November 2025
The Double Face of American Foreign Policy
When the United States lectures the world about terrorism, peace, and democracy, few remember that the world’s most notorious extremist networks were born from the womb of American foreign policy. From the rugged mountains of Afghanistan to the burning deserts of the Middle East, Washington’s fingerprints are visible on almost every so-called “terror movement” of the past four decades.
Now, as the incumbent U.S. president threatens to “take decisive action” against Nigeria under the pretext of protecting Christians from Muslim “terrorists,” the echoes of hypocrisy are deafening. This new rhetoric—painting Nigeria as a land of religious violence—reflects not a concern for human life, but a familiar strategy: manufacturing moral pretexts for intervention and resource exploitation.
To understand this, one must go back to the Cold War—the era when America created the very monster it now pretends to fear.
The Afghan Experiment: Operation Cyclone and the Birth of Extremism
In 1979, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. For the United States, it was a golden opportunity to strike its communist rival without direct confrontation. The CIA launched Operation Cyclone, one of its longest and most expensive covert missions, funneling billions of dollars’ worth of weapons, cash, and training to the Afghan Mujahideen—fighters glorified by the West as “freedom warriors.”
The U.S. government, alongside Pakistan’s ISI and Saudi Arabia, recruited tens of thousands of young Muslim men from across the world, urging them to wage jihad against the Soviet forces. Among these recruits was a young, wealthy Saudi named Osama bin Laden, who later transformed this network of fighters into Al-Qaeda.
The CIA’s own declassified documents and congressional reports confirm that the agency provided not only logistical and military support but also ideological grooming. American-made propaganda—pamphlets, films, and even school textbooks printed in Arabic and Pashto—were designed to glorify jihad and martyrdom.
As historian Steve Coll noted in his Pulitzer Prize–winning book Ghost Wars, the United States “invested in a global movement of Islamic militancy to serve its Cold War agenda.” That movement, left unchecked, later mutated into a cancer of global terrorism.
From Mujahideen to Monsters: The Rise of Al-Qaeda and ISIS
After the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989, the U.S. abandoned its jihadist allies, leaving behind a heavily armed and ideologically radicalized population. The result was chaos—civil war, extremism, and the rise of new militant factions.
In 1996, bin Laden declared war on the United States, forming Al-Qaeda, which would later orchestrate the 9/11 attacks. Ironically, the same CIA-trained fighters who once received American weapons now used those weapons against their former masters.
Fast forward to 2003: the U.S. invasion of Iraq, justified by fabricated claims of “weapons of mass destruction,” created yet another breeding ground for extremism. From the ashes of Iraq’s chaos emerged ISIS, an even more brutal offshoot of Al-Qaeda.
Numerous Western military analysts, including Michael Scheuer (a former CIA officer who led the Bin Laden Unit), later admitted that U.S. foreign policy had directly “created the conditions for global jihadism.”
The Weaponization of Religion and Media Narratives
Having manufactured the monster of extremism, the United States and its allies began to weaponize the very chaos they had created. The “War on Terror” became a convenient tool to justify endless military interventions—Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003), Libya (2011), Syria (2015)—each of which left nations shattered and societies polarized.
The global media, largely influenced by Western corporations, played a critical role in this deception. Muslim countries were routinely portrayed as violent, intolerant, and ungovernable. The complex realities of poverty, ethnic tension, and colonial legacy were reduced to one word: terrorism.
In Africa, especially Nigeria, the Western media’s obsession with portraying every local conflict as a “religious war” has become part of a larger agenda. The narrative of “Muslims killing Christians” ignores decades of socio-economic imbalance, political manipulation, and foreign influence.
This oversimplification serves a purpose—it provides moral justification for future intervention, sanctions, and military bases under the guise of “humanitarian protection.”
The Nigerian Context: Manufactured Chaos and Strategic Interest
Nigeria, Africa’s largest economy and most populous nation, has long been a target of Western geopolitical interests. From oil reserves in the Niger Delta to lithium and gold deposits in the North, Nigeria’s natural wealth is immense.
However, since the rise of Boko Haram in the early 2000s, Western analysts and policymakers have persistently framed Nigeria’s security crisis as a “Muslim-Christian conflict.” In truth, Boko Haram itself emerged from internal socio-economic decay and political negligence—not Islamic theology.
Investigations by African scholars and journalists have revealed that foreign intelligence networks and arms smugglers play active roles in sustaining these extremist groups. The instability provides an excuse for Western countries to increase surveillance, deploy special forces, and control regional security policies through programs like AFRICOM (U.S. Africa Command).
Thus, when the American president threatens to “wage war against Nigeria” in the name of protecting Christians, one must ask: is this truly about religion—or about power and resources?
From Cold War to Neo-Colonialism: The Continuity of Control
The pattern is unmistakable. During the Cold War, the U.S. fought “communism.” In the post-9/11 era, it fights “terrorism.” In both cases, the underlying motive remains the same: to maintain global dominance and secure access to vital resources.
Western nations no longer need direct colonial rule; instead, they use economic institutions (like the IMF and World Bank), military partnerships, and propaganda to control developing nations. Nigeria’s oil contracts, defense procurements, and political alignments are constantly monitored by foreign interests.
By framing African nations as unstable and violent, the West positions itself as the “savior”—ready to intervene, rebuild, and, inevitably, extract.
The Moral Contradiction: Who Truly Spreads Violence?
It is a cruel irony that the same United States that armed extremists in Afghanistan, invaded Iraq on false pretenses, and bombed Libya into chaos now pretends to defend humanity.
The “religious violence” label attached to Nigeria ignores the historical fact that Western powers have caused more deaths through interventions than any African insurgency ever has. From Hiroshima to Baghdad, from Tripoli to Kabul, the blood trail is long and well-documented.
Yet, in the global information order dominated by Western narratives, Africa remains the accused, never the accuser.
The Awakening: Nigeria and Africa’s Path to Self-Determination
The time has come for Nigeria and Africa to reject this psychological warfare. The continent’s future depends on an intellectual and political awakening—one that recognizes how external powers manipulate religion and ethnicity to divide nations.
African scholars, journalists, and youth must reclaim the narrative. Instead of allowing Western media to define their identity, they must project a balanced, evidence-based perspective.
Nigeria, in particular, must strengthen its diplomatic independence, invest in regional alliances, and prioritize peace through development and justice—not through imported “counterterrorism packages” that enrich foreign contractors.
Conclusion: Unmasking the Real Threat
The real threat to Nigeria is not the “Muslim-Christian” divide; it is the deliberate external effort to amplify such divisions for strategic gain. The West’s history of manufacturing extremism—from Afghanistan to the Middle East—is a historical reality, not a conspiracy.
By exposing this truth, Nigeria can guard itself against the trap of intervention disguised as protection.
As the late African revolutionary Thomas Sankara once said:
> “He who feeds you, controls you.”
Today, Nigeria must extend that wisdom further:
> “He who defines your enemy, owns your destiny.”
And for once, it is time Africa defines its destiny on its own terms.
References & Suggested Readings (for publication footnotes)
1. Steve Coll, Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden (Penguin Press, 2004).
2. Chalmers Johnson, Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire (Henry Holt, 2000).
3. Mahmood Mamdani, Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War, and the Roots of Terror (Pantheon, 2004).
4. Declassified CIA documents on “Operation Cyclone,” U.S. National Security Archive, Washington D.C.
5. Michael Scheuer, Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror (Potomac Books, 2004).
6. AFRICOM official reports, U.S. Department of Defense archives.
Tags
Opinion