What new US sanctions bill on Nigeria might cause us – Dauda

Keep up with the latest news and be part of our weekly giveaways and airtime sharing; follow our WhatsApp channel for more updates. Click to Follow us

The introduction of a new sanctions bill aimed at alleged violations of religious freedom in Nigeria by a group of US lawmakers quickly reignited an ongoing and sensitive debate about the boundaries of human rights advocacy and the onset of foreign overreach.

Khalid Iliyasu Dauda, an expert in international relations, believes that the suggested Nigeria Religious Freedom and Accountability Act of 2026 exemplifies a strategy used by Washington to exert pressure without engaging in direct conflict.

Dauda, a lecturer at Skyline University, stated, “The proposed legislation mirrors a well-established US strategy of using targeted sanctions to influence elite behaviour and signal concern over religious violence.”

According to him, the sanction’s “credibility will depend on strong evidence, fair targeting, and genuine engagement with Nigerian authorities. Without these, it risks being more symbolic than an effective accountability mechanism.”

The bill, put forth by Congressman Riley Moore (a Republican from West Virginia) and co-sponsored by Chris Smith (a representative from New Jersey), suggests asset freezes and visa bans targeting individuals and organizations alleged to engage in religious persecution.

The draft identifies former Governor of Kano State, Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, Fulani-ethnic nomadic militias, the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN), and Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore.

Sanctions would be implemented according to the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, with the US Departments of State and Treasury tasked with identifying individuals considered responsible for violations.

Additionally, the law requires humanitarian intervention in Nigeria’s Middle Belt via “trusted faith-based and non-governmental organisations,” with funding from both Washington and Abuja.

Additionally, the bill mandates that the US Secretary of State assess whether specific Fulani militias meet the criteria for designation as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, a move that would have significant legal and diplomatic ramifications.

Dauda finds the controversy surrounding the bill to be expected.

He said, “The sovereignty concerns are understandable, especially given Nigeria’s complex internal security challenges,” he said.

“Yet, such actions are increasingly justified under international human rights norms. This initiative sits at the intersection of rights advocacy and geopolitical pressure.”

“US–Nigeria relations are built on deep strategic foundations, particularly in security collaboration, economic engagement, and regional stability.

“What is more likely is a shift toward a more conditional and pragmatic partnership, characterised by closer scrutiny and periodic tensions rather than a breakdown in relations.”

The suggested law builds upon prior actions taken by the US. In late 2025, President Donald Trump reclassified Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern” due to what Washington characterized as serious violations of religious freedom, especially against Christian communities. Subsequently, the Federal Government consistently refuted claims of Christian persecution, asserting that the violence stemmed from banditry and insurgency rather than religious motives.

Kwankwaso was one of the most outspoken opponents of the designation. The ex-governor issued a warning via his verified X account against oversimplifying the security crisis in Nigeria.

“It is important to emphasize that our country is a sovereign nation whose people face different threats from outlaws across the country,” he said.

“The security challenges we face are complex and multifaceted. They are not limited to one faith or one region.”

He advocated for collaboration instead of a punitive response from Washington.

“The United States should assist Nigeria with advanced technology and intelligence support to combat insecurity instead of resorting to threats,” Kwankwaso said, cautioning that, “Care must be taken not to escalate tensions or deepen divisions within our diverse society.”

Those remarks provoked intense responses from certain US legislators who support the legislation. In a conversation on X, Moore charged Kwankwaso with being involved in religious persecution, stating, “Governor do you care to comment on your own complicity in the death of Christians? You instituted sharia law. You signed the law that makes so-called blasphemy punishable by death.”

Kwankwaso’s name has reappeared in the proposed legislation months later, sparking speculation in political and diplomatic circles about how personal interactions, policy differences, and enduring narratives regarding Nigeria’s north have influenced the bill.

At the time this report was filed, the former governor of Kano State had not yet publicly addressed the new development.

Please don’t forget to “Allow the notification” so you will be the first to get our gist when we publish it. 
Drop your comment in the section below, and don’t forget to share the post.