Follow us on social

Is Nigeria using Russia as an excuse for bloody crackdown?

Is Nigeria using Russia as an excuse for bloody crackdown?

Moscow has benefitted from a series of coups and instability in the region but that shouldn't be a default justification

Analysis | Africa

Nigeria is on edge as individuals linked to the deadly protests that recently shook the West African country are to be put on trial on charges that carry the death penalty.

Their arrest is part of a wider dragnet that has been triggered in part by the president's fears that the demonstrations are part of a Russian-inspired plot to overthrow his government.

Adaramoye Michael Lenin and nine others were arraigned on Monday Sept. 2 at the Federal High Court Abuja on charges of treason, insurrection and terrorism. They are part of over 2,000 protesters arrested in different parts of the country during the #EndBadGovernance protests that broke out last month in response to the harsh economic situation in the country.

According to reports, the initially peaceful youth-dominated protests, inspired by Kenya's Gen-Z anti-finance bill protest, degenerated into deadly clashes leading to the killing of about 22 protesters by government security forces.

The events leading to their arraignment have been nothing short of dramatic, as security agencies fearful of a foreign plot embarked on a frenetic crackdown on anyone remotely connected to the protest. The list, which is still growing, includes journalists, bloggers, prominent trade unionists, civil society actors as well as a group of visiting Polish students and a lecturer arrested for filming a protest in the historic city of Kano.

Although the Polish nationals have since been released, their ordeal demonstrates the panic mode authorities are in as growing anger over soaring food and energy prices has evoked fears of a Russian plot to overthrow the government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, who came to power last year.

What has particularly piqued the interest of security agencies is the sudden appearance of Russian flags among some demonstrators in the northern States of the country where the worst violence occurred. Reports claim that some of the demonstrators were chanting, “Tinubu must go,” while calling for a military coup.

According to a court affidavit sworn by Elizabeth Ogochukwu, a litigation secretary at the Nigeria Police headquarters, “The suspects/defendants herein were found to have been carrying Russian flags, banners, placards and slogans agitating for a sovereign invasion of Nigerian territory to destabilize or overthrow the sovereign state of Nigeria by the Russian government.”

Soon after, the police put two men suspected of sponsoring the plot on their wanted list. They are Lucky Obinyan, a member of the country’s opposition, and Andrew Wynne, described by the police as a British national but with a Russian-sounding moniker, Andrew Povich.

No doubt, the prevailing geopolitical landscape in West Africa, where Moscow has recently made incursions across the Sahel to the detriment of Western powers, provides a probable cause for the government’s suspicion. Not only does Nigeria’s pro-Western president double as the head of the regional body, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which the three Sahelian pro-Moscow juntas recently exited, but Nigeria is also the largest democracy within a region that has seen a rise in military coups amid waning Western influence in recent years.

On July 26, 2023, Niger became the latest country to fall under Moscow’s growing influence when General Tchiani overthrew the democratically elected government of President Mohamed Badoum in a coup. Russian military personnel and equipment are now stationed in Airbase 101, previously occupied by some of the 1,000 U.S. military personnel who have withdrawn from Niger, near the capital city of Niamey, about 600 miles from Abuja. The Tchiani junta had previously evicted French troops as well, acting on a pattern already established by pro-Moscow regimes in Mali and Burkina Faso.

Since the coup, the relationship between Abuja and Niamey has soured mainly because of sanctions imposed by ECOWAS on the Nigerien junta. But this is not the case with the people on both sides of the 1,000-mile-long border that divides both countries who share centuries-old trade and familial relations. According to the International Trade Centre (ITC), cross-border trade, mainly in petrol, tobacco, dates, cement, cattle and other agricultural products, between Niamey and traders and communities in Nigeria’s North was worth roughly $226 million in 2022.

Five of Niger's eight regions — Zinder, Tahoua, Maradi, Dosso and Diffa — all border Nigeria’s northern states of Sokoto, Kebbi, Yobe, Katsina and Jigawa. To Nigeria’s security agencies, it is hardly a coincidence that it is in these States that calls for a military coup and the display of Russian flags emerged during the protest.

Nonetheless, the allegation of a Russian plot appears at best circumstantial. For instance, one of the protesters, Adaramoye Michael, was arrested only because his nom de guerre is Lenin, the name of the 20th-century Russian revolutionary, Vladimir Ilich. Likewise, Wynne, who runs a bookshop at the Abuja office of the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC), is better known in the country’s trade union and activist circles as Drew Povey — and not the Russian variant contrived by the police to bolster the allegation of a Russian plot.

Moscow has been linked to a number of undemocratic changes of government in the Sahel and for nurturing an extensive disinformation network across the region. But Nigeria’s friends in the West should not allow the state to cynically manipulate national security concerns to violently put down legitimate dissent at home. The ultimate consequence of this would be the further discrediting of the democratic values that the West wants to rebuild in order to regain influence in the region.

As it is now, Nigeria’s status as Africa’s most populous country, its largest economy, and a symbol of enduring democracy brings a lot of benefit to Washington’s agenda of regional security and stability in the Sahel. The oil-producing country is also the West’s most enduring partner in the fight against terrorism and cross-border crimes that plague the region.

As Gen. Michael Langley, Commander of the US-Africa Command (AFRICOM) noted during a visit to Nigeria earlier in January, "Cooperation and training between the U.S. and Nigerian militaries is vital in addressing the evolving security landscape in West Africa and advancing common interests.” Therefore, the maintenance of proper democratic virtues and respect for human rights and civil liberties in the country are of great importance as much as countering any threat to peace and security.

Suffice it to say, the Nigerian state’s continuous show of force, instead of dialogue with protesting groups inside the country, may backfire. African governments should define a more civil framework for managing protests and unrest — something which has become more frequent as Africa’s huge public debt crisis continues to cut into the abilities of the continent’s governments to provide basic services to the poorest and more vulnerable sectors of their societies.

If the state is allowed to utilize measures that erode civil liberties to counter a perceived Russian threat, it would be doing exactly what pro-Moscow juntas in Mali and Burkina Faso are doing to their own citizens. In that sense, the West would have lost the fight for influence over the region to Vladimir Putin.


Protesters continue anti-government demonstrations against bad governance and economic hardship, in Lagos, Nigeria August 5, 2024. REUTERS/Francis Kokoroko

Analysis | Africa
POGO The Bunker
Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight

Bombers astray! Washington's priorities go off course

Military Industrial Complex

The Bunker appears originally at the Project on Government Oversight and is republished here with permission.


keep readingShow less
Trump Zelensky
Top photo credit: Joshua Sukoff / Shutterstock.com

Blob exploiting Trump's anger with Putin, risking return to Biden's war

Europe

Donald Trump’s recent outburst against Vladimir Putin — accusing the Russian leader of "throwing a pile of bullsh*t at us" and threatening devastating new sanctions — might be just another Trumpian tantrum.

The president is known for abrupt reversals. Or it could be a bargaining tactic ahead of potential Ukraine peace talks. But there’s a third, more troubling possibility: establishment Republican hawks and neoconservatives, who have been maneuvering to hijack Trump’s “America First” agenda since his return to office, may be exploiting his frustration with Putin to push for a prolonged confrontation with Russia.

Trump’s irritation is understandable. Ukraine has accepted his proposed ceasefire, but Putin has refused, making him, in Trump’s eyes, the main obstacle to ending the war.

Putin’s calculus is clear. As Ted Snider notes in the American Conservative, Russia is winning on the battlefield. In June, it captured more Ukrainian territory and now threatens critical Kyiv’s supply lines. Moscow also seized a key lithium deposit critical to securing Trump’s support for Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russian missile and drone strikes have intensified.

Putin seems convinced his key demands — Ukraine’s neutrality, territorial concessions in the Donbas and Crimea, and a downsized Ukrainian military — are more achievable through war than diplomacy.

Yet his strategy empowers the transatlantic “forever war” faction: leaders in Britain, France, Germany, and the EU, along with hawks in both main U.S. parties. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz claims that diplomacy with Russia is “exhausted.” Europe’s war party, convinced a Russian victory would inevitably lead to an attack on NATO (a suicidal prospect for Moscow), is willing to fight “to the last Ukrainian.” Meanwhile, U.S. hawks, including liberal interventionist Democrats, stoke Trump’s ego, framing failure to stand up to Putin’s defiance as a sign of weakness or appeasement.

Trump long resisted this pressure. Pragmatism told him Ukraine couldn’t win, and calling it “Biden’s war” was his way of distancing himself, seeking a quick exit to refocus on China, which he has depicted as Washington’s greater foreign threat. At least as important, U.S. involvement in the war in Ukraine has been unpopular with his MAGA base.

But his June strikes on Iran may signal a hawkish shift. By touting them as a decisive blow to Iran’s nuclear program (despite Tehran’s refusal so far to abandon uranium enrichment), Trump may be embracing a new approach to dealing with recalcitrant foreign powers: offer a deal, set a deadline, then unleash overwhelming force if rejected. The optics of “success” could tempt him to try something similar with Russia.

This pivot coincides with a media campaign against restraint advocates within the administration like Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon policy chief who has prioritized China over Ukraine and also provoked the opposition of pro-Israel neoconservatives by warning against war with Iran. POLITICO quoted unnamed officials attacking Colby for wanting the U.S. to “do less in the world.” Meanwhile, the conventional Republican hawk Marco Rubio’s influence grows as he combines the jobs of both secretary of state and national security adviser.

What Can Trump Actually Do to Russia?
 

Nuclear deterrence rules out direct military action — even Biden, far more invested in Ukraine than Trump, avoided that risk. Instead, Trump ally Sen.Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), another establishment Republican hawk, is pushing a 500% tariff on nations buying Russian hydrocarbons, aiming to sever Moscow from the global economy. Trump seems supportive, although the move’s feasibility and impact are doubtful.

China and India are key buyers of Russian oil. China alone imports 12.5 million barrels daily. Russia exports seven million barrels daily. China could absorb Russia’s entire output. Beijing has bluntly stated it “cannot afford” a Russian defeat, ensuring Moscow’s economic lifeline remains open.

The U.S., meanwhile, is ill-prepared for a tariff war with China. When Trump imposed 145% tariffs, Beijing retaliated by cutting off rare earth metals exports, vital to U.S. industry and defense. Trump backed down.

At the G-7 summit in Canada last month, the EU proposed lowering price caps on Russian oil from $60 a barrel to $45 a barrel as part of its 18th sanctions package against Russia. Trump rejected the proposal at the time but may be tempted to reconsider, given his suggestion that more sanctions may be needed. Even if Washington backs the measure now, however, it is unlikely to cripple Russia’s war machine.

Another strategy may involve isolating Russia by peeling away Moscow’s traditionally friendly neighbors. Here, Western mediation between Armenia and Azerbaijan isn’t about peace — if it were, pressure would target Baku, which has stalled agreements and threatened renewed war against Armenia. The real goal is to eject Russia from the South Caucasus and create a NATO-aligned energy corridor linking Turkey to Central Asia, bypassing both Russia and Iran to their detriment.

Central Asia itself is itself emerging as a new battleground. In May 2025, the EU has celebrated its first summit with Central Asian nations in Uzbekistan, with a heavy focus on developing the Middle Corridor, a route for transportation of energy and critical raw materials that would bypass Russia. In that context, the EU has committed €10 billion in support of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route.

keep readingShow less
Syria sanctions
Top image credit: People line up to buy bread, after Syria's Bashar al-Assad was ousted, in Douma, on the outskirts of Damascus, Syria December 23, 2024. REUTERS/Zohra Bensemra

Lifting sanctions on Syria exposes their cruel intent

Middle East

On June 30, President Trump signed an executive order terminating the majority of U.S. sanctions on Syria. The move, which would have been unthinkable mere months ago, fulfilled a promise he made at an investment forum in Riyadh in May.“The sanctions were brutal and crippling,” he had declared to an audience of primarily Saudi businessmen. Lifting them, he said, will “give Syria a chance at greatness.”

The significance of this statement lies not solely in the relief that it will bring to the Syrian people. His remarks revealed an implicit but rarely admitted truth: sanctions — often presented as a peaceful alternative to war — have been harming the Syrian people all along.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.