Activist lawyer Deji Adeyanju has strongly criticized controversial Islamic scholar Sheikh Ahmad Gumi over his remarks concerning United States airstrikes targeting ISIS terrorists in Sokoto State. Adeyanju argued that Gumi’s complaints are misplaced and unnecessary, emphasizing the need for Nigeria to enhance its collaboration with international partners in combating terrorism.
The US intervention, reportedly authorized by former President Donald Trump on Christmas Day, aimed to eliminate ISIS operatives within Nigeria. However, initial reports suggest the operation had limited impact, with no confirmed casualties among the targeted terrorists. This outcome has fueled a debate regarding the efficacy of such foreign military actions.
Sheikh Gumi has publicly voiced his dissent, questioning the effectiveness of the airstrikes and condemning the US involvement. His stance has ignited discussions across social media platforms, drawing a spectrum of reactions from the public and further polarizing opinions on foreign intervention.
In response, Adeyanju took to the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) to challenge Gumi’s perspective. He questioned why Gumi was expressing distress if the airstrikes failed to eliminate any terrorists, suggesting that Gumi should instead be relieved that his associates, if any, remain unharmed.
Adeyanju underscored the imperative for intensified collaborative efforts between Nigeria and the United States. He called for a unified approach to confront the relentless threat posed by what he described as “barbaric terrorists” terrorizing the nation, advocating for more robust joint operations.
The activist lawyer’s statement has prompted widespread discussion, highlighting a clear division among Nigerians. Opinions are split on whether foreign military intervention is a requisite component of Nigeria’s ongoing and complex struggle against pervasive terrorist groups operating within its borders.
