Why Both Christians and Muslims Are Victims of Extremist Violence — and Why the Narrative Is Often Framed as “Religious Conflict”-  
--Ubuntu Rooted in Humanity —

In Nigeria and the wider Sahel region, extremist violence has left a deep and pervasive scar on society. From Boko Haram and ISWAP in Northern Nigeria to Al-Qaeda-affiliated groups in Mali and Burkina Faso, countless communities have suffered attacks that kill, displace, and traumatize civilians.

Both Christians and Muslims are among the victims, yet public discourse often frames the conflict narrowly as a “religious war.” This framing oversimplifies the reality, obscuring the complex interplay of political, economic, social, and historical factors that drive the violence.

A closer examination reveals that extremism is less about faith and more about power, control, and exploitation — with religion being a convenient façade for deeper structural problems.

1. The Reality: Extremists Target Muslims and Christians Alike

Contrary to the dominant narrative, both Christians and Muslims are heavily affected by terrorist violence in Northern Nigeria and the Sahel:

• Muslims are targeted: Many extremist groups, particularly Boko Haram and ISWAP, routinely attack Muslim communities that resist recruitment, criticize their ideology, or refuse to pay extortion money. Clerics, moderate leaders, and Muslims who support the government are frequently kidnapped, tortured, or executed. These attacks demonstrate that extremism is ideologically selective rather than purely sectarian.

• Christians are targeted: Churches, markets, and schools have been attacked in predominantly Christian towns in Borno, Adamawa, and Taraba states. Kidnapping for ransom, mass killings, and forced displacement have disproportionately affected Christian communities in rural areas.

Both groups share a common vulnerability: they inhabit regions where state protection is limited, poverty is widespread, and extremist groups can operate with impunity. Extremists exploit weak governance and unprotected populations rather than targeting believers purely based on religion.

2. Political and Economic Motivations Masked as Religion

One of the reasons both Muslims and Christians fall victim is that extremist violence is strategically employed for political and economic gain:

• Control of territory: Extremists aim to dominate rural and resource-rich areas. Attacks on communities are often tactical — intended to assert control over villages, forests, and trade routes. Religion becomes a banner under which territorial ambition is pursued.

• Funding and extortion: Kidnapping for ransom, cattle rustling, and taxation of local populations are key revenue streams. Religious identity is secondary to the practical goal of financial gain.

• Suppressing dissent: Extremists attack those who oppose their ideology — whether Muslim clerics critical of Boko Haram or community leaders advocating cooperation with the government. These actions demonstrate that ideology is used to punish defiance rather than purely to convert or subjugate.

The result is a population of victims that is religiously mixed, yet the narrative is often simplified into “Muslims versus Christians” for dramatic effect.

3. Historical and Cultural Misreading of Conflict

The perception of violence as purely religious is reinforced by historical and cultural misunderstandings:

• Colonial legacies: Colonial-era policies in Northern Nigeria and other parts of Africa often codified religious identity as a political marker. British indirect rule, for example, strengthened Muslim emirs while isolating Christian minorities, planting seeds for later ethno-religious tensions. Modern observers sometimes conflate these historical dynamics with contemporary extremist activity, missing the current economic and political drivers.

• Media simplification: Headlines highlighting “Christian villages attacked” or “Muslim clerics killed” are easier to communicate than the nuanced reality of terrorism. This framing appeals to audiences seeking binary narratives, reinforcing the myth of a religious war rather than exposing structural factors.

• Global jihadist rhetoric: Extremist groups themselves amplify religious narratives in propaganda to gain legitimacy, recruit fighters, and attract international attention. While their rhetoric is faith-based, their operational decisions often prioritize power, funding, and local control over theological consistency.

4. Governance Failures as the Root Cause

Both Christian and Muslim victims illustrate the consequences of chronic governance failures:

• State absence: Many affected regions lack effective policing, military protection, and access to justice. Extremist groups fill this vacuum, wielding power indiscriminately.

• Corruption and elite complicity: Investigations have repeatedly indicated that some politicians and local leaders facilitate terrorism for personal gain, whether through protection, funding, or selective enforcement. Such complicity ensures that violence targets communities regardless of faith, based on control, compliance, or opposition.

• Poverty and marginalization: Extremists thrive in communities where economic opportunities are scarce and education is limited. Both Christian and Muslim communities are affected equally when socioeconomic neglect intersects with weak security.

This shows that terrorism is a symptom of structural dysfunction rather than a natural outcome of religious animosity.

5. The Danger of Framing It as Only Religious Conflict

The oversimplified narrative that Nigeria’s crisis is a religious war has significant consequences:

• Diverts attention from structural issues: Policymakers and the public may focus on interfaith reconciliation instead of addressing governance, corruption, and socioeconomic inequality — the real drivers of extremism.

• Polarizes communities unnecessarily: When violence is presented as a Christian-Muslim struggle, ordinary citizens may perceive each other as natural enemies, fostering distrust and undermining national unity.

• Obscures accountability: Political elites who exploit terror networks benefit from framing the crisis as a religious struggle. Religious rhetoric masks their role in financing, protecting, or negotiating with extremist groups, keeping them beyond scrutiny.

• Limits international understanding: Donor agencies and foreign governments may respond primarily to interfaith tensions rather than addressing terror financing, arms flows, and institutional weaknesses that perpetuate the crisis.

6. Both Faiths Suffer, Yet Religious Labels Persist

It is important to note that extremism is not indiscriminate chaos; it is targeted, strategic, and opportunistic. The groups use religion to recruit, intimidate, and justify violence, but their operations are often calculated based on practical considerations: territory, resources, obedience, and revenue.

Muslims and Christians alike are caught in a web where state incapacity, elite manipulation, and extremist strategy intersect. The religious lens overshadows these realities, making it harder to design effective policies and undermining social cohesion.

7. Toward a More Accurate Understanding

To address this misperception, it is essential to:

1. Highlight the shared vulnerability of both communities to shift discourse from sectarian blame to collective protection.

2. Examine political and economic incentives that sustain terrorism, rather than attributing it solely to faith.

3. Strengthen governance and institutional accountability to reduce dependence on religious rhetoric as a justification for violence.

4. Educate the public and media about the complex realities, discouraging simplistic narratives that inflame division.

By reframing the crisis, policymakers, media, and civil society can focus on the root causes — not just the symptoms — and foster Ubuntu-based unity, where human security takes precedence over religious identity.

Violence Is Not Religion; It Is a Tool

Both Christians and Muslims in Nigeria are victims because extremism exploits weak governance, poverty, and elite manipulation, not faith alone. The narrative of a purely religious conflict persists because it is simpler to tell, politically convenient, and strategically used by actors who benefit from chaos.

Addressing the crisis requires moving beyond labels: tackling political sponsorship, socioeconomic deprivation, and security failures, while emphasizing shared humanity over religious identity. Only then can Nigeria confront terrorism effectively — not as a religious war, but as a challenge to justice, governance, and human dignity.

UbuntuSafa.com | Ubuntu Rooted in Humanity
"Violence that divides us by faith serves those who profit from our fear. Recognizing our shared humanity is the first step toward peace."