Editorial
US-Iran Crisis
Since after the chain of events that led to the invasion of the United States Embassy in Teheran and the holding of 52 embassy staff hostage by irate Iranians in 1979, relations between the two countries have remained largely volatile.
The US had since designated the Islamic Republic as a state sponsor of terrorism which often uses its foreign-based militia formations to attack American citizens and sabotage Western interests, particularly in the Middle East. For this reason, Washington DC had rallied other Western nations to impose series of economic sanctions and travel bans against Teheran and some of its top state functionaries.
America and its major allies, including Israel and European Union member-countries have been at the forefront of moves to ensure that Iran does not develop its nuclear capabilities beyond the limit allowed for civilian purposes. International nuclear experts had always visited the Arab nation to monitor its nuclear projects development. And previous US Presidents had also worked with the international community to pursue any nuclear agreements reached with Iran.
Then enter President Donald Trump in 2017, riding on his ‘Make America Great Again’ campaign slogan. The tough-talking US leader would brook no nonsense from any rival world power, let alone Iran. He wasted no time in pulling out of the international nuclear deal with the Gulf State. What’s more, he is currently embroiled in trade disputes with China, Canada and Mexico, among others. Domestically, there has been no respite for Trump as opposition Democratic Party members of the US Congress are daily plotting to impeach him out of the White House via a Senate trial.
Just a few months ago, President Trump came close to unleashing US might on Iran when he ordered a military strike against the latter in retaliation for the downing of a US drone over the Strait of Hormuz. He was, however, reported to have recalled the mission at the last minute on the excuse that no American life was lost in the drone tragedy.
But the situation was different penultimate Friday, as the world was shaken by news of the killing of an Iranian military commander and head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps elite Quds Force (the corps’ foreign operations arm), Lt-General Qasem Soleimani, along with Iranian-backed Iraqi militia leader, Abu Mahdi Muhandis, near Baghdad airport.
Ordered by Trump, the killings which sparked massive street protests both in Iraq and Iran were carried out by a drone strike over the accusation that Soleimani had previously killed thousands of peaceful Iranian protesters and the suspicion that he was planning an attack on four embassies in the Persian Gulf region.
While Iran saw the elimination of one of its finest military officers as an act of war and, therefore, swore to retaliate, their equally angry Iraqi counterparts, fearing that Iraq would naturally become the theatre of any military confrontation between the two muscle-flexing nations, demanded that the US withdraws its forces from their land.
Iran made good its threat on Tuesday by firing more than 15 missiles at US military bases inside Iraq, despite the United Nations’ and other sovereign calls for the exercise of restraint by both sides. Iran’s action came after its parliament placed a bounty on Mr. Trump and unanimously designated the US Army and its defence chiefs at the Pentagon as terrorist entities.
Trump who had earlier threatened to hit 52 Iranian targets, including cultural sites, in the event of an Iranian reprisal, scaled down his threat with the claim that the Iranian missiles did not cause any collateral damage, after all. But analysts think that his capitulation may have resulted from international condemnations by those who feared that his Iranian targets could include UN-designated World Heritage Sites.
He would rather tighten the sanctions noose on Teheran while calling on his compatriots in the Middle East to leave the region immediately. US ships and airliners were also advised to steer clear of the region.
The implication of all this is that Trump, who recently boasted that the US was now less dependent on foreign crude oil and, as such, didn’t need to station so many troops abroad is now being forced to consign more American soldiers and equipment to Iraq.
Also, many gainfully employed US citizens in the Middle East will now have to suffer the inconvenience of having to abandon such jobs and hastily relocate with their families in response to their President’s recent directive.
Again, back in the US homeland, travelling Iranian-Americans are said to have come under demeaning security scrutiny, particularly by Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officials.
Elsewhere, there is this growing apprehension that any further escalation of the crisis may result to yet another world war.
Iran is known to have the largest population of Shia Muslims in the world. And, as such, anything affecting the country is very likely to resonate in places with sizeable Shia populations across the globe. Apparently thinking in this direction, the Nigerian government was reported to have beefed up security, especially at the US and Israeli Embassies and Consulates in the country.
The Tide joins the UN and other peace-loving countries to demand a de-escalation of hostilities between the US and Iran while efforts should be stepped up toward exploring an enduring diplomatic solution to any sticking issues. Already, the current crisis has led to the loss of about 56 lives during a stampede at Soleimani’s funeral. This was quickly followed by the 176 victims of a Ukrainian airliner which crashed immediately after take-off from Teheran airport on Wednesday. After initial denials, an Iranian military outfit has finally admitted responsibility for the tragedy, blaming it on human error. This has prompted a massive anti-government demonstration in the nation’s capital.
As a region with the world’s highest reserve of hydrocarbons, situations in the Middle East often act to influence the global price of petroleum. Nigeria’s economy, being highly dependent on revenue from the sale of this product, remains pitiably vulnerable.
Just as we fear that the current US-Iran crisis may embolden Iran to revive its secret uranium- enrichment programme, we can only pray and hope that the situation does not escalate as to claim more human lives and hurt global oil and gas prices any further.
The recent massacre in Yelewata, Benue State, ranks among Nigeria’s deadliest attacks of
2025. While official figures put the death toll at 59, media reports and Amnesty International estimate between 100 and 200 fatalities. This atrocity extends a decade-long pattern of violence in Nigeria’s Middle Belt, where Beacon Security data records 1,043 deaths in Benue alone between May 2023 and May 2025.
President Tinubu’s visit on 18 June—four days after the 14 June attack—has drawn sharp criticism for its lateness. This delay echoes a history of inadequate responses, with Human Rights Watch documenting similar inaction in Plateau and Kaduna states since 2013, fuelling a culture of impunity. The attack lasted over two hours without meaningful security intervention, despite claims of swift action.
The violence bore hallmarks of genocide, with survivors recounting systematic house burnings and executions. More than 2.2 million people have been displaced in the region since 2019 due to comparable attacks. Data show Benue’s agricultural output falls by 0.21 per cent in crops and 0.31 per cent in livestock for every 1 per cent rise in violence.
Security forces continue to underperform. No arrests were made following the Easter attacks in April (56 killed) or May’s Gwer West massacre (42 killed). During his visit, Tinubu questioned publicly why no suspects had been detained four days after Yelewata, highlighting entrenched accountability failures.
The roots of the conflict are complex, with climate change pushing northern herders south and 77 per cent of Benue’s population reliant on agriculture. A Tiv community leader described the violence as “calculated land-grabbing” rather than mere clashes, with over 500 deaths recorded since 2019.
Government interventions have largely fallen short. The 2018 federal task force and 2025 Forest Guards initiative failed to curb violence. Tinubu’s newly announced committee of ex-governors and traditional rulers has been met with scepticism given the litany of past unkept promises.
The economic fallout is severe. Benue’s status as Nigeria’s “food basket” is crumbling as farms are destroyed and farmers displaced. This worsens the nation’s food crisis, with hunger surges in 2023-2024 directly linked to farming disruptions caused by insecurity.
Citizens demanding justice have been met with force; protesters faced police tear gas, and the State Assembly conceded total failure in safeguarding lives, admitting that the governor, deputy, and 32 lawmakers had all neglected their constitutional responsibilities.
The massacre has drawn international condemnation. Pope Leo XIV decried the “terrible massacre,” while the UN called for an investigation. The hashtag “200 Nigerians” trended worldwide on X, with many contrasting Nigeria’s slow response to India’s swift action following a plane crash with similar fatalities.
Nigeria’s centralised security system is clearly overwhelmed. A single police force is tasked with covering 36 states and 774 local government areas for a population exceeding 200 million. Between 2021 and 2023 alone, 29,828 killings and 15,404 kidnappings were recorded nationally. Proposals for state police, floated since January 2025, remain stalled.
Other populous nations offer alternative models. Canada’s provincial police, India’s state forces, and Indonesia’s municipal units demonstrate the effectiveness of decentralised policing. Nigeria’s centralised structure creates intelligence and response gaps, worsened by the distance—both physical and bureaucratic—from Abuja to affected communities.
The immediate aftermath is dire: 21 IDP camps in Benue are overwhelmed, and a humanitarian crisis is deepening. The State Assembly declared three days of mourning (18-20 June), but survivors lack sufficient medical aid. Tragically, many of those killed were already displaced by earlier violence.
A lasting solution requires a multi-pronged approach, including targeted security deployment, regulated grazing land, and full enforcement of Benue’s 2017 Anti-Open Grazing Law. The National Economic Council’s failure to prioritise state police in May 2025 represents a missed chance for reform.
Without decisive intervention, trends suggest conditions will worsen. More than 20,000 Nigerians have been killed and 13,000 kidnapped nationwide in 2025 alone. As Governor Hyacinth Alia stressed during Tinubu’s visit, state police may be the only viable path forward. All 36 states have submitted proposals supporting decentralisation—a crucial step towards breaking Nigeria’s vicious cycle of violence.
Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999 marked a watershed moment in the nation’s political history. After enduring nearly 16 years of successive military dictatorships, Nigerians embraced a new era of civil governance with the inauguration of President Olusegun Obasanjo on May 29, 1999. Since then, the country has sustained a democratic system for 26 years. But, this democratic journey has been a complex mix of progress and persistent challenges.
The formal recognition of June 12 as Democracy Day in 2018 by former President Muhammadu Buhari acknowledged a long-standing injustice. The annulment of the 1993 presidential election, Nigeria’s freest, betrayed the democratic aspirations of millions. That it took decades to honour this date reflects the nation’s complex relationship with its democratic memory.
One of the most momentous successes of Nigeria’s democracy has been the uninterrupted civilian rule over the last two and a half decades. The country has witnessed seven general elections, with power transferring peacefully among different political parties. This is particularly notable considering that prior to 1999, no civilian government had completed a full term without military intervention. The peaceful transitions in 2007, 2015, and 2023 are testaments to Nigeria’s evolving democratic maturity.
Electoral participation, while uneven, has also reflected a level of democratic engagement. In 2003, voter turnout stood at about 69 per cent, but this figure dropped to approximately 34.75 per cent in 2023, according to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Although the declining turnout raises concerns, it also highlights the increasing expectations of the electorate, who demand credible and transparent elections.
Another area of progress is the growth of a vibrant and free press. Nigerian media has played a crucial role in holding governments accountable and fostering public discourse. Investigative journalism and civil society activism have exposed corruption and human rights abuses. The rise of social media has further expanded the democratic space, enabling young Nigerians to mobilise and advocate for change, as evidenced by the 2020 #EndSARS protests.
Judicial independence has seen mixed results. On one hand, the judiciary has occasionally demonstrated resilience, such as in landmark rulings that overturned fraudulent elections or curtailed executive excesses. On the other hand, allegations of political interference and corruption within the judiciary persist, undermining public confidence in the legal system’s impartiality.
Nigeria’s democracy has also facilitated the decentralisation of power through the federal system. State governments now wield some autonomy, allowing for experimentation in governance and service delivery. While this has led to innovative policies in some states, it has also entrenched patronage networks and uneven development across the federation.
Despite these successes, Nigeria’s democratic journey faces formidable problems. Electoral integrity remains a critical concern. Reports from election observers, including those from the European Union and ECOWAS, frequently highlight issues such as vote-buying, ballot box snatching, and violence. The introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and electronic transmission of results in 2023 elections showed promise, but technical glitches and alleged manipulations dampened public trust.
Corruption continues to be a pervasive issue. Nigeria ranks 145th out of 180 countries on Transparency International’s 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index, with a score of 25/100. Democratic institutions meant to check graft—such as anti-corruption agencies and the legislature—often struggle due to political interference and weak enforcement mechanisms.
Security challenges have also strained Nigeria’s democracy. Insurgency in the North East, banditry in the North West, separatist agitations in the South East, and herder-farmer conflicts across the Middle Belt have collectively resulted in thousands of deaths and displacements. According to the Global Terrorism Index 2024, Nigeria ranks as the eighth most impacted country by terrorism. The government’s difficulty in ensuring safety erodes public confidence in the state’s capacity and legitimacy.
The economy poses another critical remonstrance. Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita stands at approximately $2,400 as of 2024, with over 40 per cent of the population living below the national poverty line. High unemployment and inflation have fueled discontent and disillusionment with democratic governance, especially among youth. Without addressing economic grievances, the democratic dividend will remain elusive for many Nigerians.
Ethnic and religious divisions further complicate Nigeria’s democratic consolidation. Politicians often exploit identity politics for electoral gains, exacerbating social tensions. Although federal character principles aim to promote inclusiveness, they have also sometimes fostered a quota mentality rather than merit-based appointments.
Gender representation remains inadequate in Nigeria’s democratic institutions. Women occupy less than 10 per cent of seats in the National Assembly, one of the lowest rates globally. Efforts to pass gender parity bills have faced stiff resistance, highlighting deep-seated cultural and institutional barriers to female political participation.
Civil liberties, while constitutionally guaranteed, are under threat. Crackdowns on protesters, restrictions on press freedom, and surveillance of activists reveal an authoritarian streak within the democratic framework. The controversial Twitter ban in 2021 exemplified the country’s willingness to curb digital freedoms, prompting domestic and international criticism.
The political crisis in Rivers State embodies broader democratic struggles. Attempts to control the state through undemocratic means expose weaknesses in federal institutions and the rule of law. Immediate restoration of democratic governance in Rivers State is vital to preserving Nigeria’s democratic integrity and institutional credibility.
Local governments remain under the control of state governors, depriving citizens of grassroots democracy. Last year’s Supreme Court judgment on local government autonomy is promising, but state-level resistance threatens its implementation. Genuine autonomy would bring governance closer to the people and foster democratic innovation.
As we mark Democracy Day, we must honour the sacrifices of Chief M.K.O. Abiola, Kudirat Abiola, Femi Falana, Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Pa Alfred Rewane, President Bola Tinubu, and countless others, who fought for Nigeria’s freedom. As democracy in Nigeria continues to evolve after 26 years, this day should inspire action toward its renewal. With despotism and state failure as real threats, both citizens and leaders must take responsibility—citizens by demanding more, and leaders by delivering. Excuses are no longer acceptable.