Opinion

By Abdulhamid Abdullahi Aliyu

When most people hear the phrase “Artificial Intelligence” (AI), their minds often drift toward futuristic fantasies: robots that think like humans, machines plotting to overthrow their creators, or computers smarter than their inventors. Science fiction has fed us these images for decades. Yet, beyond Hollywood thrillers, AI is already here, quietly shaping the world around us. It answers customer queries through chatbots, selects the next movie you’ll watch on Netflix, predicts what story appears at the top of your newsfeed, and even decides whether a bank approves your loan.

But this growing presence of AI in our daily lives forces us to confront a pressing question: how intelligent is artificial intelligence?

The honest answer is that AI is not a brain. It is not some mystical creation that understands, feels, or reasons like humans do. What appears to be “thinking” in AI is essentially mathematics—machines processing massive datasets, detecting patterns, and making predictions based on those patterns. Take medicine, for instance. AI can analyse thousands of X-rays or MRI scans in minutes, flagging possible signs of disease with astonishing speed. Yet, it does not comprehend illness, nor does it share in the burden of delivering a life-changing diagnosis. It only “sees” shapes, signals, and recurring features in data.

This distinction raises a critical debate: Is AI genuinely intelligent, or is it just an extraordinary mimic?

Human intelligence is not simply about solving problems or recalling information. It is a rich blend of memory, imagination, intuition, creativity, and moral reasoning. It includes the ability to feel empathy, wrestle with ethical dilemmas, or create art that expresses the soul. AI has none of these. It has no emotions, no conscience, no instinct for right and wrong. When it generates a song, writes an essay, or navigates a self-driving car, it is not exercising creativity or judgment. It is reproducing patterns learned from the data it has been trained on.

Yet, to dismiss AI as a hollow imitation would be unfair. Its capabilities, in specific domains, far exceed human performance. Banks now rely heavily on AI systems to monitor millions of transactions, detecting fraud almost instantly —a feat that no team of human auditors could achieve at the same scale. In agriculture, AI-driven weather forecasts and soil sensors enable farmers to predict rainfall, manage crops effectively, and enhance food security. In education, adaptive learning platforms can tailor lessons to meet each student’s unique learning style, giving teachers powerful tools to reach struggling learners. These are not gimmicks; they are reshaping how we live, work, and think.

Still, with such benefits come significant dangers. The real problem arises when society overestimates AI’s intelligence, attributing to it a wisdom it does not possess. Algorithms are only as good as the data they consume, and data is often flawed. Recruitment systems trained on biased records have been caught replicating discrimination, silently excluding qualified women or minorities. Predictive policing tools fed with skewed crime statistics risk unfairly targeting entire communities, reinforcing cycles of distrust and marginalisation.

Even more worrying is the human temptation to outsource too much decision-making to machines. When schools, governments, or businesses heavily rely on AI, they risk eroding human capacity for critical thinking. Societies that allow machines to make moral or civic decisions run the risk of dulling their own judgment, a peril that no amount of computing power can rectify.

This is why interrogating the “intelligence” of AI is not just an academic exercise; it is a civic responsibility. Policymakers must move beyond lip service and regulate how AI is designed and deployed, ensuring that it serves the public good rather than private profit alone. Technology companies must become more transparent about how their algorithms operate, particularly when these systems impact jobs, justice, and access to essential services. Citizens, too, have a role to play. Digital literacy must become as fundamental as reading and writing, empowering people to understand what AI can and, crucially, what it cannot do.

Ultimately, the irony of AI is this: the real intelligence lies not inside the machine but in the humans who create, guide, and govern it. AI can calculate faster than any brain, but it cannot care about the consequences of those calculations. It can analyse data at lightning speed, but it cannot empathise with the human beings behind the numbers. That is the dividing line between computation and compassion, between efficiency and wisdom.

If we maintain this distinction, AI will remain a powerful tool that amplifies human potential, rather than one that diminishes it. The smartest move is to resist the illusion that machines are thinking entities and instead recognise them for what they are: products of human ingenuity, useful only to the extent that we wield them responsibly.

Ultimately, the future of AI will not be dictated by algorithms, but by people. The question is not whether AI can become truly intelligent; it cannot. The real question is whether humans will remain wise enough to use it well.

Abdulhamid Abdullahi Aliyu writes on disaster management, humanitarian response, and national development.

By Abdussamad Umar Jibia 

Finally, you are there. Your “brother” from America has spoken. He is coming to “your disgraced country” to wipe out your enemy, an enemy who has lived above your pettiness. This enemy does not give attention to your blackmail, an enemy in whose presence you always feel inferior. That enemy is I, the Muslim Northerner. Out of your inferiority complex, you have given me different names, the most widely used of which is Hausa-Fulani.

I am Hausa-Fulani, even if I am Kanuri, who can speak no single word of Hausa or Fulfulde. I am Hausa-Fulani even if I was born to one of the minority tribes of Gombe, Bauchi, Kogi or, in fact, a Birom. To qualify as a Hausa-Fulani, I require only to be a non-Yoruba, non-Igbo Northerner who prays five times a day. 

At last, I have caught the attention of your big brother, who has never been to Nigeria, a person who has no respect for a black man like you and me. All you are now waiting for are his bombs and rifles to make you greater than the Hausa-Fulani, to make your presence arouse hate and fear in others, just like you feel when I am around. Congratulations. 

Your hatred towards me has a history which cannot be ignored. You and I have lived side by side for centuries. This is where our creator has decided to place us, just like He placed the Chinese in China, the Indians in India, the Arabs in Arabia, etc.

Living together always generates experiences, sweet and bitter. You have always emphasised the bitter experiences of living with me as the reason for disliking me. For example, you believe that before the coming of the British, you were oppressed by me through my emirs, who carried regular raids on your villages to catch slaves; slaves they sold to Arabs and your newfound brothers in Europe and America.

When the British came as colonisers, they no longer needed slaves. So, even though they ruled you through my emir, they banned slavery the way it was done at that time. However, because they sensed no wisdom in you, they taught you that the worship of one God, as done by your neighbour, was wrong. They taught you about three gods that can be considered as one. Depending on who taught you Christianity, you believe that these three gods (or parts of God) are the Son, the Father and the Holy Ghost or the Son, the Father and the holy ghost. Even if it didn’t make sense, it was handy. At least, you now had a religion just like the Hausa-Fulani had one. 

This raises one question. Are you a Christian because you genuinely believe in Christianity, or are you in Christianity because you want to compete with me? Actions are said to speak louder than words. Your later actions would answer this question.

For example, even before Europeans arrived in this part of the world, we travelled to Makkah, now located in Saudi Arabia, for the annual pilgrimage. To date, we have saved our money to go on Hajj without waiting for the Government. Even without Government agencies, we would continue to go on Hajj on our own because it is an article of our faith. Don’t worry, I know how your mind is working. You would be happy if your American brother would bomb the place we go to annually. To your chagrin, that wouldn’t change anything. We shall still perform hajj even if the Kaába is demolished. Islam has provided for that possibility.

Unfortunately, Christians do not have an organised system of worship that provides for an annual pilgrimage. Out of ignorance, you thought Israelis are your brothers because their grandfather is mentioned in the Bible. You thus put pressure on the Government to create diplomatic ties with Israel so that you can go there for pilgrimage, just like Muslims go to Saudi Arabia. So, you annually come back to tell stories about Israel just like Muslim pilgrims share their experiences in Saudi Arabia.

One thing you have forgotten is that Israelis do not even believe in Christianity. As far as they are concerned, Jesus Christ is an illegitimate child of an adulterous woman, and Christians are idol worshippers. Yet, you still believe that Israelis are better than you because they are the “God-Chosen”. I don’t even know which god chose them. Is it the God they claim to have killed, or is it another God? In any case, you need a solution to your slave mentality. 

You are very unlucky to be a tiny minority; otherwise, I would have been cleansed long ago. Your record of violence against Muslims in the few areas you control is well established. In some cases, like Tafawa Balewa, Zangon Kataf and Saminaka, you wiped off/displaced entire Muslim communities. In many other cases, you killed as many as you could by intercepting Muslim travellers, attacking them during prayers, etc., as you did many times in Plateau state.

You were enjoying your violence and playing the victim with the support of the Christian press when the Fulani herders conundrum began. The word “herdsmen” is a misnomer used to avoid ethnic profiling. The correct words are criminals, armed robbers, or bandits. These groups of people have no respect for human lives and property. The least they do is to drive their cattle into farms to devour crops, and when farmers react, they fight them without mercy.

In the extreme, they attack a village, hamlet or innocent travellers and kill, rape, maim, steal and/or kidnap for ransom. Thank goodness, the ‘’herdsmen’’ kept you in check as they always return whatever fire you release with multiples of it. Both of you are criminals, but they are more vicious and sophisticated. This is even as it is in record that your youth allegedly received training in Israel to fight Muslims.

In any case, you would agree with me that I have suffered from banditry more than you did. The whole thing began in Zamfara and spread to Katsina, Sokoto, Niger and Kaduna before it reached Plateau and Southern Kaduna. Yet, you go about lying that your fellow criminals are Muslims carrying out genocide against Christians. Your shamelessness is awful.

Once more, accept my congratulations. Your lies have paid. You may, however, be disappointed to know that Americans have never solved any problem. Whichever country they enter, they would be worse off after leaving it, except in Afghanistan, where they were shamed out. Should they come in here, we are determined to resist and drive them out like they were driven out of Afghanistan. We shall die honourably or triumph with grace, in sha Allah. For us, submission to the enemy is not an option.

Finally, let me note that there are many exceptions to the above. I have respect for peace-loving Christians from the North, and there are many of them.

Abdussamad Umar Jibia wrote from Kano, Nigeria, via aujibia@gmail.com.

By Muḥammad San

I have read the PhD thesis of the Emir of Kano, and just like in his Gamji days, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi (now Muhammadu Sanusi II) remains forthright in expression and uncompromising in his quest to balance Shari’a.

Some may dismiss contributions like mine as disturbing or argue that we are too little academically to weigh in on the Shari’a debate. But this is a debate that dominated Nigeria at the turn of the millennium, and Sanusi himself was at its centre. Having read his papers, watched his TED talk, and reviewed the recent compendium of his essays, I can say I have at least a fair understanding of his intellectual outlook.

Sanusi has always been controversial. His now-famous remark that a wife should slap back or retaliate against an abusive husband is a good example. That boldness, perhaps, was the same energy that pushed him to the University of London to produce a doctoral thesis on Islamic family law, using Morocco and Kano as his comparative space.

The Emir is an ardent advocate of girl-child education, but this passion seems to have narrowed his focus, leaving him blind to the ordeals of men under the same system. While women’s marginalisation has been widely documented, men, too, are now facing a new wave of vulnerabilities. The cases are there for anyone who cares to look.

The infamous Maryam Sanda case, in which a woman brutally murdered her husband, remains etched in public memory, yet the debate around it was clouded by sympathy. In 2021, a young wife in Kano was convicted of poisoning her husband after repeated disputes. In 2022, another woman fatally stabbed her husband during a quarrel over financial neglect. These are not isolated events. They highlight the rise of what can be called “feminine defence,” but they also expose the growing fragility of men trapped in broken family systems.

Sanusi himself points to Morocco as a model. “What did they do in Morocco? They built schools and invested in transportation so that girls could be moved from villages to the nearest schools. They also invested in school feeding and provided financial support to the poorest families ready to send their sons and daughters to schools,” he said in an interview with Time Africa Magazine. Yet the contrast is sharp. In Kano, the state government spends millions on lavish emirate ceremonies, while journalists like Dan Bello continue to expose the dire state of public schools in the very heart of the metropolis.

To be fair, Sanusi’s thesis tackled the historical marginalisation of women in Islamic family law with rigour and depth. But in amplifying women’s rights, it failed to defend men or acknowledge their growing vulnerabilities in a rapidly changing society. By leaning heavily on the Moroccan Moudawana, itself a product of feminist activism, the work framed men only as a dominant class to be restrained. Missing were the struggles many men face: unemployment, the crushing demands of polygamy, and the relentless pressure to perform as patriarchs without resources.

This omission is striking. In Kano today, the rise of wives killing their husbands is not just a crime. It is a signal of imbalance in the family system, a warning that reform is incomplete. Without addressing male fragility alongside female empowerment, Shari’a reform risks becoming a zero-sum game. Sanusi’s thesis suggests that empowering women alone can resolve family crises. But true reform, as Shari’a itself demands, must be a balanced restructuring that preserves the dignity and well-being of both men and women.

Muḥammad Sani is a freelance and public policy writer from Zaria. Can be reached via muhdusman1999@gmail.com.

By Zayyad I. Muhammad 

1. Immediate Actions: Dispatch a high-level delegation to Washington: President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu should immediately send a high-powered delegation composed of respected Nigerian statesmen, business leaders, and senior government officials to engage with U.S. authorities.

The team should include former President Olusegun Obasanjo, former Head of State General Abdulsalami Abubakar, Chief Bola Ajibola, business mogul Aliko Dangote, Rev. Hassan Matthew Kukah, and the President of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Most Rev. Dr Daniel Okoh, His Eminence Sultan of Sokoto, representatives of Religious groups, NGO, etc.

From the government side, the delegation should include the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, and the Governors of Benue,  Plateau, Niger, Katsina, Kaduna, Zamfara, Borno, Yobe and Adamawa States, given the security relevance of their regions.

2. Re-engage the U.S. Mission in Nigeria: The Presidency should task the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other well-placed Nigerians with deepening communication with the U.S. Mission in Abuja and the Consulate in Lagos to strengthen diplomatic rapport, address misperceptions, and align mutual strategic interests.

3. Reach out to U.S. allies and partners: Nigeria should actively engage with other influential U.S. allies across Europe, the Middle East, and Asia to rally broader international support for Nigeria’s security and development agenda.

3. Seek U.S. assistance in defence cooperation: President Tinubu should formally request more support from the Donald J. Trump administration in providing modern weapons, intelligence-sharing technology, and counter-insurgency training to bolster Nigeria’s fight against terrorism and violent extremism.

4. Immediate appointment of ambassadors: Nigeria’s diplomatic missions have remained without substantive ambassadors for too long. Swift appointments of competent, credible, and globally respected diplomats will help restore Nigeria’s voice and visibility on the international stage.

5. The Minister Yusuf Tuggar should be reassigned to another portfolio, and a new Minister of Foreign Affairs, preferably one with strong international connections and more diplomatic weight, should be appointed. This will send a clear signal that Nigeria is repositioning its foreign policy and engagement strategy.

6. Launch a global public relations drive: Nigeria must embark on a robust, well-coordinated international PR campaign to reshape global perception. This should highlight the Tinubu administration’s economic reforms, anti-corruption measures, and counter-terrorism efforts, while showcasing Nigeria as a stable, investment-friendly democracy that protects all faiths and ethnicities

7. On the Security and Communication Front: The office of the National Security Adviser and the high military command are doing well; thus, to further boost the effort, they should further re-align the war against insurgency and banditry. The battle against bandits, terrorists, and other insurgent groups must be comprehensively restructured. This includes better coordination among the armed forces, improved intelligence gathering, community-based security initiatives, and enhanced welfare for frontline troops. A unified national security strategy will yield faster and more sustainable results.

8. Strengthen media visibility of Nigeria’s counter-terrorism efforts: Nigeria’s efforts in the fight against terror are often underreported or misrepresented internationally. There should be massive, transparent media coverage, both traditional and digital, to showcase the government’s ongoing efforts, victories, and human stories of resilience. This will help counter misinformation, boost public morale, and attract global understanding and support.

Zayyad I. Muhammad writes from Abuja via zaymohd@yahoo.com.

By Malam Ibrahym El-Caleel

Foreign invaders such as the US, NATO and Russia strike capital cities first, basically to break command and control. This creates a leadership crisis in the country, and this is how armed militia from different parts of the country begin to get stronger. The country’s borders become porous, everything passes through. This effectively means you’d have a full scale war and an insurgency going on. Even after the war when the foreign invader leaves, your insurgency will be there staring into your eyes. Go and take learnings from Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Well, after attacking the nation’s capital, the next thing foreign invaders do is to begin working on their supposed objectives of invading. God forbid they invade Nigeria, but after Abuja, they will be heading to the purported sites of “Christian genocide” to begin the work of “saving Christians”. It is not Kano, or Jigawa or Gombe. It is North-Central, especially states like Plateau and Benue, then perhaps Southern Kaduna. These are the areas constantly flashed in the media, with a claim of Muslims in Nigeria killing Christians, when everyone knows what’s happening there!

Now, the attackers in these locations do not have designated addresses. They are bandits, killer herdsmen, kidnappers and whatnot. They are criminals who live in the bushes and always moving from one area to another. If the US will be able to clinically target them and annihilate them, then this is a very good one. Nigeria will be extremely grateful for this act of charity done from the American taxpayers’ money. Both Nigerian Muslims and Christians will be happy and grateful that the US came and annihilated these bloodthirsty beasts with clinical precision.

However, based on clear antecedents, foreign invaders don’t do this type of job free and with clinical precision. It costs a nation so much to launch an invasion, therefore nobody goes to war “free”. Secondly, interventions like this always come with collateral damage. The undisclosed costs and the collateral damage is what every Nigerian with a functional brain thinks about and shivers. Once you have a functional brain, this uncertainty is what makes you not want US presence on Nigerian soil, whether you are Muslim or Christian.

Now, back to the North-Central. The first collateral damage in Benue and Plateau States is most likely going to have more Christian victims themselves, than Muslim victims. The simple reason is because we all know that Christian population in these states is more than the Muslim population, and this is why both the governor and deputy governor in each of these states are Christian. As a Christian who is cheering Savior Trump, if you are sure that the US will be able to isolate Christian populations from the collateral damage in a densely Christian populated state, then you are good to go with your celebration.

On the flip side, the cost of the war is what I don’t understand. The US is known for fetching available mineral resources after striking nations. I do not know how they plan to tap into Nigeria’s resources because the most liquid resources are located in the South-South (Niger-Delta) region, which is far away from the sites of the so-called “Christian genocide”.

Already, a US politician and advisor of Donald Trump, named Dr Walid Phares posted earlier today that he is advising Donald Trump to establish an emergency base in Port Harcourt, in order to “deter Boko Haram and other jihadist” (his words). He posted this through his handle @WalidPhares on X (formerly, Twitter), see screenshot below.

I am not interested in the conspiracy theories since there must be a background story to the choice of Port Harcourt as a military base. Port Harcourt is considered to be the commercial center of the Nigerian oil industry. It has vast reserves of oil and natural gas, and produces more than 50% of the Nigerian crude oil and gas. It is the chosen location for establishing the US base, and from there will Trump be launching attacks on Boko Haram and other jihadists that are killing Christians.

Trump shouldn’t have much business to do with the South West, except for access to the sea. For South East, may be with Gov Soludo’s recent remarks that Christians are killing Christians in Anambra, Trump might want to go and help out there too. Otherwise, the South East should be okay too. But I looked across the core Muslim North, and I am afraid it might not really be attractive to Trump. There’s really nothing there to take back to Washington, except swathes of farmlands which Bello Turji and his brothers in terror haven’t allowed innocent Muslim farmers access to cultivate.

Additionally, I don’t see any serious Nigerian economy structure that would interest Trump. If he’s coming to the core Muslim North, then it’d be the usual false flag operation as the US did in Iraq. It’d be a cover up to the war crimes it’d commit and the oil benefits it’d get through its Port Harcourt military base. For the gold mines in Zamfara, Sokoto, Kaduna and co, the villagers in those locations have already flew away since the bandits intensified their attacks on those villages. When Trump’s army arrives there, it’d be an engagement with the bandits, and that’s really a good one. The bandits should have a taste of their medicine.

Whenever I see a Nigerian cheering Trump’s arrival, I have to wonder if they’ve really thought it through. Muslims and Christians live side by side across our major cities; both faiths are present virtually everywhere. If a foreign intervention comes, nobody is guaranteed safety. The collateral damage will be real, and I fail to see what’s worth celebrating. And please rest assured, the political elite in Abuja would know in advance and would pack up and leave the country with their families. They would abandon you and the rest of us here with Trump. Maybe after 20 years of foreign involvement, as happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, some of us will finally get a little bit of sense.

By Saidu Ahmad Dukawa 

Introduction

At last, the President of the United States, Donald Trump, has made the decision he had long planned against Nigeria, following complaints by some Nigerian Christians who alleged that they were victims of religious persecution in the country.

Trump had once placed a similar sanction on Nigeria during his first term, but after he lost the election to Joe Biden, Biden reversed that “rash and unfair” decision.

This new ruling, however, requires Nigeria to take certain actions in line with America’s interests — or face a series of sanctions. For example, these “American interests” could include the following:

1. Any Nigerian state practising Sharia Law must abolish it.

2. Any law that prohibits blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) must be repealed.

3. Any location where Christians wish to build a church must grant them permission to do so.

4. Anything that Christians claim makes them “uncomfortable” in the country — such as businesses involving halal trade — must be stopped.

5. All businesses that Christians desire, such as the alcohol trade, must be freely allowed across the nation.

These are just examples of the complaints made by some Christian groups to the United States, which may also include political and economic demands.

This action by Trump mirrors what America once did to Iraq under Saddam Hussein — accusing the country of possessing weapons of mass destruction, just to justify an invasion.

If true justice were the goal, then both sides — the accusers and the Nigerian authorities — should have been listened to, including Muslim organisations that provided counter-evidence.

Even among Christians, many reasonable voices have spoken against these exaggerated claims, yet their words are ignored. Clearly, a plan against Nigeria had already been set in motion.

So, what is left for the Nigerian government and its citizens to do? Here is my opinion:

WHAT THE NIGERIAN GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO

1. Use diplomatic channels to inform the Trump administration that the situation is being misrepresented. Even if America remains adamant, the rest of the sensible world will know that any step America takes against Nigeria on this basis is pure injustice, and that knowledge itself will have benefits.

2. Reduce dependence on the United States in key areas such as trade, education, and healthcare. Nigeria should instead strengthen its ties with other countries, such as Russia, China, and Turkey.

3. Unite Nigerians — both Muslims and Christians who do not share this divisive mindset — to resist and expose any malicious plots against the nation.

WHAT THE NIGERIAN PEOPLE SHOULD DO

1. All Nigerians — Muslims and Christians alike — should begin to reduce their personal and travel ties with the United States, especially visa applications, as it may no longer be easy to obtain them.

2. Those who hold large amounts of US dollars should consider converting their funds into other global currencies.

3. Muslims with good relationships with Christians should not let this tension destroy their friendships — and vice versa. Let unity prevail.

4. Muslims must not lose hope or courage. They should realise that they have no powerful ally. Non-Muslims are the ones with global backing. The Jews can commit atrocities against Muslims, and America will support them. In India, Muslims are being killed — America is silent. In China, Muslims face persecution — America is silent.

In Nigeria, there is no single town where Muslims have chased out Christians, but in Tafawa Balewa, Christians expelled Muslims and took over the town. Terrorists who kill indiscriminately in Nigeria have taken more Muslim lives than Christian ones — yet Trump publicly declared that only Christian lives matter.

Still, Muslims can take comfort in one fact: Islam is spreading fast in both America and Europe. Perhaps, one day, when Islam gains ground there, justice and fairness will finally return to the world — because today’s problem is rooted in the injustice that Western powers built the world upon.

5. Nigerian Christians themselves need to wake up to the truth — that the Western world does not honestly care about Christianity, only about controlling resources and power.

If they really cared about Christian lives, they wouldn’t have ignored what’s happening in Congo — a country with one of the largest Christian populations — where Christians kill one another. The same goes for Haiti, South Sudan, the Central African Republic, and Rwanda.

There are numerous examples of Christian nations facing crises. And when Nigerian Christians think of running to the US for refuge, they will realise that America will not take them in. Therefore, it’s wiser to live peacefully with their Muslim brothers and sisters here in Nigeria.

6. Finally, it is the duty of all believers to constantly pray for Nigeria — that God protects it from every form of harm and evil.

Peace and blessings of Allah be upon you all.

Dr Saidu Ahmad Dukawa wrote from Bayero University, Kano (BUK).

By Aisha Musa Auyo

I preach kindness every now and then—kindness to a spouse, kids, parents, relatives, and others in our lives. But today, I want to dwell on the most crucial kindness… kindness to oneself.

This is a kindness that goes beyond this dunya (this world); a kindness that rewards you with the best of here and the hereafter. Being kind to oneself has many faces, but I’ll discuss the most important ones here:

Prioritising the Akhirah Over the Dunya

This world is merely a temporary place. Try as much as you can to resist the temptation of indulging in sins. Strive to stop any act that you would not love to die doing. Stop procrastinating regarding good deeds. We do not know when our lives will end; no one gives us notice. We owe ourselves this profound kindness: preparing for the inevitable.

The Investment of Sadaqah (Charity)

Giving out sadaqah, even if it’s merely half a date, expiates sins and prevents tragedy. We often spend a great deal on ourselves without calculation, yet when it comes to giving to others, we hold back and start calculating. What we forget is that whatever we give out is multiplied and comes back to us many times over. Whatever we spend only on ourselves ends here.

But you see, when we make other people’s lives easier, lessen their burden, or make them feel better, Allah multiplies that, and the reward is for both here and the hereafter. Whenever we spend on ourselves, let’s try to include those who are less privileged. We are not only helping others; we are being incredibly kind to ourselves beyond this dunya.

The Perpetual Reward of Sadaqah Jariyah (Ongoing Charity)

Let’s discuss Sadaqah Jariyah—a charity, in which the reward continues to reach you even after your death. We can achieve this through various means, such as investing in raising pious children, teaching the Quran, performing good deeds, drilling a source of water, contributing to an Islamic school or any other worthy cause, even if we can’t afford to sponsor it entirely, planting trees, etc.

We benefit more from this benevolence than the people it was intended for. We truly owe it to ourselves to show this type of kindness.

Cultivating Great Relationships

Cultivating good relationships with others, elevating their mood and ranks, making them feel great about themselves, and improving the quality of their lives are powerful ways we can be kind to ourselves. These are the investments that make people miss us and sincerely pray for us after we are gone. We owe this kindness to ourselves—being able to invoke the feeling of longing, missing, and praying for us when we are no longer here.

Sustaining Spiritual Well-being; keeping our mouth moist with Zikr (remembrance of Allah), Istighfar (seeking forgiveness), and Salawat (blessings upon the Prophet); reading the Quran; and constantly upgrading our knowledge and practice of our Deen (religion) is a kindness to ourselves that we should never compromise.

Integrity and Truthfulness

Saying the truth, having integrity and decency, minding one’s business, and having a halal (lawful) source of income is a profound kindness we owe ourselves, for this will be a shield from the Hellfire.

Simple, multiplied deeds

You see, a simple gesture—smiling at strangers, a kind word, an encouraging nod, removing a harmful object from the road, helping or feeding animals, or watering a plant—will go a long way in benefiting us here and hereafter. Angels are praying to Allah that whoever gives out, may Allah increase his wealth, and whoever withholds his wealth, may Allah withhold His blessings from him. So we should never forget that whatever we do, small or big, we shall receive it in multiples.

Being Intentional

One crucial thing I’d like to remind us here is to be intentional about everything we do. Let’s always ensure that our deeds and actions, big or small, are motivated by the reward of our Creator. Let every action or inaction emanate from the craving for Allah’s Rahma (Mercy) and the fear of His punishment. This, indeed, is the biggest kindness we owe ourselves.

Lemme stop here..

Aisha Musa Auyo is a doctoral researcher in educational psychology. A wife, a mother, a homemaker, a caterer, a parenting, and a relationship coach. She can be reached via aishamuauyo@live.co.uk.

By Dr Samaila Suleiman Yandaki

Nigeria is once again in the global spotlight in the wake of its redesignation as a Country of Particular Concern and the accompanying threat of U.S. military action by the Trump administration to save Nigerian Christians from “genocide”. This narrative is as dangerous as it is familiar, evoking the old imperial logic that simplifies and distorts our complex realities to justify external intervention. As a student of the politics of history and identity conflict, I find this portrayal beyond perturbing and perilous. 

I witnessed firsthand how such perilous narratives were debated in international policy circles when I joined other Nigerian and British stakeholders at a high-level summit at Wilton Park in February 2020 for a dialogue on “Fostering Social Cohesion in Nigeria”. Situated in the serene estate of Wiston House, Steyning, West Sussex, Wilton Park is an Executive Agency of the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, widely recognised as a global space for peace dialogues and post-conflict reflection. The meeting was part of the UK government’s follow-up to the Bishop of Truro’s Independent Review on the persecution of Christians worldwide, in which Nigeria was identified as a major flashpoint of “religious violence.” The Truro Report asserted that Nigerian Christians are facing systematic persecution and called upon Western governments to do more to protect them. 

At Wilton Park, we were offered more than an interfaith forum to dialogue; we were given the opportunity to deconstruct the dangerous oversimplifications that have come to characterise Western discourses on Nigeria. Unlike the imperialist gimmicks and threats emerging from Washington today, the British government, through the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, convened diverse stakeholders from Nigeria and the UK – religious leaders, politicians, diplomats, academics, and civil society representatives – to deliberate on the multifaceted security challenges confronting Nigeria and explore ways of building social cohesion. I am not permitted by the Wilton Park Protocol to name participants or cite their specific interventions, but suffice it to say that, with few exceptions, those present were individuals who matter in Nigerian and British policy circles.

The participants spent three days discussing the farmer-herder crisis, the Boko Haram insurgency, and the persistent communal conflicts in the Middle Belt. What struck me most was the consensus among Nigerian participants — Muslims and Christians alike — that the “Christian persecution” framing was profoundly misleading. We emphasised that the reality was far more complex than the narrative of religious persecution suggests. The problem, as several participants observed, is not that Christians do not suffer violence, but that violence in Nigeria is indiscriminate, affecting all communities. To single out one group as uniquely persecuted is to misread the nature of the crisis. 

The Wilton Park approach reflected a subtle but significant shift– the need to appreciate the broader social, political, and environmental dynamics of violence in Nigeria. While the Truro Report relegated these factors to the background, we strongly highlighted them, showing that Nigeria’s crisis is a shared national tragedy rather than a targeted religious war. The goal was to nurture a more nuanced understanding, one that resists the reductive opposition between Muslim perpetrator and Christian victim. 

The meeting concluded on a high note with consensus around the “sensitivity and diversity of conflict narratives,” recognising that every victim’s voice deserves to be heard. It was agreed that shifting the narrative from “Muslims against Christians” and other binary categories must therefore be a priority if we are to avoid deepening existing divisions. The meeting recommended that the Nigerian government should “commission and fund independent, credible research on climate change, number of attacks, crime victims, cattle routes and patterns; develop strategy on how to use data to proactively educate, myth-bust and shape narratives for both sides of the argument; justice and peace training to be included in schools; Government of Nigeria to appoint a National Reconciliation Adviser; establish a Joint Religious Coalition to ensure accountability of government for insecurity and politicisation of conflict; develop religious engagement strategy; and commence dialogue to facilitate creating ‘Code of Conduct’ for religious leaders,” among other actionable recommendations. This later became the groundwork for further peacebuilding engagements between Nigerian and British stakeholders. The Wilton Park dialogue is a model of thoughtful engagement, the kind of thoughtful diplomacy the world requires in times of conflict, not the militarised moralism coming from Washington. 

The question is, what are the true intentions of Trump? Is he genuinely motivated by a humanitarian desire to protect Nigerian Christians, or is this another exercise in the US geopolitical and imperial crusade? History offers little reason for optimism. We know that humanitarian and messianic pretexts always precede Imperial interventions. In the 19th and 20th centuries, colonial logic was a “civilising mission”; today it is “defence of persecuted Christians”. The language changes, but the logic remains the same —define and rule, borrowing from Mahmood Mamdani. The Palestinian literary critic Edward Said describes this imperial habit of defining how others are perceived and how their suffering is interpreted. Therefore, classifying Nigeria—a complex, plural, and Muslim-majority nation—as a persecutor of Christians is a convenient casus belli for Trump, masquerading as a humanitarian concern. 

Meanwhile, I congratulate the proponents of the “Christian genocide” narrative in Nigeria and beyond. We are now officially a Country of Particular Concern, polarised and divided. As the advocates of the narrative await, with self-righteous anticipation, an American-led “rescue mission”, I want to remind them of the devastation that American invasion has brought to nations in the name of salvation: Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Vietnam, Somalia. Each intervention was couched in the language of freedom, yet each left behind broken societies and deepened resentment.

The “Christian genocide” narrative is doubly dangerous: while deepening domestic divisions, it legitimises foreign intervention. This is not to deny the suffering of Christians in parts of Nigeria. Their pain is real and deserves acknowledgement. But this is equally true of Muslims and others who have suffered the same fate. The question is not who suffers most, but how that suffering is framed. 

Ultimately, the Nigerian state bears the greatest responsibility for its failure to protect all its citizens. Endemic corruption, elite impunity, and the persistent inability to provide security for Nigerians have created fertile ground for such divisive narratives to thrive. Unfortunately, the citizens themselves have collectively failed to hold the government accountable for these failures. Instead, they are busying themselves competing for victimhood, thereby creating the conditions for external powers to intervene discursively and politically. It is this vacuum that the Trump administration is filling.  

The task before Nigerian scholars, faith leaders, and policymakers is to reclaim the narrative, not through denial, but through a more honest, inclusive, diplomatic and historically grounded understanding and framing of its own complex realities. The federal government must strengthen its security institutions and reassert the primacy of equal citizenship. All lives matter in Nigeria—Christian, Muslim, and traditionalist alike.

Dr Samaila Suleiman writes from the Department of History, Bayero University, Kano.

By Misbahu El-Hamza

President Bola Tinubu has finally responded to the false accusation of a “Christian genocide” in Nigeria, a narrative that surfaced in late September. Yet as this claim gains traction in U.S. conservative circles, he should be more worried about his political prospects. The narrative—and U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent call to redesignate Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC)—could give Washington both motive and cover to oppose Tinubu’s re-election in 2027, just as former President Goodluck Jonathan alleged of the Obama administration in 2015.

Former President Jonathan publicly claimed that he lost the 2015 election because of U.S. interference. Two issues broadly defined the diplomatic rift between the two governments. The first was Boko Haram’s insurgency and the abduction of the Chibok girls. In a 2018 BBC interview, Jonathan lamented that Nigerians in the U.S. joined public protests there, one of which famously featured Michelle Obama holding a placard with the slogan #BringBackOurGirls.

At the October 2025 launch of ‘SCARS: Nigeria’s Journey and the Boko Haram Conundrum,’ by former Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Lucky Irabor (retd.), Jonathan recalled: “When I was in office, one of the major scars on my government, and one I will retire with, is the issue of the Chibok girls. As Bishop Kukah said, no plastic or cosmetic surgeon will remove it.” The then-opposition under Muhammadu Buhari, which included Tinubu, exploited insecurity for political advantage, a factor that clearly contributed to Jonathan’s loss.

The second, and in my opinion, more damaging rift was Jonathan’s stance against same-sex marriage, reflecting the convictions of most Nigerians. In 2014, he signed the Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act, shortly after the Obama administration’s 2011 pledge to “use all the tools of American diplomacy” to promote gay rights globally. Washington’s reaction was swift. The White House warned of possible cuts to HIV/AIDS and anti-malaria funding, while Jonathan’s government held firm. Nigerians applauded him for that. But during the 2015 campaign, the Obama administration’s outreach, including direct appeals to Nigerian voters and a high-profile visit by Secretary of State John Kerry, was widely viewed as tacit support for Buhari, which many Nigerians, including Jonathan himself, believe shaped the election’s outcome.

Insecurity also played a domestic role in Jonathan’s downfall. Nigerians were increasingly alarmed by unrelenting violence—beyond Boko Haram, currently compounded by communal, ethnic, and religious clashes and by banditry mostly in northern Nigeria—that claimed hundreds of innocent lives. Regardless of how the world described it, the reality was and is still tragic. It eroded public trust and patriotism. Yet successive governments, rather than restoring security, have often appeared more concerned with foreign perceptions than with rebuilding national confidence and truly working to end the bloodshed of innocent Nigerians.

So, while Jonathan’s administration angered the Obama White House over the same-sex marriage law, many believe that Tinubu’s has irritated Washington for another reason.

In early September, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz introduced the Nigeria Religious Freedom Accountability Act of 2025 (S.2747) to the U.S. Senate. The bill seeks to sanction Nigerian officials allegedly complicit in “Islamist jihadist violence against Christians and other minorities” and those “enforcing blasphemy laws”. Blasphemy remains an offence under Nigeria’s criminal code and in the twelve northern states operating shari’a law. Yet, the Cruz bill’s language raises serious questions: how would the former officials be identified, and on what evidence? If Washington possesses proof, it has not presented any. Within Nigeria, such accusations often surface in political rhetoric but rarely withstand scrutiny.

Still, Nigeria’s greater “offence” under Tinubu—at least to American conservatives like Bill Maher, Mike Arnold, Ted Cruz, Riley Moore, and now Donald Trump—is its unwavering support for the Palestinian people. Successive Nigerian governments, whether Christian- or Muslim-led, have consistently condemned Israel’s occupation and called for a two-state solution as the only path to peace. This position, long-standing and bipartisan in Nigeria, clashes directly with Washington’s pro-Israel consensus.

After Nigeria’s firm statement at the 80th UN General Assembly in September, Maher went on his HBO show and declared, “I’m not a Christian, but they are systematically killing the Christians in Nigeria,” comparing it to Gaza and calling it “a more serious genocide.” Such claims, amplified by Trump’s rhetoric about “defending Christians,” serve U.S. political optics more than global justice. Recall Trump’s 2020 CPC designation for Nigeria. It was largely symbolic and carried no enforcement before he left office. His renewed posturing appears equally opportunistic.

Tinubu may believe U.S. pressure arises from concern for Christian victims of Islamist violence and that this aligns with Nigeria’s large Christian population. Yet the U.S. record tells a different story. The same establishment that condemns persecution in Nigeria supports Israel’s war in Gaza, where many casualties are both Muslim and Christian Palestinians.

If Nigeria accuses Washington of selective advocacy, it may find sympathy at home, but not in Washington, where lobbying interests dominate the narrative. Assuming that the “Christian genocide” argument will shield Nigeria from criticism would be a miscalculation.

Tinubu is not yet where Jonathan stood in 2015, but the parallels are unmistakable. The Obama administration’s posture during Jonathan’s re-election bid showed how U.S. influence can shape Nigerian politics. A sustained clash with U.S. policy on religious freedom and Palestine, coupled with insecurity and governance failures, could become a tipping point. Avoiding that outcome will require strategic diplomacy (which we have no doubt our president possesses), credible reform, and a domestic agenda rooted in accountability. Nigerians must see real action towards ending Boko Haram and banditry.

This moment demands political acumen and the disciplined management of both security and foreign relations. Tinubu cannot afford to repeat Jonathan’s missteps. In global politics, misreading Washington’s signals has previously cost Nigerian presidents, and history may not be kind to those who fail to learn from it.

Misbahu writes from Kano and can be reached via email: misbahulhamza@gmail.com

By Ishaka Mohammed

As a business owner in Nigeria, you can employ graduates to work for you for free, while each of them receives N150,000 from the European Union. Your role is to create a conducive environment for these young people to learn and grow over the next 12 months.

This is a marvellous opportunity created by the Federal Government of Nigeria, funded by the European Union and implemented by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

The Nigeria Jubilee Fellows Programme (NJFP) was launched on August 31, 2021, to address Nigeria’s unemployment challenges by connecting talented graduates with job placement opportunities in organisations across the country—offering experience and building skills.

In the first phase of the programme, 20,000 graduates under 30 years were shortlisted in 2022, but official reports indicate that many of them were not matched with organisations due to a scarcity of interested and qualified host organisations. 

For those who were matched with organisations between 2022 and September 2025, each person was entitled to a monthly stipend of N100,000—now N150,000, effective from October 2025.

The portal is now open for NJFP 2.0. If you have an organisation registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), this programme will greatly benefit you by boosting your visibility, providing free labour, and helping some young people in your host community achieve financial success. Visit https://host.njfp.ng/registration/, complete the application and check your email regularly.

With a reasonable number of interested and qualified host organisations, NJFP 2.0 is expected to be more successful than the first phase of the programme.

As for Nigerians under 30 who graduated not earlier than 2022 and possess the NYSC discharged or exemption certificate, this might be worthwhile. The application link is https://portal.njfp.ng/registration/.

By the way, many of those who were shortlisted in 2022 were delisted in 2025 without being matched with organisations. Consequently, interested applicants are advised to explore other means of upskilling and generating income even after being shortlisted.