07/01/2026
Sheikh Ahmad Gumi has now publicly declared that groups such as ISIS, Boko Haram, ISWAP, and other terrorist organizations are not Muslims and do not represent Islam, emphasizing that Islam forbids violence, compulsion in faith, and terror.
While this statement aligns with core Islamic teachings, its timing has raised serious public questions, especially against the backdrop of growing international security pressure and reports linked to a possible U.S. counterterrorism target list involving Nigeria under renewed global tension associated with U.S. President Donald Trump.
This sudden shift contrasts sharply with Sheikh Gumi’s earlier positions. In the past, he openly described armed bandits as “brothers” and repeatedly argued that Nigerians must learn to live with them, whether they liked it or not. He strongly advocated negotiation rather than military action, frequently positioning himself as a mediator between bandits and their victims.
Many Nigerians criticized this stance, arguing that it legitimized criminal violence, emboldened terrorists, and undermined the sacrifices of security forces and innocent victims. His persistent opposition to decisive action against banditry was widely viewed as dangerous and morally flawed.
More striking is the fact that Sheikh Gumi had previously claimed that the U.S. government tagged him among individuals allegedly linked to Boko Haram and placed on a list for possible elimination. At the time, he was vocal in criticizing America and its leadership.
However, following emerging reports of possible U.S. counterterrorism strikes and heightened scrutiny, those critical posts about America and its president have reportedly been deleted. This abrupt cleanup of past statements has fueled public perception that fear of international consequences, rather than moral conviction, may be driving his new narrative.
The key issue for Nigerians is not whether terrorism represents Islam it does not but why this clarification is coming now, after years of controversial advocacy, negotiations with criminals, and rhetoric that appeared to normalize terror. Consistency matters in leadership, especially on issues of national security,
