Nigeria’s insecurity is fuelled by weak state presence in rural areas, unemployment and poverty, ethnic/religious tensions, land disputes, porous borders, arms proliferation, corruption and governance deficits.

Until these structural drivers are addressed, military victories may remain temporary and pyrrhic, and the country risks sliding into a prolonged era of decentralised violence, where bandits, terrorists and militias compete for territory, influence and blood.

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

FBI Submits Tinubu’s Records To US Judge

Published

on

The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has submitted records relating to President Bola Tinubu’s 1993 drug-trafficking and money-laundering case directly to a federal judge in Washington, D.C., court documents have shown.

According to Peoples Gazette, the materials were delivered to Judge Beryl Howell of the US District Court for the District of Columbia under seal, meaning they are currently accessible only to the court as it considers whether to make the records public.

The submission followed a prolonged legal battle over a Freedom of Information Act request filed by American transparency campaigner Aaron Greenspan, who has been seeking access to Tinubu’s records from the FBI.

Court filings indicated that the bureau delivered the documents on Friday, August 28, after Howell ordered it to explain its continued refusal to release the records.

The documents were submitted without notifying Greenspan of their contents.

According to the filing, the records were “hand delivered to the Court on August 28, 2026 in compliance with this Court’s Minute Order dated August 20, 2026.”

Greenspan had originally sought the records through a FOIA application submitted in 2023. He worked with Nigerian journalist David Hundeyin in pursuing the request.

The case later became a dispute over how quickly the FBI was processing the request, with the agency repeatedly asking for more time.

Howell reportedly gave the FBI several opportunities to explain why it was withholding the records but grew increasingly dissatisfied with the delays.

The judge eventually set August 28 as the deadline for the bureau to comply with her directive.

See also  11th NASS: Senate blocks ex-govs, Uzodimma from principal offices

The bureau had argued earlier that releasing the records could infringe on Tinubu’s privacy rights.

It also maintained that the Freedom of Information Act was primarily intended to promote transparency concerning government operations and records, rather than provide unrestricted access to information about private individuals.

The controversy surrounding the records dates back several years and is linked to allegations concerning Tinubu’s activities in the United States in the early 1990s.

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

Why My FBI, DEA Records Should Remain Secret – Tinubu Tells US Court

Published

on

President Bola Tinubu has given the United States District Court for the District of Columbia four reasons why his records with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) should not be released.

It was reports that the president gave his reasons in filings by his lawyers, Christopher Carmichael, Victor Henderson and Oluwole Afolabi.

He argued that the US Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Privacy Act precluded disclosure and there was no public interest in the matter.

Tinubu also said there was no public interest to balance and the plaintiff had ulterior motives for demanding documents with his name on them.

The President’s submission was in response to a request by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan, which sought disclosure of the records under the US Freedom of Information Act.

Greenspan had argued that his requests concerned the “sitting President of Nigeria…” and “a nation of over 230 million people whose daily lives are directly affected by President Tinubu’s decisions”.

Tinubu, according to filings by his lawyer, urged the US District Court to reject the bid because it amounted to an attempt to obtain private information for political purposes in Nigeria.

The President’s lawyers noted that the request sought access to information about government activities.

They specifically rejected the argument that Nigerians’ interest in Tinubu’s background constituted a public interest recognised by US law.

The team also rejected an argument on the President’s fitness for office, stating that “the asserted ‘public interest in Tinubu’s own fitness for office’ is not an interest FOIA recognises or one that needs to be balanced.”

See also  Tight security in Ondo ahead of Shettima’s visit

The lawyers further argued that the records sought were protected by privacy provisions under FOIA and the US Privacy Act.

“The redacted information sought by the plaintiff is exempt from disclosure,” they stated, citing Exemption 7(C), which protects personal information contained in law-enforcement records.

The President’s legal team relied on a 1989 US Supreme Court decision, Department of Justice v Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, to argue that FOIA was designed to allow the public to know “what the government is up to” rather than provide access to information about private citizens.

They argued that Greenspan was seeking “disclosure of information about private citizens that is accumulated in various governmental files,” which, they said, “reveals little or nothing about an agency’s own conduct.”

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

Tinubu’s FBI Records: ADC, NDC Demand Release, Say Nigerians Deserve Truth

Published

on

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s records with United States law enforcement agencies has taken another turn with opposition parties demanding that the documents be made public.

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) and the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) have questioned the President’s decision to oppose the release of the records, insisting that Nigerians deserve to know the truth about his past.

Naija News reports that the fresh controversy comes as details of submissions made by Tinubu’s lawyers before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia emerged.

In the filings, the President’s legal team, led by Christopher Carmichael, Victor Henderson and Oluwole Afolabi, gave reasons why his unredacted records with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) should not be released to the public.

Tinubu’s lawyers argued that the records were protected under the US Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act.

The legal team maintained that the information being sought contained private details from law enforcement files and therefore fell under provisions that exempt such records from public disclosure.

The lawyers also argued that there was no recognized public interest under US law strong enough to justify releasing the records.

According to them, the argument that Nigerians have an interest in knowing about Tinubu’s background does not amount to the kind of public interest recognized under the Freedom of Information Act.

They further rejected the argument that the documents could be necessary to determine the President’s fitness for public office, saying such an interest was not one that the US law was designed to address.

See also  Ogun Amotekun unveils CCTV control room to fight crime

Tinubu’s legal team also questioned the motive behind the request, arguing that the documents were being sought largely for political purposes in Nigeria.

The lawyers said the filings by the American transparency activist, Aaron Greenspan, showed that his main interest was obtaining government documents bearing Tinubu’s name.

They urged the court not to allow the FOIA process to be used as a means of accessing private information about an individual simply because he is the President of Nigeria.

The legal team also dismissed suggestions that the records could expose a secret prosecution or an agreement by US authorities not to prosecute Tinubu, describing such claims as speculative and unsupported by evidence.

The lawyers further argued that the fact that some information about Tinubu’s past had previously entered the public domain did not automatically remove his right to privacy over other details contained in government files.

The President Should Come Out Clean – ADC

Reacting to the development, ADC spokesperson, Bolaji Abdullahi, described the President’s opposition to the release of the records as suspicious.

Abdullahi, who spoke with a correspondent on Saturday, said Tinubu should allow the records to be released if he wanted to put the controversy surrounding his past to rest.

“Why is the President opposing the release of his past records? That is suspicious. The President should allow them (records) to be released to clear himself.

“The President should come out clean. He should be the one calling for the records to be released if he has nothing to hide because this is not good for him and the image of the country,” he said.

See also  See why Wole Soyinka snubbed US Embassy’s summons

Nigerians Deserve To Know – Says NDC

The National Publicity Secretary of the NDC, Osa Director, also called on the President to allow the records to be made public.

Speaking with The PUNCH on Saturday, Director rejected the argument that the request for Tinubu’s records was simply a political move by the opposition.

According to him, the President should use the opportunity to clear the air over an issue that has remained in the public domain for more than two decades.

“When a man commits an offence and he says, please, don’t blame me because it is the devil, does that mean he should not face the consequence of his action because it is the devil? That is the question the President should answer.

“Whether it is the opposition or not, if the issue wasn’t there, the opposition would not capitalise on it. Why did the opposition not ask the FBI to release records on our presidential candidate, Peter Obi, or Atiku? That is not an excuse,” Director said.

He argued that the controversy would continue to resurface as long as the matter remained unresolved.

“Nigerians deserve to know and in the interest of the President. He deserves to clear the air. This case has been hanging on since his time as a governor. It is over 20 years.

“Even me, as an opposition, am getting bored. It is time, once and for all, that he should clear the air to allow the issue to be buried,” he added.

Naija News reports that the controversy over Tinubu’s US records dates back several years and became a major political issue during the build-up to the 2023 presidential election.

See also  Tight security in Ondo ahead of Shettima’s visit

At the centre of the matter are records relating to a 1993 US civil forfeiture proceeding involving $460,000 held in an account linked to Tinubu.

US authorities had alleged that the funds represented proceeds of narcotics trafficking or were connected to prohibited financial transactions.

Meanwhile, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) had maintained during the presidential election litigation that the case was a civil forfeiture proceeding and did not amount to a criminal conviction.

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending