Nigeria’s Security Unraveled: How Political Complicity, Military Rot, and Decades of Avoidance Brought the Nation to the Brink
INTRODUCTION
Nigeria’s worsening security crisis did not begin today. It did not begin with President Tinubu. It did not even begin with Muhammadu Buhari. What the country faces now is the cumulative result of political cowardice, elite complicity, constitutional breaches, and a military system quietly eaten from within for over two decades. Yet, as former President Olusegun Obasanjo openly rebukes President Tinubu for failing to secure the nation, security analysts insist that many of the fires consuming Nigeria today began under Obasanjo’s watch — flames he saw, understood, but chose not to extinguish.
Continue reading here 👇👇
Nigeria’s security architecture is collapsing under the weight of terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, and internal sabotage, forcing the nation to confront a question once unthinkable: Can Nigeria still win the war against terror, or has the country crossed a threshold from which recovery may no longer be certain? The crisis deepens daily as terrorist groups expand their control, bandits tighten their hold on rural communities, and kidnappers operate with military-level coordination. But behind the present-day tragedy lies a long and painful history of political indecision, constitutional violations, and corruption that allowed insecurity to mutate into a national nightmare.
For many security scholars, today’s chaos cannot be understood without returning to the early 2000s, when Nigeria’s experiment with “political Sharia” spiraled into something far more dangerous. Several northern states began introducing the criminal enforcement of Sharia law, creating a parallel legal system that was openly at odds with the secular provisions of the Nigerian constitution. It was a constitutional crisis unfolding in real time, and the federal government under President Olusegun Obasanjo had both the authority and responsibility to act decisively. It did not.
Security historian Dr. Abdullahi Musa described the moment as the first major breach that weakened the republic. According to him, “When governors introduced criminal Sharia, they broke the constitutional spine of the nation. The federal government had the duty to stop it, but it refused. That refusal allowed extremist interpretations to flourish and eventually gave Boko Haram the ideological foundation it needed.”
Instead of confrontation, the Obasanjo administration dismissed the movement as nothing more than political theater that would fade away on its own. But it did not fade. It grew roots. From Zamfara to Kano and beyond, religious police forces began operating, radical groups gained influence, and extremist ideologies spread without resistance. Within a few years, a small fringe movement in Borno would evolve into Boko Haram, one of the deadliest terrorist organizations in Africa.
A former intelligence officer who served during the period recalled how early warnings were ignored. He said, “We knew what was happening. Radical preachers were recruiting. Weapons were crossing in through Niger and Cameroon. Border communities were reporting unusual activities. But the political class did not want confrontation with northern governors. That failure is haunting the nation today.”
But the Sharia crisis was only one part of the story. Nigeria’s political class had, over decades, cultivated and empowered violent groups for electoral gain. Across multiple administrations, politicians armed young men to intimidate opponents, suppress votes, and enforce loyalty during elections. Once elections were over, many of these armed groups were abandoned. But they did not abandon their weapons. Some began to operate independently as bandits. Others found new sponsors. A few metamorphosed into full-blown terrorist cells. The transition from political thugs to national security threats was swift and devastating.
Dr. Helen Arewa, a criminologist at the University of Lagos, stated, “You cannot have armed groups controlling forests and highways without political protection. Many of the men terrorizing Nigeria today were created by politicians. When the state creates its own shadow armies, those armies eventually turn against the state.”
Nigeria’s military, which should have been the nation’s shield, was also suffering its own moral and structural collapse. While thousands of soldiers have died fighting bravely, the institution itself has been weakened by corruption, internal betrayal, poor welfare, and decades of political interference.
Stories of soldiers supplying ammunition to terrorists continue to emerge. A few have been caught participating in raids or collaborating with bandits. These incidents are often treated as isolated cases, but insiders say they reflect a deeper rot.
A retired colonel who requested anonymity explained, “When terrorists wield brand-new rifles while soldiers are given outdated or empty weapons, something is fundamentally broken. Terrorists are not outgunning Nigeria because they are stronger. They are outgunning Nigeria because insiders are feeding them and billions meant for arms have been stolen.”
The same retired officer added that soldiers often complain of being ordered to withdraw mid-battle or being told not to intervene when villages come under attack. In some cases, soldiers claim they were instructed to stand down because “the sponsors” of the attackers were powerful politicians. These claims remain difficult to verify fully, but they are consistent with repeated allegations from affected communities.
The question then arises: Are these soldiers acting as terrorists, or are they victims of a broken command structure? Experts say both realities may be true. Low pay, poor living conditions, delayed allowances, and a sense of abandonment create fertile ground for corruption and indiscipline. At the same time, a system where funds meant for military equipment are routinely looted leaves frontline soldiers desperate and angry.
Underlying the military crisis is a long-standing suspicion that top officers benefit financially from the protracted conflict. In Nigeria, it is widely whispered that retired generals from Brigadier rank upward almost always retire as millionaires. If true, this raises uncomfortable questions. Military salaries alone cannot generate such wealth. The only plausible explanations are either business interests or access to opaque financial systems such as security votes, classified expenditures, and arms procurement budgets.
Professor Okey Udeh, an expert in public finance, explains that security spending in Nigeria is one of the least transparent sectors in government. According to him, “Security votes, arms contracts, classified expenditure — these are the largest black holes in Nigeria’s fiscal system. Billions vanish in the name of national security. Until this structure is reformed, corruption will remain embedded in the war effort.”
Meanwhile, ordinary Nigerians continue to pay the ultimate price. In many rural areas, terrorists have effectively replaced the government. Villages in Niger, Katsina, Kaduna, Sokoto, and Zamfara now pay monthly or yearly taxes to bandits in exchange for the most basic form of peace. A community leader from western Zamfara explained their reality clearly: “If we wait for the military, we die. If we report, we die. So we pay the bandits because they are the only government we see.”
This phenomenon is the clearest sign that Nigeria has lost territorial sovereignty in certain areas. When citizens pay taxes to non-state actors, the state is no longer the authority — it has been replaced.
In the middle of this crisis came former President Obasanjo’s public criticism of President Bola Tinubu’s handling of security issues. Although some of his concerns are valid, a large portion of the public sees his comments as a form of selective amnesia. Many Nigerians argue that Obasanjo helped sow the seeds of the crisis he is now condemning. Others note that while Tinubu inherited an overwhelming problem, he has yet to respond with the scale and urgency required to reverse decades of decay.
Security analyst Confidence Okoro summarized this dilemma when she said, “Tinubu did not create Nigeria’s security crisis, but he now owns it. Leadership is not judged by inheritance, but by action. Nigeria is slipping, and excuses cannot save it.”
The path forward requires more than speeches or committees. Experts recommend a full audit of all arms procurement programs dating back to 1999, public trials of politicians found sponsoring terrorism, a complete restructuring of the military hierarchy, constitutional clarity on religion and state, and technological surveillance across forests and borders. But above all, Nigeria must confront the political elite that allowed insecurity to flourish.
As one intelligence officer stated bluntly, “Terrorism in Nigeria did not grow in the forest. It grew in government houses.”
Jibola Jeremiah Oluti is a media consultant, political analyst, and public affairs commentator whose work explores the deeper currents shaping Nigeria’s governance and national security landscape. His weekly essays draw from years of observation, research, and on-ground realities, offering readers clear, compelling perspectives on the issues that matter most.
📚 Read more columns and analyses:
👉 https://imusttellitnow.blogspot.com/p/my-articles-bookshelf_14.html
📖 Explore his storytelling series, Echoes of the Storyteller:
👉 https://imusttellitnow.blogspot.com/
J.J. OlutiCreative Voice of Africa
No comments:
Post a Comment