Following a call by Walid Phares, a former advisor to the Republican presidential campaigns of President Donald Trump, for an emergency US military base to be established in Port Harcourt, Nigerians have taken to social media to condemn the suggestion, alleging that the call is an avenue to exploit the nation’s mineral resources.

According to a statement on Phares’ official X handle, urging President Trump to send troops to the main port city of the Biafra region.

He wrote, “To deter #BokoHaram and other jihadist groups in Nigeria—and to stop their massacres of Christians and threats against moderate Muslims— I advise the #Trump administration to establish an emergency base in #PortHarcourt, the main port city of the #Biafra region.”

He added, “Such a move would enable the rapid deployment of international humanitarian aid, particularly assistance from American churches. President @realDonaldTrumphas issued two strong statements condemning the jihadist attacks on Nigerian Christian communities and has directed the Secretary of War to prepare contingency plans for the “protection of communities” in Nigeria, should the federal government fail to stop the jihadists—as has been the case for years in northern and central Nigeria. In the meantime, targeted strikes against jihadist forces could also be considered.”

However, Nigerians responded, dismissing the rhetoric of establishing a base in Port-Harcourt, and stressing that the oil-rich city is not a Biafra region and that there is no Christian genocide in the city.

Nigerians further expressed reservations over the invasion, stating that the US invasion is not a humanitarian cause, but rather one aimed at polarising the country and deepening the crisis within.

An X user who identifies as @Iamjaneezy wrote, “This talk about a “U.S. emergency base in Port Harcourt” isn’t about humanitarian aid it’s about oil, geopolitical control, and strategic positioning. Let’s break it down clearly for everyone.

“Port Harcourt = Nigeria’s oil heart. That’s the entry point to the Niger Delta, where most of Nigeria’s crude is refined and exported. Whoever controls that region controls Nigeria’s economic pulse.”

He added, “Protection of Christians” is the narrative oil is the motive. They use religion because it divides and distracts. But if their goal was purely humanitarian, they’d build hospitals, schools, and trauma centers not military bases beside oil pipelines and export terminals.

“History repeats itself. In Iraq, they said it was about weapons of mass destruction it was oil. In Libya, they said it was about human rights it was oil. In Venezuela, they said it was about democracy it was oil. And now, in Nigeria, they say it’s about Christians but again, it’s oil.

“A base in Port Harcourt is not “help” its leverage. It gives them military control over the Gulf of Guinea, proximity to West Africa’s energy routes, and influence over OPEC’s largest African producer. Let’s not fall for the same script written decades ago. Nigeria must protect its sovereignty, its people, and its oil because whoever controls our energy, controls our freedom. We don’t need a foreign base; we need a reformed system that ensures our oil wealth finally serves Nigerians not outsiders or the same corrupt elite.”

Another user identified as @voxnihilum wrote, “Using Port Harcourt and Biafra in the same breath isn’t coincidence — it whispers of that formidable Biafra lobby perhaps out in D.C. flexing its muscle. Nigeria, at this point, is under full-blown state capture — and if history repeats, a Sudan-style split might not even be the worst card in the deck. Obama greenlit that one, remember? I’m just here… watching the tectonics shift.”

Another user, @abdulcardry, wrote, “This is clearly divide and rule tactics. First, they used religion as the basis, and now they’re pushing for a region. It’s a wake-up call for the Nigerian government to address the root cause of the insurgency and stop the killings of Nigerians.”

@Tolu7086 also wrote, “So because they want to protect Christians, we should hand over our land for a foreign military base? That’s how it starts — next thing, they’ll be dictating our security, economy, and politics. Nigeria doesn’t need foreign soldiers”

@Joshuajee0x also wrote, “No Christian has been killed in port harcourt for their faith. Go where Christian’s are being killed.”
A user who identified as @kachi_paul also wrote, “Interesting proposal, but a U.S. base in Port Harcourt would raise serious sovereignty and regional tension issues. Humanitarian support yes, military footprint no. Protecting civilians from jihadist violence is critical, but foreign military bases in Nigeria have deep geopolitical consequences. This idea needs careful thought.”