In recent days, a deeply inflammatory and misleading post by a foreign commentator, Mike Arnold, has circulated across social media platforms, falsely portraying the Sultan of Sokoto, His Eminence Muhammadu Sa’ad Abubakar, as the mastermind of a supposed Islamic agenda to conquer Nigeria and unleash a global jihad.
The publication, wrapped in sensational headlines and conspiracy-laden language, is not only dishonest and reckless, but also a dangerous attempt to undermine Nigeria’s fragile social and religious harmony by demonizing one of the country’s most respected voices for peace and interfaith unity and the 17th most influential Muslim in the world.
For millions of Nigerians — Muslims and Christians alike — the Sultan’s decades-long record speaks louder than the manufactured hysteria of online propagandists and alarmists such as Mike Arnold seeking attention by creating fear and division.
Far from being an agent of extremism, the Sultan of Sokoto has consistently stood as one of Nigeria’s strongest advocates for peaceful coexistence, religious tolerance, national unity, and dialogue across faith lines. His interventions during periods of national tension have repeatedly helped calm nerves, reduce hostility, and preserve social stability in a country as religiously and ethnically diverse as Nigeria.
To accuse such a figure of orchestrating violence is not only absurd; it is maliciously wicked.
Sultan as a symbol of unity, not division
Since ascending the throne in 2006, Sultan Sa’ad Abubakar has built a reputation as a bridge-builder committed to fostering understanding between Muslims and Christians. As President-General of the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA), he has consistently emphasized moderation, mutual respect, and national cohesion.
At various times of heightened religious tension, the Sultan has publicly condemned terrorism, sectarian killings, and extremist ideologies. He has repeatedly declared that Boko Haram and similar groups do not represent Islam and should never be used to define Nigerian Muslims.
His voice against extremism remains particularly resonant. In one of his widely quoted remarks, the Sultan explained:
“Jihad simply means striving — striving to be a better Muslim, a better Christian, a better citizen, and a better human being. It is not about killing anyone. Islam abhors extremism.”
Another is: “If you blow up yourself or kill people shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’, you are going to hell” — Sultan of Sokoto.
Besides, his collaboration with Christian leaders, particularly through platforms such as the Nigeria Inter-Religious Council (NIREC), has helped sustain dialogue even during some of Nigeria’s darkest moments. Alongside Christian clerics, including leaders of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), the Sultan has travelled across the country preaching peace and urging Nigerians not to allow religion to become a weapon of political manipulation.
These are not the actions of a man plotting division. They are the actions of a statesman committed to peace and harmonious coexistence.
Indeed, several Christian leaders have, over the years, publicly acknowledged the Sultan’s efforts towards peace and national development. His palace has remained open to religious and community leaders from all backgrounds, while his speeches consistently emphasize justice, compassion, and peaceful coexistence.
Security is the responsibility of government
One of the most dishonest aspects of Mike Arnold’s narrative is the attempt to place responsibility for Nigeria’s security challenges on the Sultan.
Nigeria is a constitutional democracy with elected governments, security agencies, military institutions, and law enforcement structures responsible for protecting lives and property. The Sultan is a traditional and religious leader with moral influence, not a military commander or political ruler controlling the Nigerian state.
To suggest that he directs national security operations or orchestrates violence across the country is a dangerous falsehood completely detached from reality.
Nigeria’s insecurity is a complex national crisis driven by multiple factors including terrorism, banditry, poverty, unemployment, illegal arms proliferation, weak governance, corruption, climate-related conflicts, and organized criminality. Simplifying such challenges into an imaginary “Islamic conquest agenda” or “jihad” insults the intelligence of Nigerians and trivializes the suffering of victims across all communities.
Muslims, Christians, and adherents of traditional religions have all suffered immensely from insecurity. Several Muslim villages in the North have been destroyed by terrorists and bandits. Islamic clerics have been assassinated. Mosques and markets have been attacked. Thousands of Muslims remain displaced across several states.
The pain is national, not sectarian.
The danger of imported conspiracy theories
What makes Arnold’s publication particularly dangerous is its potential to inflame religious war in a country where emotions around identity and faith are already sensitive.
The language used in the post is deliberately provocative. Terms such as “final jihad,” “Christian genocide,” and “global Islamic conquest” are crafted not for constructive engagement but for emotional manipulation and fearmongering.
This kind of rhetoric has historically been used to justify foreign interference and destabilization in vulnerable nations. From Iraq to Libya and elsewhere, alarmist narratives built around religion, extremism, and “saving oppressed populations” have often heralded external interventions that ultimately left societies more fractured and devastated.
Libya remains a painful example. Once one of Africa’s most stable states, it descended into chaos after foreign-backed intervention destroyed state institutions under the guise of liberation. Years later, the country remains deeply unstable.
Nigeria must not become another victim of an externally amplified division.
Many Nigerians increasingly view such sensational narratives as part of a broader agenda aimed at weakening national unity, eroding trust among citizens, and portraying the country as irredeemably broken before the international community.
But Nigeria is not Libya. Nigeria is not Venezuela.
Nigeria is a resilient nation of over 220 million people with extraordinary religious and ethnic diversity. Despite its many challenges, millions of Nigerians continue to coexist peacefully every day in markets, schools, workplaces, neighborhoods, and families that cut across religious lines.
That unity must not be sacrificed on the altar of Mike Arnold’s propaganda.
Rejecting hate, defending truth
This is not to deny the seriousness of violence affecting parts of the country. Christian communities in some regions have suffered horrific attacks and deserve justice, protection, and national solidarity. Equally, Muslim communities devastated by terrorism and banditry deserve the same compassion and support.
Acknowledging these realities, however, is entirely different from promoting conspiracy theories that demonize an entire religion or falsely accuse respected leaders of masterminding violence.
Nigeria’s path forward lies in strengthening institutions, improving governance, reforming security structures, promoting economic inclusion, and encouraging sincere interfaith dialogue — not in spreading dangerous myths capable of provoking unrest.
The Sultan of Sokoto has consistently chosen the path of dialogue over division, peace over provocation, and unity over hatred. His voice has remained one of moderation in moments when extremists on all sides sought to exploit national tensions.
That legacy cannot be erased by the falsehoods of Mike Arnold and his cohorts.
At this critical moment, Nigerians must reject divisive propaganda and stand firmly against any attempt to turn religion into a weapon of chaos. The country’s diversity remains one of its greatest strengths, and preserving that unity is a responsibility shared by all citizens.
Falsehood may trend for a moment, but truth and national unity must prevail in the end.
Balogun is a columnist with Vanguard Newspaper and publisher of The Reporter Nigeria.
1 Comment
Undoubtedly the Role of the sultan should be more of a Traditional Role vas leader of a Tribe but His doubling into Religion affairs is Responsible for All this controversial impression about His implications about insecurity in Nigeria