Column
Enugu 2023: All Eyes On Governor Ugwuanyi As Clamour For Prof. Bart Nnaji Heightens
Professor Bart Nnaji, “a gift to human race”―former US Secretary of State
As political activities for next year’s general elections intensify across Nigeria, Enugu State seems to be a beehive of activities due to the caliber of persons indicating interest in various elective positions to be contested. This is so because since the return of democracy in 1999, the state this time around is experiencing unprecedented buoyancy in number of persons expressing interest to vie for one position or the other among various elective positions of Governorship, Senatorial, House of Representatives and State Assembly openings that would be up for grabs from the first and second quarters of next year. Some are wondering why this frenzy?
A global citizen and an accomplished astute technocrat, Prof Bart Nnaji, is being called upon by a wide range of groups and opinion moulders in Enugu state and beyond to step out and contest for the governorship of the state.
The clamour for him to run may not be unconnected with the desire among many for him to bring his wealth of experience from the public and private sectors as well as his intellectual capability to bear in consolidating on the gains of the state over the years and create a new pathway for growth in running the government should everything work out successfully.
Another reason is that Enugu being the heart of Igbo land, people of the area are interested in seeing the South East experience industrial and economic transformation beyond it’s present status so that the current wave of restiveness and criminality resulting mainly from lack of jobs in the region could abate.
The heightened quest after him to come and lead Enugu State makes one to ask:
Who Is Professor Bart Nnaji?
Description of the person of Prof. Nnaji is as varied as there are people sharing opinion about him.
Former America Secretary of State, James Baker once described Bart Nnaji as simply, “a gift to human race”.
Also, an American Certified Public Accountant as well as Chartered Global Management Accountant based in USA, Chief Christopher Ogbodo, says that Prof. Bart Nnaji is “a super exceptionally brilliant human being”.
Professor Bart O. Nnaji is the Chairman/CEO of Geometric Power Limited, the first indigenously owned private sector power company in Nigeria. Geometric Power develops and invests in power plants, sub stations, electricity distribution infrastructure and gas pipelines.
He is the Pro-Chancellor and Chairman, Governing Council, Bells University of Technology, Otta Ogun State, Nigeria.
He also Chairs, Advisory Board for Nigeria Liquified Natural Gas, NLNG, Prize for Science.
Prof. Nnaji was Nigeria’s Federal Minister of Power from 2011 to 2012. Prior to that, he served as Special Adviser to the President on Power and Chairman, Presidential Task Force on Power from 2010 to 2011. During this period, he developed the popular Roadmap for Power Reform in Nigeria. He subsequently led the implementation of the Power Roadmap as well as privatization of Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN), the state-owned utility monopoly as Honourable Minister of Power. During his tenure as Minister, he was a member of the National Economic Management Team, chaired by the President and includes Senior Ministers and select Captains of Industry. He served as a member of the Presidential Advisory Council from March 2010 to January 2011 and was the Chairman of the Power committee of the Council. In 1993, he served as Federal Minister of Science and Technology of Nigeria. Prior to his appointment, the Ministry had been abolished by Government. He re-established the Ministry to sustainability to date.
As Minister of Power, the quantum of power rose from about 2800 megawatts to about 5300 megawatts, a landmark achievement in power generation in Nigeria at the time.
As Minister of Power, the quantum of power rose from about 2800 megawatts to about 5300 megawatts, a landmark achievement in power generation in Nigeria at the time.
In 2009, he was appointed by then President Yar’Adua as a member of the National Energy Council (the apex decision making body on energy in Nigeria). He was the pioneer President of the Independent Power Providers Association of Nigeria (IPPAN). He served on the Governing Board of the Nigerian Merit Board from 2008 to January 2014.
Prof Nnaji was a Professor of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst from 1983 to 1996. He subsequently became the Alcoa Foundation Professor of Engineering at University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania from 1996 to 2003. In 2003, he served as the William Kepler Whiteford Professor of Engineering at University of Pittsburgh where he also spearheaded the creation of the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) Centre for e-Design as a multi-campus NSF Center of Excellence in the United States of America and served as its first Director. He resigned as William Kepler Professor of Engineering and Director of the U.S. NSF Center for e-Design in 2007.
Prof Nnaji also served as Principal or Co-Principal Investigator on over $50 million research sponsored by the US National Science Foundation, NATO, US Department of Defence, NASA, GE, Boeing, IBM, Ford Motors, and many other major companies.
He has published 5 books and over 100 technical articles. His book, Computer Integrated Manufacturing and Engineering, won the 1994 world best text book prize for Manufacturing Engineering. He was the founding Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal of Design and Manufacturing and has served as Editor of many professional journals.
He has also served as Chairman of many conferences including the World Conference on Robotics Research (1991); the UN Institute for Training and Research Workshop for diplomats from various parts of the world at the UN headquarters on debt and financial management for developing countries (2001 and 2002).
He has received numerous awards including: 5 honorary doctorates from prestigious Universities; Nigeria’s highest intellectual national honour — Nigerian National Order of Merit (NNOM); the National Honour – Commander of the Order of Niger (CON); Fellow of Nigerian Academy of Science; Fellow of Nigerian Academy of Engineering (FAEng); The U.S. Secretary of State’s Distinguished Public Service Award (1995); Distinguished Scientist Award by the World Bank – IMF Africa Group (October 1998); West African Power Industries Life-time Achievement Award for 2014; Onwa Nkanu, conferred on him by all the traditional rulers of Nkanuland/Enugu East Senatorial zone; many other traditional/chieftaincy titles; among other honours and awards.
The acceptance of the calls on Prof Bart Nnaji to run for the governorship seat of Enugu State would have amounted to a distraction from his focus on delivering reliable power to Aba and the environs if not that he has set up a sustainable management structure of international best practice for his Aba Power. He should consider the enormous contributions in development, growth of the state’s economy, job creation among others his governorship would cause for Ndi Enugu.
Prof. Bart Nnaji is widely traveled, well connected both internationally and within Nigeria as to attract investments which will turn Enugu State into investors’ haven to stimulate the state’s economy.
No doubt, if elected governor, his leadership of Enugu State, with that of Gov. Chukwuma Soludo of Anambra State will combine to pull South East out of the developmental woods it is currently enmeshed in.
However, given the prevailing mechanism of the People’s Democratic Party, PDP, the rulling party in the state on which platform Prof Nnaji is expected to stand for election, the sitting Governor, Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi, like previous governors in the state wields great influence on who wins the party’s ticket. Therefore, as pressure mounts on Prof Bart Nnaji to contest, all eyes are on Governor Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi to support a transparent process for the emergence of the best aspirant because at this time in Enugu State’s history, it does not need a pedestrian politician but a seasoned technocrat who understands the mix of politics and governance for greater good for all.
♦ Chijioke Ogbodo, a Managing Partner at GMTNews also authored the article: “Who Is Afraid Of Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi”, in 2014.
- From Threats to Partnership: How Diplomacy Repositioned Nigeria in Washington - January 13, 2026
- Burbank Marriage Unravels After Woman Allegedly Used Tracking Devices to Monitor Husband - December 27, 2025
- U.S. Signals More Strikes in Nigeria as Abuja Confirms Joint Military Campaign - December 27, 2025
“Nigeria reframed terrorism, corrected Washington’s lens, and secured cooperation —a pure anatomy of diplomatic turnaround“ —Anthony Obi Ogbo
Nigeria’s recent engagement of a United States–based lobbying firm under a reported $9 million contract was widely scrutinized, predictably misunderstood by some, and quietly effective. The objective was clear: to shape Washington’s understanding of Nigeria’s complex security challenges—particularly violence affecting Christian communities—within an accurate geopolitical, intelligence, and regional framework. Such engagements are not unusual. In fact, they are a routine and essential feature of modern international diplomacy, allowing governments to clarify policy positions, counter distorted narratives, and ensure that domestic security crises are not flattened into simplistic talking points for foreign consumption.
In an era where global perception can influence aid, sanctions, military cooperation, and diplomatic goodwill, strategic communication has become inseparable from national security. Nigeria’s decision to professionally engage Washington signaled an understanding that security today is fought not only on the battlefield but also in briefing rooms, policy memos, and diplomatic corridors.
Evidence suggests that this recalibration has begun to yield results. Just days ago, former U.S. President Donald Trump publicly acknowledged—belatedly—that Muslims are equally among the primary victims of ISIS terrorism. It was a striking rhetorical shift for a political figure who had long leaned on broad, inflammatory framing that blurred the distinction between extremist violence and religious identity. That admission did not emerge in a vacuum. It followed sustained pressure from global security analysts, regional experts, and Muslim leaders who have repeatedly challenged the false narrative that terrorism is rooted in faith rather than criminal ideology, geopolitical instability, and organized violence.
More importantly, the acknowledgment coincided with tangible policy movement. Trump-aligned U.S. security networks have quietly expanded counterterrorism cooperation with Nigeria under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration. This development underscores a pragmatic recognition that effective counterterrorism is not achieved through threats, isolation, or performative rhetoric, but through partnership, intelligence sharing, and regional capacity building.
This week, the United States delivered fresh military supplies to Nigeria to support ongoing security operations. The delivery followed recent U.S. air strikes against Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) targets, carried out at Nigeria’s formal request. While air strikes often attract public attention, the more consequential story lies beneath the surface: a shift toward coordinated intelligence operations, logistical support, and sustained military collaboration. This is not symbolic diplomacy. It is functional, operational alignment.
Contrast this moment with an earlier chapter in Nigeria–U.S. relations. During the Jonathan administration, Nigeria experienced significant difficulties in its diplomatic engagement with Washington. Rather than relying on seasoned foreign policy professionals, security strategists, and international communications experts, the government leaned heavily on local intermediaries and political loyalists to interpret and convey Nigeria’s position abroad. The result was a weakened diplomatic posture, fragmented messaging, and persistent misinterpretation of Nigeria’s internal security realities. Critical issues—ranging from Boko Haram’s evolution to regional insurgency dynamics—were often viewed through incomplete or distorted lenses.
That experience offered a lasting lesson: goodwill alone does not translate into influence. In global politics, perception must be managed as deliberately as policy. Strategic silence, amateur diplomacy, or reactive communication leaves a vacuum—one that is quickly filled by external narratives, advocacy groups, or political opportunists with their own agendas.
What has changed now is not merely tone, but method. Nigeria’s current approach reflects an understanding that diplomacy is not capitulation, and lobbying is not a sign of weakness. It is leverage. It is preparation. It is the disciplined articulation of national interest in a language that global power centers understand. By engaging professionally, Nigeria reframed its security narrative—not as a sectarian failure, but as a shared counterterrorism challenge that requires international coordination.
Even Donald Trump’s posture illustrates this transformation. A leader who once relied on threats, ultimatums, and rhetorical spectacle has now, through institutional channels, become part of a support framework working with regional actors to strengthen security and civilian protection. The shift is not ideological; it is a strategic move. And it reflects the enduring truth that diplomacy often succeeds where bluster fails.
In international politics, power is not only measured by firepower or economic weight, but by the ability to persuade, align, and sustain cooperation. Nigeria’s recent experience is a reminder that nations are not judged solely by their crises, but by how effectively they explain, manage, and confront them on the global stage. Diplomacy, when practiced with clarity and professionalism, does not dilute sovereignty—it reinforces it.
♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us
- From Threats to Partnership: How Diplomacy Repositioned Nigeria in Washington - January 13, 2026
- Burbank Marriage Unravels After Woman Allegedly Used Tracking Devices to Monitor Husband - December 27, 2025
- U.S. Signals More Strikes in Nigeria as Abuja Confirms Joint Military Campaign - December 27, 2025
Anthony Obi Ogbo
When Air Power Becomes a Christmas Performance: The Illusion of Success in Trump’s Nigerian Strike
“Bombs alone do not defeat ideology. Precision without intelligence is noise.“ —Anthony Obi Ogbo
When President Trump announced his authorized United States air strike against ISIL (ISIS) fighters in northwest Nigeria on Christmas Day, there was an immediate burst of celebration on Nigerian social media. For a country exhausted by years of kidnappings, massacres, and territorial insecurity, the announcement sounded like long-awaited international support. Memes circulated, praise poured in, and some Nigerians hailed Trump as a decisive global sheriff finally willing to act where others hesitated.
But after the initial euphoria settled, a sobering assessment emerged: the strike appeared less like a strategic military intervention and more like a made-for-television spectacle designed to burnish Trump’s international strongman image.
This was not the first time the United States has launched air strikes in Africa or the Sahel under the banner of counterterrorism. From Libya to Somalia, from Syria to Yemen, U.S. “precision strikes” have often been announced with confidence and celebrated with press briefings—only for the targeted groups to regroup, mutate, and, in some cases, expand their reach. In Nigeria itself, years of foreign-backed security assistance have failed to decisively neutralize Boko Haram or its ISIS-affiliated offshoots. Instead, violence has fragmented, spread, and grown more complex.
No verifiable evidence has been produced to confirm high-value ISIS targets were eliminated
The Nigerian strike followed a familiar pattern. U.S. officials framed it as a blow against ISIS-West Africa Province (ISWAP), a group aligned with the global ISIS network. Trump’s language suggested a decisive intervention—an act of muscular diplomacy signaling that America still projects power where it chooses. Yet no verifiable evidence has been produced to confirm high-value ISIS targets were eliminated, leadership structures dismantled, or operational capacity degraded.
What followed was a digital smokescreen. Social media accounts, many anonymous and unverified, began circulating gruesome images of dead bodies and destroyed villages—photos long associated with banditry in Nigeria’s northwest. These images were quickly repurposed to “prove” the success of Trump’s strike. However, this is where the narrative falls apart under scrutiny.
Trump’s mission, as publicly stated, was to target ISIS. Not bandits. Not kidnappers. Not rural criminal gangs. ISIS is a transnational terrorist organization with ideological, financial, and operational links across continents. Bandits, by contrast, are primarily armed criminal groups—motivated by ransom, cattle theft, and territorial control, not global jihad. Conflating the two may be politically convenient, but it is analytically dishonest.
Killing or displacing bandits does not equate to dismantling ISIS. In fact, indiscriminate or poorly targeted air strikes often worsen the situation, pushing criminal groups to radicalize, splinter, or align with extremist factions for protection and legitimacy. This pattern has been observed repeatedly in conflict zones where military force substitutes for intelligence-driven strategy.
A truly successful counterterrorism raid is not measured by dramatic announcements or viral images. It is measured by clear, verifiable outcomes, including the confirmed elimination of high-ranking commanders, disruption of recruitment and financing networks, seizure of weapons caches, and—most importantly—sustained reductions in civilian attacks. None of these benchmarks has been credibly demonstrated in the aftermath of Trump’s Nigerian air strike.
Instead, Nigeria wakes up to the same grim reality: villages remain vulnerable, highways unsafe, and communities terrorized. The strike did not change the security equation. It did not empower Nigerian forces. It did not restore civilian confidence. And it certainly did not neutralize ISIS as a strategic threat.
This air strike offered Nigerians symbolism, not security.
In that sense, the air strike was not merely ineffective—it was a failure dressed in the language of strength, executed for optics, and amplified for political gain. It offered Nigerians symbolism, not security.
If the goal is truly to eliminate ISIS and its affiliates in West Africa, the path is neither theatrical nor unilateral. It requires robust intelligence sharing, sustained training, and real-time coordination with Nigerian and regional forces. It demands targeted arms assistance, logistical support, and investments in surveillance capabilities that allow local militaries to act decisively and lawfully. Above all, it requires a long-term commitment to strengthening state capacity—not fleeting air shows announced from afar.
Bombs alone do not defeat ideology. Precision without intelligence is noise. And celebration without results is self-deception. Trump’s Nigerian air strike may have produced headlines, but history will remember it for what it was: a failed mission masquerading as success.
♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us
- From Threats to Partnership: How Diplomacy Repositioned Nigeria in Washington - January 13, 2026
- Burbank Marriage Unravels After Woman Allegedly Used Tracking Devices to Monitor Husband - December 27, 2025
- U.S. Signals More Strikes in Nigeria as Abuja Confirms Joint Military Campaign - December 27, 2025
“With Obama, Al-Qaeda was not eliminated by noise; it was suffocated by intelligence.“ —Anthony Obi Ogbo
It has now been confirmed that the United States acted in collaboration with Nigeria in the recent strike on Islamic State elements in northwest Nigeria. That cooperation deserves recognition. Intelligence-sharing between Washington and Abuja is necessary, overdue, and welcome. Terrorism is transnational; defeating it requires allies, not isolation.
But let us be clear: bombs alone do not defeat terror. And Donald Trump’s strike—trumpeted loudly on social media before facts, casualties, or strategy were disclosed—was less a turning point than a performance.
Trump’s announcement was a classic spectacle: “powerful,” “deadly,” “perfect strikes.” No numbers. No clarity. No accountability. Just noise. It was the same choreography America has deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and Somalia—places where U.S. airpower landed hard, headlines screamed victory, and instability deepened afterward. Violence escalated. Militancy adapted. Civilians paid the price.
History is unkind to airstrikes sold as solutions.
Nigeria knows this better than anyone. Long before Trump’s tweet, the Nigerian military had already conducted multiple operations in the same terror corridor. At least five major strikes and offensives stand out:
- First, Operation Hadarin Daji, launched to dismantle bandit and terror camps across Zamfara, Katsina, and Sokoto, involving sustained air and ground assaults.
- Second, Operation Tsaftan Daji, which targeted terrorist hideouts in the Kamuku and Sububu forests—precisely the terrain now in the headlines.
- Third, repeated Nigerian Air Force precision strikes in the Zurmi–Shinkafi axis, neutralizing commanders and destroying logistics hubs.
- Fourth, joint operations with Nigerien forces, disrupting cross-border supply routes used by ISIS-linked groups.
- Fifth, recent coordinated offensives involving intelligence-led raids, special forces insertions, and follow-up ground clearing in the northwest.
These were not symbolic gestures. They were Nigerian-led, Nigerian-funded, Nigerian-executed. And yet, there were no fireworks on social media. No flag-waving hysteria. No intoxicated praise of Nigerian commanders as saviors of civilization.
Why? Because there is a dangerous segment of Nigerians who suffer from what can only be called the American Wonder mentality—a colonial hangover that applauds anything louder simply because it comes from Washington. The same Nigerians who ignore their own soldiers dying in silence suddenly abandon Christmas meals to celebrate Trump’s tweets, typing incoherent praise, mangling grammar, and mistaking spectacle for substance.
It is embarrassing. And it is intellectually lazy.
Terrorism is not defeated by volume or virality. It is defeated by intelligence—quiet, patient, unglamorous work. The United States knows this. Barack Obama understood it. Al-Qaeda was not dismantled through social media theatrics or chest-thumping declarations. It was weakened through intelligence fusion, financial disruption, targeted operations, local partnerships, and relentless pressure on leadership networks—mostly without fanfare.
Obama did not tweet. He acted. So what actually works against groups like ISIS in Nigeria?
First, intelligence supremacy. Human intelligence from local communities, defectors, and infiltrators matters more than bombs. Terror groups survive on secrecy. Break that, and they collapse.
Second, financial and logistical strangulation. Terrorists run on money, fuel, arms, and food. Cut access to smuggling routes, illicit mining, ransom flows, and cross-border trade, and their operational capacity withers.
Third, community stabilization and governance. Terrorism thrives where the state is absent. Roads, schools, policing, and justice systems matter. People who trust the state do not shelter terrorists.
Fourth, regional coordination, not episodic strikes. Nigeria, Niger, Chad, and Burkina Faso must sustain joint pressure, not reactive operations driven by headlines.
Airstrikes can support these strategies—but only as tools, never as substitutes.
Trump’s strike may have killed militants. It may have disrupted camps. That is commendable. But it is not a solution. It is a moment. And moments, without strategy, fade.
If Nigerians truly want terror defeated, they should stop worshiping foreign loudness and start demanding disciplined intelligence, consistent policy, and respect for the men and women already fighting on the ground.
Real victories are quiet. Real security is built, not tweeted.
♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us
- From Threats to Partnership: How Diplomacy Repositioned Nigeria in Washington - January 13, 2026
- Burbank Marriage Unravels After Woman Allegedly Used Tracking Devices to Monitor Husband - December 27, 2025
- U.S. Signals More Strikes in Nigeria as Abuja Confirms Joint Military Campaign - December 27, 2025