Connect with us

Nigeria

We’re seeking explanation from FG on Kanu’s arrest, says Britain

Published

on

THE United Kingdom has said it will seek clarification from the Federal Government on the circumstances and legality of the arrest of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra.

The Head of Communications, British High Commission, Mr Dean Hurlock, who stated this while responding to enquiries from one of our correspondents, said the UK was in the process of seeking explanations from the Federal Government on the circumstances surrounding Kanu’s arrest and extradition.

Hurlock said this as Ifeanyi Ejiofor,  the lead counsel to the detained IPOB leader, said members of the legal team had formally applied to the Department of State Service to allow them access to their client.

Recall that Kanu, who is facing trial for treasonable felony, jumped bail in 2017 and fled the country for the UK when soldiers stormed his parents’ residence at Afaraukwu, Abia State.

On Tuesday, he was re-arraigned before Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja,  two days after he was arrested and extradited  to the country.

He is still being remanded in the custody of the Department of State Services by the Federal High Court.

The UK, which had on Tuesday said Kanu, who is also a British citizen, was not arrested within its territory,  made further  clarifications on Wednesday.

Responding to enquiries from one of our correspondents on the legality of Kanu’s arrest and extradition, the Head of Communications, British High Commission, Hurlock, on Wednesday reiterated that the IPOB leader was not arrested or extradited from the UK.

Hurlock said, “In response to any queries on whether Nnamdi Kanu was extradited from the UK, we can reaffirm that Nnamdi Kanu was not arrested in the UK nor was he extradited from the UK.

“With regards to any questions about the possible legality of his arrest, the British High Commission in Abuja is currently in the process of seeking clarification from the Nigerian government about the circumstances of the arrest.”

Trial must follow due process, Britain insists

The British Government also said its Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office was ready to provide consular assistance to Kanu who was expected back in court on July 26.

Hurlock further said the UK expected the trial of the Biafran separatist to follow due process.

He noted, “With regard to any questions about whether the British High Commission is providing assistance in this case, we can confirm that the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office stands ready to provide consular assistance.

“With regard to any questions about what the UK thinks about the proposed legal process that Nnamdi Kanu is facing in Nigeria, the UK would expect any trial or legal proceedings to follow due process.”

Nnamdi Kanu was arrested in Kenya, says Brother

Meanwhile, the IPOB spokesperson, Emma Powerful, disclosed that Kanu was arrested in Kenya by security operatives.

Powerful, in a statement quoted Kanu’s brother, Kingsley, as stating that the IPOB leader was detained while visiting Kenya and handed over to the FG.

According to IPOB spokesman, Kanu’s brother  stated,  “My brother has been subject to extraordinary rendition by Kenya and Nigeria. They have violated the most basic principles of the rule of law.

“Extraordinary rendition is one of the most serious crimes states can commit. Both Nigeria and Kenya must be held to account. I demand justice for my brother, Nnamdi Kanu.”

Kingsley admonished the British High Commission to insist on his brother’s release, adding that the mission must guarantee his safety and security.

He stated, “The British High Commission in Nigeria must insist upon my brother’s immediate release. They must guarantee his safety and security.

“Nnamdi Kanu must be returned home to the UK to his wife and his sons who live here. The Foreign Secretary, Dominic Raab, must make it clear to the Nigerian authorities that they will not tolerate the unlawful detention of British citizens and that the UK government condemns the Nigerians and Kenyans for undermining the rule of law.

“Foreign Secretary, Raab must be clear: There will be consequences for those who resort to extraordinary rendition. The British Government must insist upon justice for Nnamdi Kanu.”

Also, IPOB leader younger brother,  Kingsley Kanu, in a statement on Wednesday said Nnamdi Kanu was arrested in Kenya.

He said Nnamdi Kanu’s arrest was unlawful, saying he had been subjected to the most and serious violations of international law.

Kingsley Kanu said, “News has reached Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s family that he has been unlawfully arrested in Kenya.”

Nnamdi Kanu’s legal team writes DSS, seeks audience with IPOB leader

On his part, Kanu’s lawyer said the DSS had yet to respond to the legal team’s application seeking access to the IPOB leader.

Ejiofor stated this in a telephone interview with one of our correspondents on Wednesday.

He said, “We have tried getting access to the office today to see him while he is being detained.

“In line with their procedure, we have written to the DSS to allow us access to see him, more so, in view of the subsisting charge.

“They have not responded to the application. We were requested to come formally; we have done that and we copied the court.

“We are awaiting their response to the application.”

Ejiofor also alleged that Kanu was abducted, contrary to the popular view that he was arrested.

He added, “Let me correct an impression. Nnamdi Kanu was not arrested. He was abducted by the Nigerian security agency in collaboration with African allies.

“If we are talking about arrest, it will sound civil. But in this case, he was abducted.

“I will confirm from him the exact location where he was abducted from.

“He was abducted and smuggled into Nigeria against all professional ethics and in complete violation of all diplomatic conventions.

“When we get to the bridge, we will cross it as it is a matter for the court to look into.”

Let nothing happen to Kanu, IPOB warns FG

Also on Wednesday, IPOB  warned the Federal Government to be careful with the way it handled its leader, saying nothing must happen to him.

The secessionist group in a statement by its Director of Media and Publicity,  Powerful, said Kanu was abducted, adding those against the Biafra struggle masterminded the ‘abduction’.

It stated, “We remind the Nigeria government and her security agencies that our leader deserves justice and fair hearing. We also want to state unequivocally, that no harm should befall our leader.  Should anything untoward happen to him, Nigeria government will be held accountable for it.”

The group urged its members at home and in the Diaspora to remain calm. It added,  “Our leader’s next court appearance is July 26, 2021 and Biafrans should mobilise and attend the court hearing.

“IPOB will not relent in the pursuit of Biafra freedom. We have crossed the Rubicon in our struggle for the restoration of Biafran sovereignty. There is no going back no matter the level of intimidation by our oppressors.”

An Igbo group, Nzuko Umunna, said Kanu should not suffer any  harm.

In a statement on Wednesday by its Executive Secretary, Joe Odumuko, and Deputy Executive Secretary, Dr Uju Agomoh, Nzuko Umunna demanded fairness in Kanu’s trial, warning that he must not suffer any bodily harm in the DSS custody.

The group said, “We ask the government to ensure that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s fundamental rights are secured to the fullest extent possible. It is noteworthy that Section 31 of the Nigerian Constitution and Article 4 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights obligate the Federal Government to ensure that Nnamdi Kanu does not suffer any bodily harm while in the custody of the state and its agencies. It bears repeating that it is the responsibility of the Federal Government to secure the bodily integrity and personal dignity of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu while in its custody. We shall hold the Nigerian government and all state actors to account on this obligation under domestic and international laws to the fullest extent possible.”

Respect Kanu’s human rights, Abaribe tells FG

On its part, the Minority Leader of the Senate, Enyinnaya Abaribe  advised the Federal Government to apply caution and strict adherence to the rule of law in  handling  the issue of Kanu.

The Senator, who stood surety for Kanu, when he was first arraigned a few years ago, stated this in a statement  by his Media Adviser, Uchenna Awom, on Wednesday.

The statement is titled, “Nnamdi Kanu: Abaribe urges respect to fundamental human rights, adherence to rule of law.”

The Senator also advised the Federal Government to be guided by the provisions of Section 31 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.

But a former Director of Public Relations of the Nigerian Army, Brigadier General Sani Usman,  described arrest  of  Kanu, as heart-warming, calling for the speedy and diligent discharge of justice.

Usman said this on Wednesday morning while speaking on the Sunrise Daily show on Channels Television.

A group,, the International Society for Civil Liberties and Rule of Law (Intersociety)  commended the Federal Government for not bringing Kanu ‘body bag’.

The rights group in statement signed by Emeka Umeagbalasi and other principal officers, Obianuju Igboeli, and Chidimma Udegbunam, however expressed worries about his safety.

However, the Archbishop of Enugu Provence Church of Nigeria Anglican Communion, Most Rev Emmanuel Chukwuma, warned Federal Government to know that if anything should happen to Kanu under custody that there would be greater trouble.

He said “If you kill Kanu that would amount to looking for the trouble of the Igbo.

“We will not allow him to be eliminated. Let him face his trial and judgment. They cannot eliminate anybody like that. If they eliminate him, then they are looking for more trouble.”

Kanu: Afenifere asks Buhari to use same energy in addressing killer herders’ menace

Also, The pan-Yoruba socio-political organisation, Afenifere,  called on the President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari to deploy energy used  in arresting  Kanu to tackle the insecurity in the country.

The Secretary General of the association, Mr Sola Ebiseni, who reacted to the extradition of the IPOB leader,  said the arrest of Kanu, even in a foreign land,  showed how efficient and effective the Nigerian security services and forces could be when operating under the right environment uninfluenced  by political considerations and tribal body languages of the political actors in the illegitimate exercise of the powers granted them by the people.

According to the group, there is nothing cheering in the arrest against the backdrop of the “dubious approach of the Federal  Government to fighting crimes and criminality in Nigeria. “

Ebiseni said, “Nnamdi Kanu is answerable to charges against him and having now been brought before the court, the mode of effecting his arrest has become a mere academic exercise. Nonetheless, as a citizen of Nigeria, he is absolutely entitled to the protection of his fundamental human rights as guaranteed by the constitution and other global norms, including  the right of presumption of innocence until proven beyond reasonable doubt by the state.

“However, such level of enormous energy, resources and  logistics deployed by government to effect the arrest  of  Kanu, in whichever locations outside our shores, would not have been required  to pick members of the Fulani ethnic militias, masquerading as herdsmen, whose innumerable criminal activities were at the roots of such violent and incendiary activities that have engulfed the nation since the advent of the Buhari administration and in reaction to which self determination agitations have taken the central stage of our political existence.

“Rather than the presidential admonition that victims of mass murder and destruction of economic lives should seek peaceful coexistence,  in their  own ancestral communities, with their invading  assailant herdsmen, the Federal Government should not only act but be seen to deploy requisite security measures  against herdsmen and kidnappers who have held the southern and Middle Belt regions hostage for so long and, in recent times, emboldened by government duplicity to have also invaded local farmers and indigenous tribes of the North- West.

“It leaves a sour taste in the mouth that the Nigerian military and security forces which used to be the toast of international community in peace keeping exercises and the renowned deterrence force in the West African sub region are now subjected to the insult and ridicule of negotiations with bandits who bear arms in their presence and their negotiator agents given field days on television.”    ,,

Culled from the Punch News Nigeria

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Column

From Noise to Votes: Nigerian Youth Must Turn Online Fire into Electoral Power

Published

on

Young Nigerians have shown a remarkable ability to create waves in the digital space. With a single click, they can expose a politician’s corruption, rally tens of thousands of supporters behind a single hashtag, and keep every political actor on edge from dawn until dusk. However, as the 2027 general elections draw closer, it is time to face an uncomfortable truth: loud online noise isn’t the same as real power in the political sphere. If Nigerian youth wish to get the best possible leadership from their nation’s leaders, they need to take their online activity offline (i.e., to places where actual democracy occurs) and start showing up to cast votes.

There is simply too much evidence to ignore that this needs to occur. Nigeria is a young country demographically. Together, Gen Z and Millennials comprise approximately half of the total population—50.1 percent—according to IntelPoint. Gen Z makes up 25.8 percent and Millennials account for 24.3 percent. When we consider Gen Alpha, the percentage rises to 85.7% of the population under 44. According to ActionAid Nigeria, more than 60% of Nigeria’s population is under 30. According to Afrobarometer, Nigeria has a median age of 18.1 years, and 58% of its population is aged 0-29. Therefore, Nigeria isn’t merely a young country; it is a country dominated by young people.

Based on this information, this dominant demographic should wield considerable political influence. Unfortunately, there often appears to be little correlation between these statistics and political influence. The contrast is striking. While a majority of Nigeria’s population is young, there remains a significant gap between how influential young people are politically and how influential they could be. This lack of influence is not due to a lack of ability among young people; rather, it stems from many young people stopping short of completing what is often called the “civic journey,” which involves moving from awareness to action. They consume politics, engage in political debate on social media, participate in meme politics, and express frustration with politics through social media rants; however, many young people still fail to register to vote (PVCs) or participate in elections in sufficient numbers to affect the outcome.

This disparity is important because youth dissatisfaction is far from abstract. More than 23% of Nigerian youth report being unemployed or seeking employment, according to Afrobarometer. Additionally, more than two-thirds of youth aged 18 to 35 report having some form of postsecondary or secondary-level education. Despite Nigeria ranking among the lowest in providing employment and opportunities for youth, and despite identifying high costs of living, unemployment, crime and security concerns, poverty, poor economic management practices, and insufficient access to electricity as the top five issues requiring immediate attention from government officials, youth dissatisfaction cannot be considered indifferent. Rather, youth dissatisfaction reflects citizens’ grievances and legitimate reasons to be deeply interested in who governs their country.

However, mere interest alone will not suffice. Democracy does not reward passion without participation. A young person can identify every weakness inherent in a political system; however, unless that person participates by casting a vote, they will remain a spectator to their own future. If you are mature enough to understand concepts such as inflation, insecurity, broken campaign promises, unemployment rates, and poorly managed governance systems, you are mature enough to accept responsibility for your role in creating solutions to those problems. That responsibility begins with voting.

In addition to continuing to use social media to raise awareness of voter registration, election knowledge, fact-checking mechanisms used during elections, and peaceful participation methods, social media can also serve as a vehicle for facilitating the transition from social media activism to actual civic engagement. Young Nigerians should leverage their social media presence to encourage voter registration, promote election literacy programs, provide fact-checking services to counter election misinformation, and advocate for nonviolent participation throughout the electoral cycle. They should convert their social media timelines into civic classrooms. Where can I find the information I need about voter registration processes? Where is my assigned polling station located? Where do I receive my Permanent Voter Card? How do I protect myself from spreading misinformation? How do I properly monitor election results? These are not dull topics; they represent essential tools required for surviving democracy.

Youth organizations, creators, and social media entities can also help facilitate offline civic engagement. Use your WhatsApp groups to alert others as registration deadlines approach. Use X Spaces and Instagram Live to focus on discussing relevant issues rather than hurling insults. Use TikTok to simplify the voting process. Use Facebook to motivate family members and first-time voters to participate in elections. Use whatever platforms are available to make civic obligation contagious. Nigeria’s youth have shown they can create viral content. Now they must begin to generate participation on a viral scale.

One of the most damaging myths in Nigerian politics is that “your vote doesn’t matter.” It is a self-fulfilling prophecy that only serves the interests of cynics, crooks, and machines whose success depends solely on low turnout. Yes, Nigeria’s electoral process has flaws. Yes, there have been numerous disappointments. However, the response to a flawed democracy is not abandonment; it is increased participation. By staying home on Election Day, youth essentially give their votes — and therefore control — directly to the very same groups they loathe.

Another mythological excuse for the youth’s failure to vote in Nigeria is the claim that “all politicians are alike.” No — they’re not all the same. While some politicians are inept, others are corrupt, and others exhibit both characteristics, democracy is not about seeking holy men or women; it is about making selections and enforcing accountability. An individual who refuses to make a selection for office because none of the options appear acceptable is ultimately selecting the candidate most likely to emerge victorious by default.

Nigeria’s youth already constitute the country’s largest demographic group. It is time for them to become its strongest democratic force as well. However, that will not be achieved by trending hashtags alone. Instead, it will be achieved when online energy is harnessed and directed toward political organization, civic education, voter registration, increasing voter turnout, and holding elected representatives accountable after elections.

The 2023 election saw remarkable youth participation but lacked follow-up. Therefore, the 2027 election should not produce another generation of disillusioned observers; instead, it should yield a new generation of participatory citizens. Let online flames ignite electoral power. Let debates become ballots. Let criticism evolve into participation. If Nigerian youth can dominate social media, they can also dominate democracy. The future will not be handed to them in a retweet. They must elect it into existence.

_________

♦ Chris Ulasi is on the Editorial Board of The West African Pilot News. He contributes stories about culture and tradition, elite politics, ethnicity and national integration, civil society, and social movement. He is a university professor, community builder, poet, film producer, recording the emergent Nollywood cultural history through film.

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading

Anthony Obi Ogbo

Between Silence and Sabotage: Jonathan’s Return to Political Manipulation

Published

on

“Jonathan’s calculated and weaponized ambiguity breeds deception and weakens emerging political alliances.” —Dr. Anthony Obi Ogbo

Former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan has once again found himself at the center of presidential speculation, floating silently above the country’s political waters while supporters aggressively market him as a possible candidate ahead of another critical election cycle. And once again, Jonathan is doing what he has mastered throughout his political career: saying nothing clearly while allowing political confusion to grow around him.

This pattern is not new. It is the same indecisive political behavior that defined some of the most consequential moments of his rise and fall. Jonathan became president in 2010 following the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. At the time, many northern political stakeholders within the then-ruling PDP believed there was an informal understanding that Jonathan would complete Yar’Adua’s term but not seek another full term in 2011, thereby preserving the party’s zoning arrangement between North and South. Instead of taking a clear and immediate position, Jonathan spent months dribbling the nation politically. He neither fully denied nor openly confirmed his intentions until the political tension had already escalated nationwide.

By the time he eventually declared his candidacy, the damage had been done. Many northern allies who initially supported him felt betrayed, politically cornered, or deceived. The PDP fractured internally, regional distrust deepened, and Jonathan’s relationship with major northern power blocs deteriorated permanently. Though he won the 2011 election, the cracks created by that indecision followed him into 2015, contributing significantly to the coalition that eventually removed him from power.

Yet Jonathan learned little from that experience. Since losing reelection in 2015, his name has repeatedly surfaced during every major electoral cycle as a potential presidential contender. Each time, his supporters strategically floated his candidacy across media platforms and political circles. Each time, Jonathan refused to decisively shut the door. Silence became his political instrument, whereas ambiguity became his strategy.

Now the country is witnessing the same playbook again. As coalition politics intensify and opposition forces attempt to consolidate around alternative political movements, Jonathan’s name has resurfaced aggressively. Reports and speculations about his presidential ambition continue to dominate political discussions, especially within camps seeking to disrupt the growing momentum surrounding Peter Obi and emerging opposition realignments.

The troubling part is not merely that Jonathan’s supporters are campaigning. The troubling part is that Jonathan fully understands the implications of his silence. He knows that his political stature carries enough weight to destabilize fragile coalition negotiations. He knows his name alone can divide campaign structures, weaken consensus-building, and inject uncertainty into opposition calculations. Yet he refuses to publicly and definitively state where he stands.

That is not statesmanship. That is calculated political ambiguity. Jonathan’s political history is filled with similarly contradictory choices. After losing power in 2015, he received widespread praise for conceding defeat peacefully. He initially framed that decision as a sacrifice made to preserve Nigerian lives and prevent violence. Later, however, different narratives emerged suggesting international pressure, particularly from the United States under President Obama. The shifting explanations weakened what could have remained one of his strongest democratic legacies.

Then came another contradiction. Despite emerging politically from the PDP, Jonathan gradually aligned himself closely with the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, serving in diplomatic and goodwill capacities that many PDP loyalists considered politically inappropriate. This unusual closeness fueled longstanding allegations that elements within the APC establishment viewed Jonathan as a useful political instrument capable of destabilizing opposition coalitions from within. Whether those allegations are true or not, Jonathan’s conduct has consistently created room for suspicion.

His political base remains uncertain. His campaign structure is invisible.

Today, his undeclared ambition is already generating confusion among supporters, coalition organizers, and opposition strategists. His political base remains uncertain. His campaign structure is invisible. His intentions are unclear. Yet his loyalists continue mobilizing aggressively in his name while he watches silently from the shadows.

Nigeria is too politically fragile for this kind of elite gamesmanship. At critical national moments, leadership demands clarity, courage, and accountability. Jonathan cannot continue operating as a permanent “maybe” in Nigeria’s political future, thoughtlessly hovering around every election season like an unanswered question designed to manipulate negotiations and weaken emerging alliances.

At this time, Jonathan should sit in or sit out! If he wants to run, he should declare openly, defend his record, and face the democratic process directly. If he does not intend to run, he should immediately and publicly withdraw his name from the political marketplace. Anything short of that increasingly looks less like political strategy and more like calculated deception. Nigeria deserves leaders who make difficult choices openly—not politicians who weaponize silence while others gamble with national uncertainty in their name.

♦ 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

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading

Nigeria

The Devastation of Insurgency: Nigeria Cannot Kill Its Way Out of Insecurity

Published

on

“Insecurity persists not only because armed groups are present but also because the state is often absent” —Dr. Declan Onwudiwe

Nigeria cannot kill its way out of insecurity. While military victories may win battles, only legitimacy, governance, and economic opportunity can secure lasting peace. Across the country, persistent violence, characterized by impunity and a tragic disregard for human life, has exposed the limits of a force-only approach. The time has come for a more sweeping and planned security response.

What is most troubling is the continuing victimization of innocent citizens, especially women and children. Reports of attacks on farmers, worshippers in churches and mosques, and travelers have become disturbingly routine. Kidnappings, sexual violence, and the killing of schoolchildren have weakened public confidence in the state’s ability to protect its people. These are not individual events but symptoms of a deeper structural crisis. Yet, Nigeria is not without options. A strategic and sustained plan can alter this trajectory.

Cooperation between Nigeria’s security forces and international partners is praiseworthy and necessary. However, a recurring weakness undermines these gains: areas cleared by the military are often left insufficiently secured, allowing insurgents and bandits to return. A viable strategy must go beyond clearing territory to consolidating control. Insurgent groups adapt rapidly; after defeat, they disperse, regroup, and re-emerge in areas where governance is weak. Every community reclaimed by force but left without sustained state presence risks becoming tomorrow’s battleground.

Experience from other regions underscores this point. Countries such as Colombia and Iraq that have made substantial progress against insurgency have done so by maintaining a firm and continuous government presence in liberated areas. Where state authority is visible through security, justice, and basic services, insurgents find it much harder to re-establish control. Where it is absent, violence returns. Nigeria must learn from this reality and prioritize holding territory as much as reclaiming it.

At the heart of the problem is a governance deficit. Insecurity persists not only because armed groups are present but also because the state is often absent. Recovered areas commonly lack functioning institutions, effective policing, and access to justice. Without these, citizens remain vulnerable, and security gains become temporary. A credible strategy must ensure that communities reclaimed by security forces are immediately supported with police presence, local administration, and basic services, including healthcare, education, and dispute resolution.

Equally important is the recognition that the population, not the battlefield, is the true center of gravity in counterinsurgency. Intelligence from local communities is indispensable, but it depends on trust. Where citizens feel protected and respected, they are more willing to share information. Where they feel neglected or abused, they withdraw. Strengthening this relationship between citizens and the state is essential.

Intelligence-led security operations are far more effective than broad, reactive force. Targeted precision, based on reliable information, disrupts insurgent leadership, logistics, and financing networks. But this requires the population’s cooperation. When criminals operate with impunity, and accountability is weak, citizens lose confidence and hesitate to engage. Restoring trust, therefore, requires both professionalism within the security forces and a justice system that swiftly and fairly punishes wrongdoing.

Beyond security operations, Nigeria must address the economic drivers of instability. Youth unemployment and underemployment remain major concerns. Many young people struggle to find meaningful livelihoods, keeping them vulnerable to exploitation by criminal and extremist networks. Security cannot be sustained without opportunity. Investments in agriculture, education, infrastructure, electricity, and small-scale industry are not just economic policies; they are security measures. A population rich in hope and opportunity is less susceptible to recruitment and radicalization by violent groups.

The question of self-defense has also entered public debate. While communities have a natural right to protect themselves and arm themselves, widespread and unregulated access to weapons carries serious risks. Criminological literature shows that the proliferation of arms without accountability can fuel cycles of violence and create new security challenges. The solution is not to transform communities into rival armed camps but to build structured partnerships between citizens and the state.

Community-based security initiatives can play a valuable role when properly organized, regulated, and integrated into the wider security framework. Groups such as local defense volunteers should operate under unambiguous legal authority, receive appropriate training, and remain accountable to state institutions. When managed effectively, such partnerships can enhance intelligence gathering, strengthen local resilience, and complement formal security forces.

Nigeria now remains at a crossroads. It can continue to approach insecurity primarily as a military problem and remain trapped in a cycle of temporary victories followed by renewed violence. Or it can adopt a more extensive, more strategic approach, one that acknowledges that sustainable security depends on governance, legitimacy, and opportunity as much as on force.

The way forward is clear. Nigeria must hold every liberated area through sustained security and governance. It must prioritize intelligence by building trust with local communities. It must deliver a visible and tangible state presence through schools, healthcare, and justice systems. It must formalize and regulate community-based security initiatives. And it must expand economic opportunities to reduce the appeal of violence and criminality.

Countries that have turned the tide against insurgency did so not through force alone, but by rebuilding the bond between the state and its people. Nigeria must do the same. Until that bond is strengthened, insecurity will remain not just a threat at the margins, but a challenge rooted at the core of the nation’s stability.

Only through a coordinated, long-term strategy can Nigeria move from managing insecurity to truly controlling it.

____

■ Ihekwoaba Declan Onwudiwe, Ph.D., of the School of Public Affairs, Texas Southern University, is a Professor and Director, Africa Institute for Strategic Security Studies (AISSS). He is also on the EDITORIAL BOARD of  the WAP

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading

Trending