Nigeria has once again been shaken by allegations of a coup attempt. Last Tuesday, six men, including a retired senior army officer and a police inspector, were charged for terrorism and treason, over an alleged plot to overthrow President Bola Tinubu back in 2025. This coup plot, initially denied by the authorities to have taken place, has revived fears about the fragility of Nigeria’s democracy. Nigeria’s tensions are often reduced to simple stories: a failing democracy, a religious war, or claims of a “Christian Genocide”. So the real question is: What’s really driving the violence in Nigeria?

A democracy that faces old and new threats

Let’s begin with the political context. Nigeria has a long history of military coups. After gaining independence from Great Britain in 1960, the country spent much of the remainder of the 20th century under military rule. Civilian rule returned in 1999, but conditions haven’t strongly improved, leaving Nigeria still struggling with corruption, poverty, and insecurity. The recent coup allegations highlight how fragile this democratic system remains.

The regional context makes the situation even more worrying. Six West African countries have experienced military coups since 2020. A successful coup in Nigeria would have major consequences for democratic rule across the region, given the country’s size, influence, and role in the security of the region. Much of Nigeria’s influence derives from its large population of 239 million people, making it the most populous country in Africa, and its status as a top oil producer. But political fragility is only one part of the picture.

Misinformation and the “Christian genocide” narrative

Nigeria’s conflict is often misrepresented internationally, mainly due to the propagation bysome political figures abroad who have promoted misleading narratives. For instance, U.S. Congressman Scott Perry falsely claimed that the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) had funded Boko Haram, the jihadist militant group. This stigmatizing claim fed broader conspiracy theories about renewed U.S. involvement in Nigeria’s counterterrorism effort. Other narratives suggest that violence in Nigeria exclusively targets Christians, framing the situation as a “Christian genocide”. A February report by the U.S. Congress on Christian persecution in Nigeria amplified concerns portraying it as the deadliest place to be for Christians, but it does not capture the full complexity of the conflict. While Christians face higher targeting in certain areas, according to The Times, Muslims too are victims of jihadist attacks. The phenomenon of ‘mixed targeting’ is not arbitrary, and is rather consistent with the behavior of other terrorist groups, targeting Muslims and Christians alike because both are seen as infidels–the Muslims who distance themselves from the narrow interpretation of the Shari’a law propagated by the terrorist group are seen as infidels or apostates, even if these are Muslim leaders or scholars.  

The high death rates of Boko Haram and ISWAP do indicate that civilians are targeted, to a certain level, indiscriminately, including government forces and rival communities.

These simplified explanations and narratives are dangerous because they reduce a multi-layered conflict to a single religious dimension, fuel polarization inside and outside Nigeria and distract from the structural causes of the ongoing violence.

Understanding the conflict in northern Nigeria

While political tensions dominate headlines, the most persistent threat to Nigeria’s stability comes from the complex conflict in the north. According to Human Rights Watch, more than 1,800 civilians have been killed by the army and armed groups since 2023. In the north, the government is not of substantive presence: there remain few schools and jobs, a lack of security forces, and very few available services. When the state is weak, the political vacuum created invites other groups in. 

But the violence is not driven by a single actor. Instead, northern Nigeria is home to a diverse ecosystem of armed groups, each leading with different motivations:

● Ideological jihadists, mainly Boko Haram and the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), who want to impose their strict version of Islam.

● Commercial criminal groups, often called “bandits,” who carry out kidnappings for ransom and control smuggling routes.

● Local militias involved in community conflicts, especially between herders and farmers, fighting over land and water.

The insurgency has changed over the past decade. ISWAP, the local affiliate of the Islamic State, has become more structured and sophisticated. It has taken advantage of the weakening of Boko Haram, consolidating its presence around the Lake Chad region. It now controls parts of local trade and supply routes, which strengthens its resilience. The group also uses new technologies, including drones, and operates across borders in areas where state authority is weak.

Why Violence Persists: Structural Drivers

So what keeps the violence going? 

The violence persists because it is rooted in structural problems such as chronic poverty, educational exclusion, weak local governance, and lack of trust between communities and the state. Indeed, many families struggle to survive, and the armed groups offer them money or food. The fact that millions of children are out of school makes them easier to recruit. Moreover, northern states are as large as entire European countries, making them extremely hard to control. Many areas rarely see police, teachers, or officials, allowing armed groups to take over.

Another important dimension is the long-standing tension between Fulani herders and farming communities. These disputes, originally linked to land and water access, have escalated due to weak resource governance and the marginalization of pastoralist groups. In some areas, local conflicts have transformed into organized violence involving armed groups.

Why the Crisis Cannot Be Solved by the Military Alone

Military operations are necessary to contain insurgent groups, but they are not enough to end the conflict. Moreover, it is important to outline that the Nigerian military is also implicated in civilian casualties: Human Rights Watch estimates that over 1,800 civilians have been killed by both insurgents and security forces since 2023–these incidents occur partly because the conflict zones are vast and difficult to police–. Insurgency thrives where social services are weak, education is inaccessible, governance is ineffective and regional borders are porous. Without coordinated action between Nigeria, Niger, Chad, and Cameroon, armed groups can easily regroup and move across territories.

Conclusion: Moving Beyond Simplistic Explanations

Nigeria’s current crisis is not the result of a single cause. It is the byproduct of structural drivers that reinforce and feed into one another, creating a vicious cycle. Armed groups thrive where poverty is entrenched, where education is inaccessible, where governance is fragile, and where misinformation distorts public understanding of the violence. As long as these conditions persist, military operations alone will struggle to produce lasting stability. Breaking this cycle will require rebuilding trust between citizens and the state, investing in education and local governance, strengthening regional cooperation and actively countering misleading narratives that fuel polarization.

By Mathilde Laprée