Amidst deteriorating security situations throughout West Africa, the United States intends to invest N587 billion ($413.046 million) in counter-insurgency operations in Nigeria and other African nations in 2026.
Our correspondent was able to receive the US National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026, which includes the amount.
According to The PUNCH, the funds were authorized under Title XLIII: Operation and Maintenance.
The Donald Trump administration’s Christmas Day attacks on terrorists’ hideouts in Sokoto State are a backdrop for the US Africa Command’s security budget.
As part of continuous efforts to improve security operations around the nation, AFRICOM handed a shipment of military hardware to Nigerian security agencies on Tuesday.
In addition to authorizing $901 billion in yearly military spending and a 4% pay increase for personnel, the NDAA 2026 is a complete package that lays forth defense policy priorities.
The Act did not specify how the $413.046 million that AFRICOM had sought would be used, but the same amount was authorized.
On December 18, 2025, President Trump signed the Act into law, authorizing it for the 65th year in a row.
The $413 million security operations budget comes as violent extremism, banditry, and insurgency continue to be problems in West Africa.
Piracy and other maritime crimes continue to be a problem in the Gulf of Guinea, while insurgency continues in the North-East and banditry in the North-West of Nigeria.
Jihadist organizations have been attacking Mali for a long time, and unrest from the Sahel has spread to northern Benin.
The United States European Command, with a budget of $385.744 million, the United States Southern Command, with $224.971 million, US Forces Korea, with a $77.049 million allocation, Cyberspace Activities (Cyberspace Operations), with $331.467 million, and Cyberspace Activities (Cybersecurity), with $550.089 million, are among the other commands and activities listed under the NDAA’s operation and maintenance category.
The Act’s subtotal for operational forces under operation and maintenance is $39.999 billion.
Additionally, the Act calls for the US Department of State to appoint an Assistant Secretary for African Affairs.
The Act states that the office will coordinate the execution of US foreign policy in the region and supervise issues pertaining to sub-Saharan Africa.
The Appropriations Act also creates a Bureau of African Affairs, to be led by the Assistant Secretary, to oversee the execution of US foreign policy and aid to sub-Saharan Africa.
“(5) BUREAU OF AFRICAN AFFAIRS. (A) ESTABLISHMENT: The Department of State shall establish a Bureau of African Affairs, which shall carry out such duties as the Under Secretary for Political Affairs may prescribe with regard to the execution of U.S. foreign policy and aid to sub-Saharan Africa.”
(B) HEAD: The Bureau of African Affairs will be led by the Assistant Secretary for African Affairs.
(9) AFRICAN AFFAIRS ASSISTANT SECRETARY: (A) ESTABLISHMENT. An Assistant Secretary for African Affairs will work in the Department of State and report to the Secretary of State, acting through the Under Secretary for Political Affairs, on “(i) matters relating to sub-Saharan Africa; and” “(ii) such other related duties as the Secretary may from time to time designate.”
The Act partially stated, “(B) Responsibilities: In addition to the duties outlined in subparagraph (A), the Assistant Secretary for African Affairs shall maintain continuous observation and coordination of all matters pertaining to implementation of United States foreign policy in sub-Saharan Africa.”
The Act also requires evaluations of how Russia’s military strategy, goals, and force posture impact African nations.
The ramifications for US contingency preparations under AFRICOM, US Central Command, and US European Command are also examined, along with Russia’s foreign military bases, logistics capabilities, and infrastructure used to project force on the continent.
“An evaluation of Russia’s military strategy goals and force posture that impact African nations; An explanation of Russia’s military bases abroad, military logistical capabilities, and power-projecting infrastructure.
“An examination of how such an action would affect the Armed Forces’ capacity to carry out the Department of Defense’s contingency plans, including those under the purview of US European Command or to support operations and crisis response under the purview of US Central Command and US Africa Command.”
According to the Act, “the reduction of the risk of executing departments of defense contingency plans, including contingency plans conducted by United States Central Command and United States Africa Command.”
Kabir Adamu, the CEO of Beacon Consulting and a security expert, commented on the event, saying that the policy and funding changes were a reflection of the growing geopolitical rivalry in Africa, which is primarily motivated by economic interests.
According to Adamu, insecurity, lax state control, and the availability of vital resources have made Africa—especially West Africa and the Sahel—a strategic arena.
He claims that through economic and military cooperation, China and Russia have increased their influence throughout Africa, compelling the US to reevaluate its position there.
First, according to the Monroe Doctrine, the United States’ near neighborhood, especially South America and surrounding areas, constitutes its area of influence.
For this reason, it threatened Cuba and took action against Venezuela. The geopolitical competition between the US and Russia is the other factor that is pertinent to this conversation.
“Russia and China are already ahead of the US in practically every area where the US has economic interests. Africa is in the same boat. The United States is currently attempting to catch up.
Due to their economic interests, China and Russia have effectively seized control of a large portion of Africa. In China’s example, Beijing maintains its influence over Africa through loans and other financial aid. It is difficult for the US to catch up, and it seems improbable that China and Russia will do nothing while the US makes an effort.
Strong competition between the US, China, and Russia was anticipated by the security risk and counterintelligence consultancy.
As a result, these three nations will be engaged in a fierce period of geopolitical rivalry. Where the United States plans to set up this agency is yet unknown. Given the US’s newfound interest in Nigeria, I would venture to say that it is a likely choice.
The United States can benefit strategically from Nigeria. In addition to its resources, Nigeria permits the US to keep an eye on its neighbors, notably Sahelian nations like Niger, which have uranium deposits. The United States had to depart Niger not long ago.
The US would still be able to monitor events in the Sahel if it could establish a foothold in Nigeria. East Africa is another potential destination, if not Nigeria. Congo serves as an illustration, particularly in light of current attempts to negotiate a peace deal there.
“Overall, it will be difficult to draw firm conclusions about the nature of the geopolitical rivalry that will emerge until we know the exact location where the bureau will be established,” he continued. But in terms of economic interests, China and Russia are already ahead of the US wherever it decides to participate in Africa.
The US will also try to evaluate Russia’s current role, as mentioned in the budget. Developing its own plan to achieve benefits will probably be a part of that assessment.
This has the potential to compel nations to submit, but it may also lead to local resistance, which is something we should keep a close eye on. In my opinion, economic interests—rather than military ones—are the main focus.
Economic interests, especially access to rare earth materials like lithium, are what fuel the competition. Other stories may exist, such as assertions that Christian genocide in Nigeria has been stopped, however the Nigerian government has made it clear that these stories are untrue and that Christian genocide does not exist in Nigeria.
If you look at what happened on December 25, you’ll see that the attacks took place in places where there weren’t many Christians. One would anticipate action in states like Plateau State or Benue State if the goal were to safeguard Christians. Indeed, Benue officials claim that bandits started entering the state as a result of the Sokoto attack.
Therefore, the idea of intervening to stop Christian genocide is incorrect. It’s an economic interest. The nature of any agreements made with the U.S. government is a crucial question that media and the National Assembly must bring up when it resumes. Nigerians have a right to know what these agreements contain.
“We require clarification. The agreement should be made public if it is economic in nature. It should also be made public if it is military.
However, Adamu emphasized that the struggle was mostly economic, pointing out that long-term influence and access to vital minerals continued to be the key factors influencing international powers’ involvement in Africa rather than outright military conflict.
“Lastly, strategic autonomy is the foundation of Nigeria’s foreign policy,” he stated. This implies that Nigeria maintains an open line of communication with any nation that presents a strategic advantage. We should anticipate an increase in what I would call multilateral diplomacy given the current state of the world and recent US measures.
“This will require distinct strategies from the three superpowers on various continents. China and Russia won’t keep quiet, but the US will behave as it does in Europe and in its own backyard. These powers are probably going to engage in a complicated geopolitical struggle, especially in Africa.
Chidi Omeje, a security analyst, noted that rather than dominance or repression, the changing relationship between Nigeria and the US should only be seen through the prism of cooperation and partnership.
Nigeria has long demanded to be recognized as an equal partner in tackling security concerns, and Omeje stated that the present contacts with the US, notably through AFRICOM, demonstrate mutual respect and dignity.
He emphasizes that organizations working in the Sahel and Lake Chad regions are not only local but also a part of larger international movements, claiming that many of Nigeria’s security problems are connected to worldwide terrorist networks.
According to him, such transnational challenges necessitate international cooperation, which calls for alliances with superpowers.
“The main problem at hand is that we are currently discussing collaboration rather than invasion or any form of domination. The Nigerian military received some supplies from AFRICOM the other day. Anything we do with them that is founded on respect, dignity, and collaboration is always acceptable since this is about partnership and not about threats, repression, or displays of dominance and the like.
“If it is a global terrorist network, then cooperation and partnership are welcome, and the problems we are facing are actually related to that network.”
Omeje voiced concerns about Russia’s expanding security involvement in Africa, claiming that, given its continuing conflict in Ukraine, Moscow lacks the reach and capability to adequately handle Nigeria’s security issues.
US-Army collaboration
In a parallel move, Lt. Gen. Waidi Shaibu, the Chief of Army Staff, has urged the Nigerian Army and the US Army to work together more strategically in order to successfully handle Nigeria’s complicated and ever-changing security issues.
When Lt. Col. Semira Moore, the US Defense Attaché to Nigeria, paid him a courtesy call at Army Headquarters in Abuja on Wednesday, the COAS made this statement.
Shaibu noted that the Nigerian Army has greatly benefited from American military professionalism and institutional expertise, and he praised the US government for its long-standing collaboration and consistent support of the NA.
The COAS emphasized that the Nigerian Army is still keen to take advantage of the US Army’s vast experience in both kinetic and non-kinetic operations.
As a result, he promoted the growth of collaboration in fields meant to improve strategic capabilities, institutional capacity, doctrinal development, and operational performance.
He claims that international military alliances are still essential for enhancing Nigeria’s internal security framework and promoting long-term peace and stability throughout the nation.
Moore conveyed gratitude for the friendly and advantageous relationship between the two militaries. She reiterated her dedication to fortifying current relationships while investigating new avenues for cooperation, especially in intelligence sharing, capacity building, and cooperative operational planning.
In order to maintain morale and operational efficacy in the field, the Defense Attaché also revealed that the United States is still dedicated to helping the Nigerian Army in important non-kinetic domains, such as humanitarian aid and troop welfare programs.
About the Author
