Sometimes in March 2018, one of Nigeria’s most respected military generals and a former Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant General TheophilusYakubuDanjuma, in an outburst following series of armed herdsmen attacks in some parts of Taraba State, called on the citizens to rise and defend themselves. Given his extensive military background and the strategic positions that he held in the past, the widespread view then was that General Danjuma who also served as Minister of Defence from 1999 to 2003 spoke with astute conviction and got many adherents in his call for self-defence, which has continued to gain momentum since then.

Towing the same line, in February 2021, Bashir Magashi, also a retired army general and then Minister of Defence, while responding to bandits’ kidnap of 27 students in a school in Kagara, Niger State, said it is the responsibility of every citizen to be at alert amid the insecurity in Nigeria and the people should show that they are not cowards by defending themselves. Expatiating it further, General Magashi said, “in our younger days, we stand to fight any aggression coming for us. The people should stand and let these bandits know that even the villagers have the competency and capabilities to defend themselves”.

In yet another but more cautious note, the DG DSS MrAdeolaOluwatosinAjayi, in February this year, argued that every community should have a vigilante outfit licenced to use appropriate firearms to act as the first line of defence against invaders, terrorists, bandits, armed herdsmen, kidnappers and other violent criminals. This position modified the earlier calls by Generals Danjuma and Magashi, and coming from the nation’s Number One spy man, it gives some backings to those in support of self-defence, some of whom have lost confidence in the state’s ability to protect them.

But what has given rise to these calls in a country that has an organised police force and one of the most capable militaries in Africa? The answer is in the level of insecurity that pervades the country from around 2009 till now. According to the group Nigeria Mourns, in 2024, 5,353 people including 308 security personnel were killed in violent attacks across Nigeria with 88.5 per cent occurring in Northern Nigeria. Within the same period, a total of 5,171 people were abducted. This casualty figure for 2024 was 22.1 per cent higher than that of 2023 where 4,385 people were killed in violent attacks.  Corroborating this, Amnesty International in its latest report (under serious dispute) revealed that a total of 10,217 people were killed in attacks by armed groups in the first 2 years of the current administration, painting a gloomy picture of the state of insecurity in the country.   

Of course, not a few people are optimistic that the days ahead look promising in terms of security. The recent resurgence of attacks in Borno and Yobe States by Boko Haram Terrorists group and the Islamic State’s West Africa Province (ISWAP) as well as those of killer herdsmen around Benue and Plateau States are coming at a time when alarm is being raised concerning the activities of a new terror group, Lakurawa in Sokoto and Kebbi States as well as the Mahmuda group in northern part of Kwara State.  There are warnings that these attacks are not likely to abate but continue in a more aggressive fashion.

As a nation, have we truly and precisely identified the strategic intention and end state of these threats? If the intentions are multi-dimensional, can we isolate each to enable appropriate response? From all indications, the rapidity and extent of concentration of extremist fighters affiliated with ISIS and Al-Qaeda along the Sahel region of West Africa must be a pointer to a bigger stake. Could this validate the recent avowal by the Commander of the US Africa Command, General Michael Langley that one of the terrorists’ new objectives is to continue their fight until they gain access to West African coastlines? An understanding of the adversaries’ strategic end state is important to convince the advocates of self-defence if their proposition could defeat the threat and bring lasting peace or produce just a temporary protection. 

Despite its allure, the calls for self-defence against bandits and criminal gangs could just be a recipe for disaster. Take the United States for example, the liberal laws on access to weapons has contributed to a high incidence of gun violence, mass shootings and increased homicide rates. We have also seen how the proliferation of small arms and light weapons has fuelled decades of conflicts leading to widespread instability and humanitarian crises in Somalia and Yemen. These are clear evidence of the risks associated with having weapons freely in the hands of the people.

Amidst genuine domestic concerns about insecurity and violence, the introduction of more weapons into the communities could exacerbate more violence and lead to potentially disastrous outcomes. As highlighted in an article by the Institute of Security Studies, as of 2024, Nigeria accounts for about 70 per cent of the almost 500 million illegal weapons in circulation across West Africa.  It is just rational that Nigeria maintains its current laws and regulations on gun control but with more pragmatic actions on strict enforcement. 

Ultimately, addressing the myriads of security challenges requires a more nuanced and whole of society approach starting with an assessment of the gaps in the current security architecture that allows insecurity to fester. From the physical security aspect, government must focus on raising the capability of the military, strengthening the capacity of law enforcement agencies and design strategies to dominate the vast swaths of ungoverned spaces across the country. It must also keep focus on providing good governance and ensure absolute control of its borders. 

In terms of military capability, urgent attention is required to address the current manpower shortage and insufficient high-grade weapons and platforms in commensurate strength. Appropriation of fund to address these gaps will most certainly face some criticism in a society where opinions are in the majority that annual budget to defence is a burden on the nation’s development. Unfortunately, such opinions are based on mere comparison of defence budget with those of other sectors, but not on any empirical analysis anchored on threats and capability which principally drives funding of defence.

From global security assessment, the 2024 Global Peace Index ranks Nigeria 147 out of 163 countries and categorized Nigeria as very low in the state of peace spectrum along with other African countries such as Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Somalia, Mali, DRC, South Sudan and Sudan. Given this pathetic situation, Nigerians must realise that it is better to throw in every resource that is required to quicken the achievement of stability noting that peace and stability provide the foundation for development, and without them no nation can achieve its full potentials. 

Faced with the prevailing precarious security challenges, Nigeria must gear up to boost the operational efficiency of its military well above the current abysmal level, noting that conventionally most countries strive to achieve close to 85-90 percent efficiency. It is time to acquaint Mr President with the current reality in terms of the overall operational efficiency of the military, so that government could embark on a deliberate plan for short, medium and long-term procurement that could gradually raise the military’s operational efficiency to a decent level required for mission success.

In doing this, there must be a remarkable deviation from the current piecemeal acquisition of critical operational equipment.  It must be noted that the operations to rid the country of insurgents and bandits have lasted so long with undesirable impact on the will of troops to fight. When troops become battle weary, the catalyst needed is the injection of ‘game changers’ that would reinforce the confidence of troops and boost their morale to fight. Mr President, the military is in urgent need of new and modern tanks, APCs, MRAPs, attack helicopters, high grade armed drones, boats and assorted weapons and ammunition in large quantities.  Let the nation provide these for the military and watch how situation will change and the calls for self-defence will fizzle out. 

If there is any pronounced gap in the nation’s security architecture that has made insecurity to fester, it is the near collapse of policing as a key component of law enforcement.  Since 1999, Nigerians have continued to yearn for necessary reforms that would bring the police in tune with current global standard, but that aspiration remains a mirage.  At this moment, Nigeria needs the strong will and character of President Tinubu to initiate a focused and sustainable police sector reform that would earn it the respect of many Nigerians.  Such reform must address issues of recruitment, force restructure, training, administration, welfare of personnel, infrastructure, kitting and equipment.  An efficient police force is crucial for the overall security of the country and promotes social, economic and political development.

Over the years, nearly all of Nigeria’s 1,129 forest reserves have become expanse of ungoverned spaces providing haven for bandits and terrorists. Government seems to have heeded the calls for these forests to be properly dominated, with the recent announcement of the creation of forest guards. According to reports, the forest guards are to be well trained and armed to flush out terrorists and criminal gangs hiding inside the forests for criminal activities. This is obviously a deviation from the traditional roles given to forest guards. In South Africa, Kenya, Ghana, Tanzania etc, forest guards or park rangers as they are called are principally tasked to combat illegal logging and mining, anti-poaching activities, patrolling and surveillance operations and forest fire protection. 

Details about the Forest Guards are still sketchy, but the scanty disclosure has raised some questions; what weapons will they bear considering the role it has been given, will they be under state or federal government control, what will be the relationship between the guards and the military, police and other security agencies, how will they relate within the existing forest security arrangement where we have the National Park Service and the Agro-Rangers under the NSCDC, will the role being proposed for the forest guards not bring them into conflict with the military? These and many other questions are what the planners must ponder on as they put the presidential directive into action.

Government must ensure that the forest guards operate professionally in close cooperation and collaboration with other security agencies and must be free from political interference and misuse. They must be given clearly defined roles and responsibilities to prevent confusion and overlaps in the course of their duty.  Government must avoid the temptation of turning the forest guards into a quasi-military force, by limiting its combat role to patrolling and surveillance for information and intelligence gathering to aid the military in conduct of operations. 

Notwithstanding, the forest guards must be sufficiently armed for self-defence against bandits and other intruders as well as attacks from wild animals. In Kenya, Ghana, Tanzania, DRC and Cameroon, forest guards are equipped with semi-automatic rifles and AK47 in some cases. In South Africa, the park rangers are equipped with R5 rifles which is a more accurate and versatile rifle suited for longer range engagements and more tactical operations.  Given the right weapons with a clear mission and institution of effective coordination, the forest guards would be able to fill a gap which would help to strengthen the current security architecture.

•Olawumi, a retired Major General and former NYSC Director General is a member of THISDAY editorial board