The U.S. military announced Tuesday that it would send 200 servicemembers to the embattled African nation of Nigeria to help train Nigerian troops to fight Islamist terrorists, who have murdered tens of thousands of Christians and other religious practitioners in the country over the last two decades.

According to a Wall Street Journal report, the troops will join several U.S. servicemen already stationed in Nigeria to “help local forces use intelligence to identify targets for military strikes.” Specifically, the U.S. troops will reportedly train Nigerian forces to coordinate the risky military tactic of “simultaneous air and infantry operations.” However, a spokesman for Nigeria’s armed forces made it clear that the U.S. forces will not be involved in any direct combat operations. He went on to say that the Nigerian government had requested America’s assistance.

The announcement came seven weeks after the U.S. fired over a dozen missiles from an offshore warship at two alleged jihadist camps in Nigeria run by the Islamic State. While it was never confirmed how many terrorists were killed in the attack, a Nigerian military spokesman stated, “I can confirm the intent was achieved.” The strike was likewise launched at the request of Nigeria’s government.

The surge in U.S. military activity in Nigeria has come amid burgeoning genocidal violence against the Christian population of the country by several Islamist jihadi groups, including Boko Haram, Islamic State in West Africa Province, Fulani, and others. As noted recently by Across Nigeria Founder Brad Brandon during “Washington Watch,” 72% of all Christians killed across the globe in 2025 took place in northern Nigeria. Experts estimate that upwards of 60,000 Christians have been murdered in the country since 2009, far and away the largest total of any nation in the world over that time frame. In addition, Nigerian sources estimate that jihadists have murdered approximately 29,000 non-fundamentalist Muslims.

A renewed focus on the crisis emerged last November when President Trump declared the ongoing deadly attacks on Christians in Nigeria to be a “genocide” and threatened to send U.S. troops into the country “guns-a-blazing” to eradicate Islamist terrorists. He also threatened to significantly cut aid to the country if Nigeria’s government “continues to allow the killing of Christians,” with his administration declaring the nation a Country of Particular Concern (CPC) in November. Since then, it appears the Trump administration has settled on the strategy of direct military cooperation with the African nation.

But will the strategy successfully rid Nigeria of Islamist jihadists? Experts like Lt. Col. (Ret.) Bob Maginnis, who serves as senior fellow for National Security at Family Research Council, say that the strategy strikes a sensible medium.

“The decision to send 200 U.S. troops to Nigeria for training purposes — while avoiding direct combat — reflects a familiar and cautious approach,” he told The Washington Stand. “It signals support without plunging America into another open-ended conflict. The December missile strike against Islamic State camps reinforced that message: we are willing to act against terrorist infrastructure, but we are reluctant to expand our footprint.”

“Is that enough?” Maginnis continued. “From a military standpoint, training and targeted strikes can help. Nigeria’s armed forces face a complex threat environment: jihadist groups such as Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province operate across difficult terrain, exploit porous borders, and prey upon vulnerable rural communities — many of them Christian. Professionalizing Nigerian units, improving intelligence fusion, logistics, and air-ground coordination can strengthen Abuja’s capacity to protect its own citizens.”

At the same time, Maginnis argued that the U.S. should take a more consistent approach to fighting Christian persecution worldwide in order to build credibility. “Nigeria has been one of the epicenters of anti-Christian violence, especially in Africa. Villages are attacked, clergy kidnapped, congregations massacred. Persecution of Christians is not isolated or declining; it is expanding geographically and intensifying in severity. What we see in Nigeria is part of a broader global pattern — from parts of the Middle East to communist regimes like China, where state-driven repression seeks to subordinate or silence Christian witness.”

As to the question of whether the U.S. should take more direct military action, Maginnis contended that “we must begin with clarity. The U.S. should support nations that are genuinely committed to defeating jihadist violence and protecting vulnerable populations, including Christians. Training missions, intelligence sharing, and carefully calibrated strikes can be appropriate tools when tied to measurable reforms and accountability. But ‘boots on the ground’ in a combat role is another matter entirely. Nigeria is a sovereign state with a large military. The primary burden must rest with its government.”

He further recommended continuing “training and advisory support for Nigerian forces conditioned on demonstrated commitment to protecting civilians” and “targeted counterterrorism strikes when actionable intelligence identifies terrorist infrastructure,” as well as upping “diplomatic pressure on Abuja to address corruption, impunity, and sectarian bias within its own security services.”

“Expanding into large-scale U.S. combat deployments would risk repeating past mistakes,” Maginnis advised. “But retreating into symbolic gestures while persecution spreads would also be a failure. The United States cannot solve every conflict. It can, however, choose integrity. If we are serious about combating Islamist terrorism in Nigeria, we must also be serious about confronting persecution wherever it occurs — without fear, favor, or double standards.”