Persecution and Policy: Christians in Nigeria and Sudan
This episode of The New Sentinel unpacks the intensifying violence against Christians in Nigeria and Sudan, exploring the distinct conflict dynamics and the international—especially U.S.—responses under the incoming Trump administration. Using intelligence reports and global data, the hosts analyze sources of violence, humanitarian impacts, and real-world implications for U.S. and international policy.
This show was created with Jellypod, the AI Podcast Studio. Create your own podcast with Jellypod today.
Get StartedIs this your podcast and want to remove this banner? Click here.
Chapter 1
Escalating Violence Against Christians: Nigeria vs. Sudan
Chukwuka
Welcome back to The New Sentinel. I'm Chukwuka, and today, we've gotta tackle a tough, honestly pretty personal topic: the crisis facing Christians in Nigeria—and what’s happening in Sudan too. Now, numbers don’t tell you everything, but in 2025 alone, over 7,000 Christians were killed in Nigeria. That's just mind-boggling. In Sudan, the overall violence is even deadlier—20,000 to maybe 30,000 people killed in the ongoing civil war, and Christians are especially taking the hit in places like Darfur and the Nuba Mountains.
Duke Johnson
Ain’t no way to sugarcoat it, Chukwuka. It's a mess on both fronts, but you look at who’s behind the stuff in Nigeria—Boko Haram, ISWAP, Fulani herdsmen—they’ve all got religious targeting at the heart of it. Meanwhile, in Sudan, you got the SAF and RSF, and they don’t even pretend—they use this war as cover for straight up ethnic and religious violence. The stats make you want to holler—seven thousand Christians killed? That's about thirty-five a day. These aren’t just numbers. These are families torn apart. And, what, 39,000 churches have been destroyed in Nigeria since 2009? That’s a full-on campaign, not some random attacks.
Olga Ivanova - Female, Progressive
It's unbearably tragic, and honestly, the world’s response is never enough. Sudan’s civil war is more than religious—it’s ethnic cleansing, war crimes, sexual violence, famine. Christians are often minorities within minorities, marked three times over in places like Darfur. But back to Nigeria for a moment—Chukwuka, you mentioned this is personal. You ever been near something like this when you visited family?
Chukwuka
I have, Olga. The last time I went back to my village—it’s not the city, it’s just a regular place in the Middle Belt—nobody was talking about jobs or crops. All I heard was folk worrying about the next church attack. You could see the tension in people’s faces. Doors barred during night prayers, kids told not to walk alone, mothers arranging sleep schedules just in case... I’ll never forget, one of my cousins, she asked me, “Uncle, why do they hate us for praying?” and honestly, I didn’t have a good answer. It’s that kind of fear that gets lost when we just read numbers.
Major Ethan “Sentinel” Graves
Chuk, you painted it plain as day. I mean, that’s asymmetric warfare—targeted, constant, leaves people feeling powerless. Sudan, though, that's almost the opposite—it’s a civil war where being Christian just stacks the odds dead against you, especially in Darfur. Christians are only about, what, four percent of Sudan’s population? And both the SAF and RSF are using the chaos to go after minorities, churches, anything that doesn’t fit their agenda. In el-Fasher alone, you had fifteen hundred killed in just one month. It's like they're tearing apart the roots of these communities, not just the branches. I’m not sure folks really grasp what “systemic” means until you see this kind of carnage play out day after day, year after year.
Olga Ivanova - Female, Progressive
Yes, Ethan, and it all feels so impersonal from a distance, but this is the destruction of culture and families. We talk about numbers, but it is the fear, the erasure, the psychological scars—these are things that last for generations. These two crises—Nigeria and Sudan—they look different but leave the same devastation behind. Maybe that's a good place to flow into how governments are responding—or not responding—to all this suffering.
Chapter 2
Government (In)action, Humanitarian Crisis, and International Fallout
Chukwuka
So picking up from there—one thing I always say is, when the government sits on the fence, the people pay the price. In Nigeria, the authorities have been called out, over and over, for basically washing their hands of the whole thing. Instead of hunting down Boko Haram, they argue, they deny, they say, 'everything’s under control.' Meanwhile, people are being kidnapped every week, churches torched, millions running for their lives. Three million displaced in Nigeria alone! And that's not even counting the psychological displacement—people lose their sense of home entirely.
Olga Ivanova - Female, Progressive
That’s the pattern—they minimize, deny, or even profit from the chaos. In Sudan, it’s even worse. You don’t even have one government; you have two armed camps fighting for power, and in the crossfire, all state protection just evaporates. I’ve talked to aid workers in Darfur recently who told me stories that keep you up at night—whole families hiding in burnt-out buildings, children dying from hunger or sexual violence. The displacement is staggering—over ten million people in Sudan. That’s whole cities emptied, and famine’s hitting a quarter of the country. Everywhere you look, it’s either violence or the ghost of it. The world barely gets a headline out before it moves on.
Duke Johnson
And, Olga, you’re right. The average American ain't got a clue what ten million people on the move looks like. For us, that’s like, evacuating the whole of Los Angeles and Dallas, just gone—folks walking with nothing but what’s on their back. In Sudan, these two rival forces—the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces—they’re using famine, they’re using rape, they don’t care. And we’re not just talking war, but social breakdown. Even getting aid convoys through is a craps shoot. Plus, there’s so much underreporting—stuff doesn’t even make it onto the world news unless it’s especially gruesome or viral, and by then, it’s way too late for the victims involved.
Major Ethan “Sentinel” Graves
I can't help but look at the big picture. This is classic government inaction. Nigeria denies, and so the insurgents keep playing whack-a-mole. Sudan, like Olga said, there’s literally no one left in charge. It’s like watching a police force dissolve in a riot—nobody’s left to call for help. Add the numbers—millions running, famine, sexual violence—it’s a textbook humanitarian nightmare that just keeps rolling. What really gets me is that these countries ain’t isolated. The risk is this spills over, destabilizes neighbors, creates more chaos for everybody. It’s not, "Oh, it’s over there, so we’re good." That mindset is dangerous.
Olga Ivanova - Female, Progressive
Absolutely, and when I speak to NGOs or volunteers working on the ground, they say the real story isn't just violence; it's the slow violence, the chronic fear, the hunger, families turning into refugees overnight, losing homes, everything. There’s an epidemic of sexual violence nobody wants to really confront. There's so much pain that never makes it into policy debates. Even simple medical aid or a safe corridor seems too much to ask for. As we talk about what the rest of the world is doing—or failing to do—I hope we don't lose sight of these lives. The system works only when it works for everyone, but that's clearly not the case here.
Chapter 3
International Responses and U.S. Policy Shifts Under Trump
Major Ethan “Sentinel” Graves
Now, looking outwards—how’s the international community responding to all this mess? The U.S., especially under the new Trump administration, is, uh, doubling down on Nigeria. They put Nigeria back on the “Countries of Particular Concern” list, put out threats about troop deployments, and all that jazz. Meanwhile, Sudan’s mostly getting, what, statements and a few UN sanctions. Might be a little harsh, but they’re not seriously stepping in—not compared to Nigeria.
Duke Johnson
Yeah, the report spelled it out—the Trump crowd’s clear: Nigeria’s a front-line CPC, and there’s talk of drones, even boots on the ground if things go sideways. Sudan? Just lots of talk, sanctions, arms embargoes—sure, but, let’s be real, it’s mostly a hands-off deal. I get it strategically; Nigeria’s an easier sell—targeted insurgency, you can do drone hits, intel sharing, whack the baddies and get out. Sudan’s got no clear front lines, it’s all internal war, so, yeah, nobody wants to step into another unwinnable quagmire. But that don't mean we should just look away.
Olga Ivanova - Female, Progressive
It’s a clear double standard, Duke. Nigeria’s crisis gets more attention—maybe because it’s easier to frame as “terrorism”—while Sudan’s is so big and messy, there’s political risk in getting too involved. Reports recommend arms embargoes on Sudanese leaders, calls for African Union ceasefire monitors, but action is slow. And it's not just the U.S.—the African Union, IGAD, all these bodies tried peace talks, but nothing’s stuck. Humanitarian aid’s always playing catch-up, sanctions hit the elites, not the people suffering.
Chukwuka
That's the brutal truth. And I know some folks listening will ask, "Why not do more in Sudan?"—but the sad reality is, U.S. policy likes solutions you can wrap up neatly. Asymmetrical stuff—like in Nigeria—fits that model, you get your “mission accomplished” moment, at least on paper. Sudan? That's a never-ending tangle—ethnic, political, religious, famine. Still, the reports do offer some actionable things—more drones and surveillance over Nigeria, sure, but also tougher sanctions, even talk of an arms embargo and a proper ceasefire monitored by the AU over in Sudan. Question is, will any of that stick without the will to see it through?
Major Ethan “Sentinel” Graves
History shows us, these approaches are night and day. Asymmetrical fights, say like Nigeria, sometimes you can move the needle—take out leaders, disrupt cells, train up the local teams. But when you got a symmetric, full-on civil war like Sudan, it’s a meat grinder unless you’ve got buy-in from neighbors and multilateral players. U.S. and UN did it in Bosnia and the Balkans eventually, but it takes years. Intervention isn’t a quick fix—it’s a marathon, not a sprint. Sometimes I wonder, what threshold has to be crossed before we see that kind of response? Is it the ten million displaced? Genocide warnings? I don't know—it’s grim thinking about what actually sparks action.
Olga Ivanova - Female, Progressive
And as we wrap up, I think our takeaway has to be this—both of these crises risk spilling over and destabilizing entire regions if things don’t change, fast. I hope policy makers hear it: intervention needs to be more than optics. These are people, not chess pieces. We must demand better, whether it's coordinated U.S. action, African Union leadership, or real humanitarian corridors, not just reports and recommendations left unread.
Chukwuka
Amen to that, Olga. I’d just remind listeners—don’t tune out, even when the headlines fade. This is the hard work, making sense of tragedy, pushing leaders to act, and—well, just maybe—helping bring some hope to a dark situation. For now, that’s all from me. Sentinel, Olga, Duke, always a pleasure sharing the roundtable with you.
Major Ethan “Sentinel” Graves
Right back at you, Chuk. Let's keep the heat on—these stories matter. Catch y'all next time.
Olga Ivanova - Female, Progressive
Take care, everyone. Let's stay engaged and keep fighting for the voiceless.
Duke Johnson
Keep your powder dry, folks. Y’all be safe—’til the next drop.
