Travel restrictions imposed by the United States on Nigeria on Tuesday have raised concerns over security and diplomacy, but public affairs analysts say the move is more politically motivated than any objective assessment of Nigeria's security.
Analysts argue that these sanctions reflect domestic priorities and geopolitical calculations in Washington rather than a definitive judgment on Nigeria's security situation or international standing.
Speaking in separate interviews with BusinessDay newspapers, political analysts Soko Deji Ajomale-McWord and Michael Olugbode argued that the sanctions should not be interpreted as a definitive judgment on Nigeria's security situation or global standing, but as part of broader US domestic politics and geopolitical manoeuvering.
Ajomale-McWard described the measures as typical of Trump's leadership style, noting that they are consistent with his frequent use of executive orders rather than constitutionally established policies.
According to him, such actions are inherently temporary and can be reversed by a future US administration.
He pointed out that the sanctions decision appeared to have been taken before recent diplomatic engagements, suggesting that official consultations were largely procedural rather than genuine efforts at reparations.
In his view, the move reflects America's internal political calculations and use of the US as foreign policy leverage rather than a measured security assessment.
Rejecting claims that Nigeria is inherently less safe than the United States, Ajomale-McWard said insecurity manifests itself differently in the two countries.
While Nigeria faces serious security challenges, he said the violence is often driven by identifiable extremist groups, making the threats relatively predictable.
In contrast, he argued that violence in the US is often random, citing repeated mass shootings by individuals who acquire high-end weapons and attack civilians without warning.
He cautioned Nigerians against idealizing the United States, stressing that “America is not heaven”, urging citizens to focus more on national development than on decisions taken in Washington.
He said the long-term impact of the sanctions would be minimal, as they are not backed by constitutional law and could be easily overturned.
On the economic front, Ajomale-McWard acknowledged that Nigerian and US businesses interested may experience short-term disruption, but expressed confidence that existing trade relationships and investment frameworks will remain largely intact.
He also criticized US foreign policy in Africa, particularly its role in the destabilization of Libya, which he said significantly contributed to insecurity in the Sahel and Nigeria.
“If insecurity is the real concern, then responsibility for what happened in Libya must also be taken,” he said. He said Africa is suffering the consequences of those decisions.
Ajomale-McWard further expressed optimism that Washington will refrain from actions that undermine its own economic interests, stressing that Nigerian investors contribute to the US economy through taxes and job creation.
He suggested that the sanctions may be a bargaining tool aimed at strengthening the US's negotiating position rather than a genuine effort to exclude Nigeria.
Michael Olugbode, an Abuja-based public affairs analyst, described the recurring travel bans as an expression of superpower arrogance that undermines the spirit of friendship and mutual respect expected in international diplomacy.
According to him, the frequency of such sanctions has made them almost routine, reducing their impact but raising concerns about the quality of relations between the two countries.
He argued that the US often maintains a sense of superiority in its dealings with Nigeria, treating the country as an inferior partner rather than an equal sovereign state.
Olugbode said differences between the allies should be resolved through dialogue and cooperation, and not through punitive measures.
He also faulted Nigeria's excessive dependence on the United States, noting that Nigerians have contributed to the situation by giving excessive importance to travel to the US.
“We give the impression that without America, we are nothing,” he said, adding that this perception encourages Washington to resort to sanctions and sanctions whenever tensions arise.
Addressing allegations of religious killings in Nigeria, Olugbode acknowledged the country's security challenges but rejected narratives that the violence is specifically religious or targeted at any one group.
He stressed that insecurity affects Nigerians along religious and ethnic lines.
He warned that despite diplomatic efforts by Nigerian officials, the US's hardline stance could ultimately force Nigeria to reevaluate the value of its relationship with Washington.
According to him, the US often behaves as if it has the right to police the world, adding that this stance is especially evident in its dealings with African countries.
Olugbode urged Nigerian leaders to assert the country's sovereignty, strengthen self-confidence and reduce excessive dependence on any single foreign power.
While acknowledging the emotional and psychological impact of the sanctions, particularly for Nigerians who view US visas as a symbol of success, he dismissed fears of long-term economic damage.
“Nigeria will always have friends,” he said, expressing confidence that the country can forge new partnerships and attract investment elsewhere if necessary.
Both analysts said the current situation does not pose any fundamental threat to Nigeria-US relations and advised Nigerians to remain calm, focus on internal developments and avoid overreacting to what they described as temporary political tactics.
“Normalcy will return. This is not something Nigeria should lose sleep over,” Ajomale-McWard said.
