The Nation Newspaper

Category: Commentaries

  • Border fencing and national security

    Border fencing and national security

    Sir: I listened to General Christopher Musa, Nigeria’s Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), on June 3, during a security conference in Abuja, where he publicly advocated for the construction of fences along Nigeria’s borders with neighbouring countries such as Cameroon, Niger, Benin, and Chad.

    He informed the audience that Pakistan has constructed extensive border fencing along its frontier with Afghanistan as a decisive measure to curb cross-border terrorism and preserve territorial integrity. He further noted that Saudi Arabia has done the same with its border with Iraq, highlighting it as a strategic effort to safeguard national security and assert sovereign control over its frontiers.

    I align my thoughts with the critical initiative proposed by General Musa, to confront our national security challenges through a transformational leap. No doubt, our security situation has reached a decisive junction—an inflection point—where our strategic efforts must experience a strong and fundamental paradigm shift.

    We are all aware that our borders are extensively porous—northwest to northeast, southwest to southeast, and even through the north-central and south-south zones. These porous borders have become readily available conduits for terrorists, arms smugglers, human traffickers, illegal migrants, economic saboteurs, and all kinds of nefarious transnational criminals.

    Records indicate that Nigeria, with over 4,000 kilometres of land borders shared with Niger, Chad, Benin, and Cameroon, has more than 1,400 illegal routes, with only 114 approved control posts and merely 80 e-border technology deployments.

    If we are genuinely committed as a nation to confronting the security and economic vices facilitated through our porous borders, border fencing stands out as a critical option—one that can significantly complement the other efforts of government in reducing the security challenges tormenting Nigeria.

    The call by the CDS should not receive rhetorical responses but must be seen as a practical, implementable strategy. It has been successfully deployed in many countries to confront similar security threats. Beyond Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, as mentioned by the CDS, other examples include India, which constructed over 3,300 kilometres of fencing along its borders with Pakistan to counter terrorism and arms smuggling, Israel, which built high-tech fences along the Gaza Strip and the Sinai border with Egypt, resulting in a significant reduction in illegal entries and terrorist attacks and United States, which despite political outcry, undertook border fencing along parts of the U.S.–Mexico border, leading to a dramatic reduction in unauthorised crossings.

    Fencing signals state presence, authority, and intent, particularly in remote or disputed territories where governance is either weak or non-existent. It curbs smuggling and prevents economic leakages, where billions are lost annually through illicit trade, and facilitates structured migration management and related benefits.

     Given these critical imperatives, the federal government should urgently constitute a Presidential Task Force on Strategic Border Fencing with full presidential mandate and authority to undertake a national border security risk survey, identifying and prioritising vulnerable corridors prone to transnational crimes, design a phased national border fencing masterplan—a scalable fencing blueprint informed by threat indices and regional strategic importance, recommend the most effective and efficient fencing models (physical and technology-driven), and propose funding mechanisms, including budgetary allocations, public-private partnerships, international security grants, multilateral development assistance, and other innovative sources.

    Read Also: Cardtonic Launches Upskill 3.0 to Give Out Free MacBooks to 20 Young Nigerians 

    The task force must enforce transparent financial governance and implement strict expenditure tracking to ensure value for money and zero tolerance for corruption.

    Border fencing is not merely a physical barrier but a strategic redefinition of Nigeria’s security architecture. It represents an integrated national security framework designed to defend our territorial integrity, promote economic stability, and secure long-term development.

    Therefore, I make a passionate appeal to Mr President—renowned for his bold vision, legacy-driven leadership, and strategic foresight—to elevate border fencing to a presidential priority. It must not be approached as an optional policy direction but as a legacy-defining national project, vital to the structural recalibration of Nigeria’s security.

    •Prof. Sunday Ayodele Enikanselu, Baruwa, Lagos.

  • Youth and inordinate pursuit of wealth

    Youth and inordinate pursuit of wealth

    Sir: In today’s fast-paced society, the pursuit of wealth has become more intense than ever. Young people are under growing pressure to succeed quickly and visibly. Social media has made it worse, constantly showing luxury lifestyles, expensive cars, designer clothes, and dream vacations. Everywhere you look, there is someone showing off something new, and this has created a culture where being rich is seen as the only proof of success. With this kind of pressure, it is not surprising that many are tempted to look for shortcuts to riches.

    Some youth turn to legal avenues such as starting businesses, learning digital skills, or investing in trades. These are commendable paths that require time, discipline, and consistency. However, others begin to lean toward illegal or dishonest means. Internet fraud, online scams, money rituals, and other shady activities have unfortunately become attractive options for those who want to make it overnight. These choices are dangerous and often come with serious consequences that people do not fully think through until it is too late.

    The reality is that there is always a price to pay for fast money, especially when it comes through illegal means. Aside from the risk of arrest, prosecution, and jail time, there is also the emotional burden and shame that follow. Getting caught in criminal activity can destroy the future. It closes doors to real opportunities, stains the reputation, and breaks the trust of family and community.

    It is important to understand that real wealth takes time to build. There is nothing wrong with starting small. Many successful people started with little, but they stayed consistent. Whether learning a skill, starting a side hustle, or working one’s way through school or a job, what matters is growth. Progress may be slow, but it is real, and over time, it adds up. That kind of wealth gives confidence and freedom because it was earned the right way.

    Read Also: Cardtonic Launches Upskill 3.0 to Give Out Free MacBooks to 20 Young Nigerians 

    Young people need to hear this often. There is no shame in taking one’s time. Not everyone will blow in their twenties, and that is okay. Social media has created false timelines that make people feel like failures if they have not made it early. But life is not a race. The future should not be built on lies or shortcuts. Let it be built on purpose and effort.

    Money comes and goes, but values, peace of mind, and name should remain intact. Do not trade your future for temporary pleasure. Stay focused, stay clean, and remember that true success is not just about how much you have but how you earned it.

    •Muhammad Umar Shehu,Gombe.

  • A governor’s rogue dream

    A governor’s rogue dream

     Somewhat, Governor Duoye Diri of Bayelsa State reminds all yet again of former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s third term debacle.  But that parallel only leads to even a richer ironic parallel between the two.

    Obasanjo and cronies deluded selves they had the power of “third term”, by bribing and suborning the National Assembly, into a constitutional amendment surrender.  Yet, were so coy about it all — at least Obasanjo himself, who put a lie to the plot but his body language screamed the exact opposite.

    Diri, on the other hand, knew his jaundiced dream would only happen when Birnam woods move to Dunsinane (to borrow that witch imagery from Macbeth, the William Shakespeare tragedy).  Yet, he was more brazen, in his third term pipe dream. But he knew it would never happen.

    Moral: if the PDP has moved from “Power!” of old to “scatter!” today, just know it had always packed undemocratic conduct in its DNA!  A “third generation” of leaders down in Bayelsa, and the third term nonsense is rearing its head.  But perhaps the governor spoke tongue-in-cheek?

    Read Also: Hold governors accountable, not just Tinubu, APC chieftain tells Nigerians

    Using “abandoned projects” as excuse, Governor Diri, on a tour of Nembe in the Nembe Local Government of Bayelsa State, urged his audience to impress it on their members in the National Assembly, to amend the 1999 Constitution to give governors a third term.

    He suggested that though his government was focusing on completing an independent power project plant, he would still not be able to meet all his electors’ demands, with the short time he had left in office.  For that, the appeal for third term!

    Deja vu — have we not heard such before?  When Obasanjo’s cronies were dangling his own constitutional subversion, it was to create time for the imperial president to complete his “reforms” — reforms that with hindsight were nothing but deforms in real terms, given the huge burden of corruption the PDP era bequeathed the country, until it all crashed on the luckless President Goodluck Jonathan in 2015.

    You’ll also want to remember how the guy that now wants third term accessed power.  In 2019, David Lyon, the APC candidate, defeated Diri, the PDP candidate, by a shellacking of near-8:2: 79.59% to 28.66% of votes. But that win was annulled, on the eve of Lyon taking power, by the most gangling form of injustice, by the Supreme Court.  Poor Lyon was even rehearsing his inauguration guard parade when the thunder him him!

    By controversy over the changing names of Lyon’s running mate, Senator Biobarakuma Degi, the Supreme Court nullified the Lyon mandate on an alleged “forgery”.  But a lower court had since found no forgery existed; and that the names were only different but legitimate names of the senator.  But that couldn’t save the doomed Lyon mandate.

    So, a governor that accessed power through rogue justice dreams rouge third term — perfect logic!

  • Nigeria’s youth in a fragile economy

    Nigeria’s youth in a fragile economy

    • By Muhammad Umar Shehu

    Sir: Nigeria’s youth are growing up in a country weighed down by economic instability, rising inflation, political uncertainty, and widespread insecurity. Yet despite these harsh realities, they continue to push back, refusing to be buried under the weight of a system that has repeatedly failed them.

    With over 70% of the population under the age of 30, the Nigerian youth are not just a demographic fact. They are a force. But this force operates in a country where job opportunities are scarce, education is underfunded, and the cost of living keeps rising. Many graduates roam the streets for years without employment. Even those with jobs often earn salaries that barely cover transportation and food, let alone rent or savings.

    In response to these struggles, many young people are turning to alternative paths. The digital economy has become a lifeline, and platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and X are being used for work, advocacy, education, and influence. Self-taught developers, content creators, and freelancers are building new careers from scratch, often with little to no support from the government or traditional institutions.

    At the same time, there’s a growing political awareness. Across social media, campuses, and community spaces, young Nigerians are organizing, speaking out, and demanding better governance. They are increasingly asking tough questions, mobilizing around issues that affect their daily lives, and refusing to be silenced by fear or frustration.

    Read Also: We’ll reshape economic diplomacy to build a progressive West Africa – Tinubu

    Still, the journey is tough. Youth-led initiatives often face resistance, intimidation, and a lack of institutional support. Many of the country’s leaders remain disconnected from the realities of young people. But that hasn’t stopped this generation from getting involved in politics, leading social change, and creating their own opportunities to make an impact.

    From small business owners in rural areas to young creatives and tech enthusiasts in urban centres, Nigerian youth are showing resilience, courage, and a strong desire to reshape their country. They are not waiting for handouts or hoping for miracles. They are building, learning, and leading with what little they have.

    The economy may be fragile and the leadership uncertain, but the determination of Nigeria’s youth remains strong. And in that, there is still hope for the kind of change that can move the country forward.

    •Muhammad Umar Shehu,

    Gombe.

  • Iran’s nuclear sites: What the U.S. broke

    Iran’s nuclear sites: What the U.S. broke

    • By Lekan Olayiwola

    Sir: On June 21,  the United States launched coordinated airstrikes on three of Iran’s most sensitive nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan—marking a dramatic escalation in a conflict that had already been simmering between Israel and Iran for over a week. President Trump declared the operation a “spectacular military success,” while Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu hailed it as a “bold decision that will change history.”

    But history may not be so easily rewritten.

    Beyond the immediate tactical impact, the strikes have triggered a cascade of strategic consequences that threaten to unravel decades of nuclear diplomacy, destabilize the region, and fracture the already fragile architecture of global non-proliferation. The Iranian foreign minister echoed this when he said “the United States betrayed diplomacy.”

    For years, the U.S. maintained a posture of calibrated deterrence toward Iran’s nuclear program, pressuring through sanctions, cyber operations, and diplomatic isolation, but stopping short of direct military engagement. That posture is now over. By targeting declared nuclear sites under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) monitoring, the U.S. has crossed a threshold that Iran’s leadership has long warned would be interpreted as an act of war.

    Tehran has responded with threats of “everlasting consequences” and has already launched retaliatory missile strikes toward Israel. But the deeper shift is doctrinal: Iran’s calculus on nuclear deterrence may now tilt toward acceleration, not restraint.

    Meanwhile, in the shadow of these strikes, Iranian civilians in Isfahan and Natanz, many of whom live within kilometres of the targeted facilities, have taken to social media to express fear, confusion, and grief. Hospitals in nearby towns reported surges in trauma-related admissions, not from physical injury, but from psychological shock. These are not collateral voices. They are the human barometers of escalation.

    The 2025 strikes may be remembered not for what they destroyed, but for what they dismantled: the credibility of the global non-proliferation regime. The IAEA confirmed that the targeted sites were under inspection and had shown no signs of diversion toward weaponisation. By attacking them anyway, the U.S. has sent a chilling message to other states with the effect that compliance with international norms offers no protection from force.

    This precedent could embolden nuclear aspirants and weaken the moral authority of the West in future negotiations—from North Korea to Saudi Arabia. The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), already strained, now faces a legitimacy crisis.

    Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called the strikes “a betrayal of diplomacy.” But what remains unspoken is the betrayal felt by Iranian scientists who had worked under IAEA protocols, only to see their facilities bombed. One technician, writing anonymously on Telegram, said: “We followed the rules. They bombed us anyway.” That sentence may echo longer than any missile.

    Read Also: ADA won’t stop Tinubu’s re-election in 2027 — APC Chieftain Okechukwu

    Prior to the strikes, there were backchannel efforts reportedly involving Oman and Switzerland to broker a regional de-escalation framework. Those efforts are now in tatters. Iran’s foreign ministry has declared diplomacy “betrayed,” and the likelihood of any near-term return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) an Iran nuclear deal reached in July 2015 with a group of world powers known as the P5+1 (U.S., U.K., France, Russia, China, and Germany along with the European Union) is now vanishingly small.

    Moreover, the strikes have complicated U.S. relations with European allies, many of whom were not consulted and now face the prospect of refugee flows, energy shocks, and retaliatory cyberattacks. The EU’s foreign ministers are scrambling to convene an emergency session, but the damage to transatlantic unity may already be done.

    What’s missing from this diplomatic collapse is any symbolic gesture of repair. No U.S. official has acknowledged the IAEA’s prior clearance of the sites. No apology has been offered to the international inspectors whose work was rendered moot. In terms narrative equilibrium, this is a rupture not just of policy but of relational trust.

    The Middle East is now on a knife’s edge. Iraq, caught between its U.S. security ties and Iranian religious-political affinities, has condemned the strikes and warned of militia reprisals. The Houthis in Yemen have declared solidarity with Tehran. Hezbollah has hinted at “regional coordination.” And Iran’s missile arsenal remains intact.

    In short, the U.S. may have won a tactical round but at the cost of igniting a multi-front escalation that could engulf the region. The U.S. may have obliterated three nuclear sites. But unless it rebuilds the scaffolding of global trust, it may have also detonated the last fragile hopes for a negotiated peace.

    •Lekan Olayiwola,

     lekanolayiwola@gmail.com

  • On Oyo Government House renovation plan

    On Oyo Government House renovation plan

    • By Adisa Atolagbe

    Sir: Governor Seyi Makinde’s proposed N63.4 billion renovation of the Oyo State Government House has ignited a wave of public backlash and provoked intense scrutiny of governance priorities. Coming into government in 2019 and projecting itself as a progressive administration committed to people-centered policies, Makinde’s administration, already faced with land grabbing allegations, now confronts accusations of misplaced priorities and governance detachment.

    Oyo State, with its rich cultural legacy and strategic geographical position, remains stifled by systemic underdevelopment. A significant portion of its rural and peri-urban populations live without access to quality education, potable water, functional healthcare, or reliable infrastructure. The road networks in agrarian zones like Ibarapa and Oke Ogun and Ibadan, less city local government areas are dilapidated, cutting off farmers from markets and stifling economic activities. Primary healthcare centers are often under-resourced, and public schools remain decrepit, overcrowded and underfunded.

    Despite these deficits, the state possesses considerable economic potential. A logical policy approach would allocate state resources toward scalable, grassroots initiatives to increase food production, stimulate agro-allied industry to reduce rural employment, including providing basic amenities. Instead, the N63.4 billion allocated for executive luxury risks widening existing disparities.

    Read Also: We’ll reshape economic diplomacy to build a progressive West Africa – Tinubu

    The scale of the proposed renovation—not merely its cost—is emblematic of administrative tone-deafness. Oyo State’s poverty incidence surpasses 40%, and basic public services are in disrepair. The allocation of N63.4 billion to a largely symbolic structure is indefensible under such conditions. It is estimated that this amount could fund 640 well-equipped primary health centers or provide vocational training and grants to tens of thousands of youths and women.

    Comparatively, the figure overshadows several years’ worth of education and healthcare budgets, underscoring the disproportionality of the proposed spending. There has been no public disclosure of structural deficiencies that justify this scale of renovation. If renovation of government house will cost N63.4 billion, how much will constructing a new one cost? Thus, the project not only appears extravagant and wasteful but fundamentally disconnected from the lived realities of the state’s population.

    Good governance is characterized by transparency, responsiveness, and the ethical deployment of public resources. A central ethical concern in this case is the prioritization of luxury for a political elite over public welfare. There is no public evidence of stakeholder consultations, feasibility studies, or community needs assessments to support the project.

    Furthermore, the decision raises critical ethical questions about empathy and accountability in public leadership. A government house is primarily a symbol of executive power—not a developmental necessity. In a democracy, optics matter. Renovating an already functional Government House amid widespread poverty sends a message of elite insularity and administrative hubris.

    This controversy may mark a turning point in Makinde’s political legacy. Unless reversed, the renovation could define his administration as a government that loves to indulge in fiscal indulgence.

    The proposed N63.4 billion Government House renovation stands as a cautionary tale of how political symbolism can eclipse developmental urgency. It exposes the chasm between executive choices and the existential struggles of citizens. Governor Makinde’s reputation is at risk of forever being eclipsed by this decision and some recent ones that, by many metrics, symbolizes elite detachment and administrative myopia.

    True governance legacy lies not in architectural grandeur but in measurable improvements in human capital, welfare, and opportunity. A redirection of the N63.4 billion toward education, healthcare, agriculture, and infrastructure would produce ripple effects of development and restore public confidence in governance.

    The administration should halt the renovation project or at the very least scale it down considerably and prioritize the welfare of the people rather than cosmetic projects that have no public value. Citizens should have a say in how their resources are allocated. By listening to the people, the government can rediscover its moral compass—and perhaps, its mandate.

    •Adisa Atolagbe,

     Ibadan, Oyo State.

  • Iran, Israel, and the ghosts of a relationship gone bad

    Iran, Israel, and the ghosts of a relationship gone bad

    By Nishtha Gautam

    As Tehran and Tel Aviv continue to bomb each other, it is impossible to wrap one’s brain around the time, not so distant in the past, when Iran and Israel were each other’s trusted allies in the West Asia region. In a twisted way, however, Iran still seems to be helping Israel. In furthering Israel’s narrative of being the victim. Iran, in turn, stands as isolated today as its arch enemy Iraq once was.

    How was the road to Iran’s isolation, not just regional, paved? As opposed to the popular view of the American grandstanding on peace, which has been altering the geopolitical landscape of West Asia, Iran’s downfall has been largely of its own making, ably aided by Israel. While Iran didn’t recognise the nationhood of Israel, it saw the nascent Jewish state as an ally in the project of regional dominance. Israel needed non-Arab allies, too. It was a good deal for both. After a decade of covert collaboration, Israel became more upfront about its friendship with Iran post the Suez War of 1956. Both Israel and Iran viewed Gamal Abdel Nasser’s Pan-Arabism and Soviet communism with great apprehension.

    Through the 1960s, Tel Aviv and Tehran were instrumental in strengthening the Kurds fighting the regime in Iraq, a Shia-majority country ruled by the Sunni establishment. It’s difficult to believe today, but the Israeli Mossad worked closely with its Iranian counterpart SAVAK, to support the Kurdish resistance. Even the 1967 Arab-Israeli war was not a deal-breaker for this relationship based on common geopolitical interests. If anything, it bolstered Iran’s trust in Israel’s strength after the latter defeated Jordan, Egypt and Syria. The Shah regime held close ties with Israel and continued military, economic, and intelligence cooperation, and both worked against the Ba’athist Iraq.

    READ ALSO: How we contracted infections using school toilets – Pupils

    In 1973, when the Arab world stood united against the United States and Europe for their support of Israel and stopped selling them oil, Iran firmly stood in the corner of Israel. It was an expedient move on the Shah’s part as Iran became the leading beneficiary with bourgeoning oil revenues. Iran’s oil was fuelling the West.

    When Israel Had Iran’s Back

    Israel seems to have forgotten today that the missiles landing on its cities are probably thanks to Project Flower, a 1977 joint Iranian-Israeli development programme of advanced missile systems. Even after the regime change in Iran after the 1979 revolution, the reliance on Israel continued unabated, despite the public stance of the Ayatollah against the Jewish state. When Iraq, boosted militarily by both the Americans and the Soviets, invaded Iran in 1980, the Islamic Republic needed Israel more than ever before. And Israel delivered!

    In violation of the sanction policy of its mentor, the US, the Israeli government supplied weapons and other military hardware to Iran in the early 1980s. Saddam Hussein’s war against Iran cemented the military and intelligence collaboration between Tehran and Tel Aviv. But something was about to change.

    The US sanctions against Iran in the aftermath of the 1979 hostage crisis, when 66 American citizens were held captive by an Iranian student group in Tehran to demand the extradition of the Shah, announced that the days of Iran-US bonhomie were over. The religious extremism of the Islamic Republic began to overshadow its pragmatism, and what could have been an inter-regime squabble soon turned into a full-blown geopolitical crisis in the next decade.

    The Coming of Netanyahu

    The Islamic Republic not only started amplifying its anti-Jewish state rhetoric, but it also started painting Iran as a victim of the West-style modernity. Tehran-Tel Aviv cooperation continued covertly, as if on life support, till the mid-1990s. With Benjamin Netanyahu’s first Prime Ministerial stint starting 1996, the anti-Iran paranoia began to take root in Israel.

    Thanks to Iran’s support for Hezbollah and Hamas in a bid to emerge as a regional heavyweight, the Israelis pinned every regional conflict they faced on the Islamic Republic. This development had ramifications beyond West Asia. Post 9/11 attacks, Iran tried a rapprochement with a hostile US, citing an alignment of interests in terms of destroying the Taliban in Afghanistan. Washington rejected this “Grand Bargain” proposal, and George W Bush famously declared, “States like these and their terrorist allies constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world,” referring to North Korea, Iran, and Saddam’s Iraq.

    A lonely existence

    Netanyahu has been consistently working towards painting Iran as the biggest threat not only to regional stability in West Asia but also to the interests of the US. The “axis of evil” clubbing has been detrimental to Iran’s economic and geopolitical standing, exacerbated by the Islamic Regime’s constant attack on the West-corrupted Iranians who do not adhere to religious diktats. Iranian dissenters have been the biggest allies of the Israeli overtures against the Islamic Regime.

    With the fall of the Assad regime in Syria and the continuing Russia-Ukraine war, one of the rare allies of Iran, Putin, too, is in no position to help. Beyond the usual rhetoric of opposition to Western hegemony, Moscow cannot provide any substantive assistance to Tehran. Not to forget Netanyahu’s persistent lobbying efforts, which have led to Putin not giving Syria the S-300 anti-aircraft system. Tehran cannot rely on Moscow’s support. It appears the same with China. Beijing is more heavily invested, despite the rivalry, in the US economically than in Russia or West Asia, and money trumps friendships almost every time in international affairs.

    Iran’s isolation, therefore, can be summarised in this couplet by Salik Lakhnavi, a Progressive Urdu poet:

    Khuda aazmaae sanam aazmaae

    Sanam jaante haiñ khuda jaanta hai

    (God tested me, my beloved tested me

    God knows, my beloved knows).

    *This article was first published in www.ndtv.com           

  • Geopolitics: When opportunity knocks

    Geopolitics: When opportunity knocks

    By Timothy Ash

    All the focus at present is on the on-going war between Israel and Iran, but this just reminds us again of the importance of geopolitics and its ability to impact on markets and the global economy.

    Uncertainty and risks are back with us. The fear is that we see escalation, with potentially devastating impacts on global markets. For example, if we see regional energy sector assets subject to attack, the closing of the Straits of Hormuz could see a repeat of events in the 1970s with potential for an oil price shock to the global economy?

    Markets have a difficulty in figuring out geopolitics, and we saw the impact of that with Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, when the market was largely unprepared and the result was a big move in global markets, a further inflation shock, higher central bank policy rates in response and a negative hit to global growth.

    Explanations as to why markets struggle with geopolitics are varied but I think it is partly the fact that geopolitics is a multidisciplinary subject, often involving foreign affairs, but understanding domestic factors influencing decision making in a range of countries, defense and security, even environmental issues, geography, economics, trade, markets, and now cyber and AI looking forward. There are many moving parts, and few people have all the tools to accurately call events.

    I think also in markets, and analysis, there is often a desire to see the glass half full, hope for the best, and not want to think about the uncomfortable and difficult to fathom results of out-of-the-box or black swan events. A bias to mean reversion when, actually politics globally appear to be going the other way, with more extremism, and likely more extreme, even systemic risks looming.

    READ ALSO: How we contracted infections using school toilets – Pupils

    Often, I also think there is a bias to think that we all share the same information set, have the same objectives and apply the same kind of logic. That’s a mistake, I think, if we look back at Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, as one example. think also people ignore the impact of “opportunity” in the decisions that our leaders make.

    Just explaining all that around Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine. I think most people failed to understand the existential importance of Ukraine to Putin, and what he was willing to sacrifice in his decision to invade.

    Most outside observers heard the warnings of crippling Western sanctions on Russia and assumed that Putin would not be crazy enough to risk the Russian economy in order to invade and capture Ukraine. But for Putin, Ukraine was an important enough prize to take that very risk.

    We could also argue that he had a different information set or evaluated the risks differently – either he did not expect aggressive Western sanctions or, even if he did, he had spent the last decade building up Russian buffers, and assumed they provided enough insulation, should he decide (I would argue he decided long before) to invade.

    But for Putin the opportunity presented itself in 2022. He saw the West as weak and divided, with limited military capability to intervene on Ukraine’s part. The US withdrawal from Afghanistan sent a signal that the Biden administration was weak and uninterested in foreign military adventures.

    He saw himself as having leverage on Europe as it remained reliant on Russia for energy supplies – and he had spent the past twenty years buying and corrupting Western politicians and interests. On the issue of energy, he saw the energy card as potentially weakening with the carbon transition – the longer he left it, the weaker his leverage over Europe would become. He saw the Ukrainian military as relatively weak still, but rebuilding – and the longer he left it, the greater defense capability they would present, and more able to resist invasion.

    And he still thought the Russian military were capable and had overwhelming superiority over its Ukrainian counterpart. For Putin, it was a now-or-never moment – in his mind, the stars aligned in 2022.

    Others (not yours truly – I argued back as far as 2015 that a defining war between Ukraine and Russia was inevitable) simply failed to see that, or did not want to see the obvious. The obvious being the huge Russian troop build-up in 2021 and then early in 2022, and Putin even writing his essay in mid-2021 on why Ukraine was not really a state, and Russia and Ukraine were one nation. He even spelt out – quite literally – what was coming.

    One might also look at Azerbaijan’s defining wars with Armenia in 2000 and then 2023, the latter in particular reflected opportunity. Opportunity from the fact that Russia, which had a security alliance with Armenia, was tied up in Ukraine and had little military capability to intervene against Azerbaijan, and its military backer, Turkey, which Russia needed to maintain access to markets given Western sanctions. But also, the opportunity provided by technology, and the advantage provided by Turkish drones. Relating all this now to events in the Middle East – and drivers for events from Oct. 7, at least. First, Israeli PM, Netanyahu needed an opportunity to turn the news cycle against his own political and legal problems building up to Oct. 7. This could have been a political disaster for him, given criticism of the lack of preparedness of Israel for that attack – on Netanyahu’s watch.

    But events of October 7 provided an opportunity for Netanyahu by removing the constraints on Israel for military campaigns, against Hamas in Gaza, in the West Bank, in Lebanon, Syria and now Iran. Fortunately for Netanyahu, the Biden administration was weak, going into a difficult election. Biden faced internal pressure from the left of the party, more pro-Palestinian in orientation, and this forced Biden to adopt a much more hawkish pro-Israeli line. It gave Netanyahu almost Carte blanche to act in Gaza et al, with the one constraint then being not to escalate to an all-out war with Iran – Biden did not want higher oil prices as he headed to elections. But that removed the constraints on Netanyahu elsewhere – Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon et al.

    And technology added to the opportunity for Netanyahu – which we saw in the pager attacks in Lebanon against Hezbollah, but also now against Iran proper. The same Western technological advantage seen in Ukraine – third generation NATO kit, beating fourth generation Russian kit, plus use of drones, AI et al, is also playing out for Israel against Iran.

    Netanyahu escalated to attack Iran over the past few weeks not because Iran was closer to moving to build a nuclear weapon but because events and technology, and Iran’s own weakness, presented him with an opportunity for an all-out victory.

    This was not about taking out the latent, but not real, nuclear threat but about removing a long-term strategic threat from Iran to Israel, and it’s about regime change. The opportunity was just too good for Netanyahu not to let up on.

    Now we can debate whether or not the Trump administration was involved or supportive of the decision by Israel to strike. But whether it knew, or approved or not of the attacks, I think Netanyahu knew that this US administration contains so many ardent religious supporters of Israel, that whatever it did, there would be no sanction on Israel for its actions. And understanding the egotistical personality of Trump, he knew that as long as the mission was successful – which he was sure of – that Trump would eventually fall in line, and behind Israel, as he has done so far.

    Now as events are transpiring, it seems that Israel does not quite have the military capacity to take Iran’s full nuclear capacity out, or to deliver regime change given the Islamic regime is entrenched, and has durability built over many years of being tested by the U.S. and its allies, plus Iraq under Saddam.

    Netanyahu needs the US to complete the job – albeit it is unclear whether regime change will produce a better, more sustainable long-term outlook, and the experience there from US past intervention in Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc., is not good.

    The question is whether Trump will join Israel now in its fight with Iran.Will the U.S. get involved?

    Trump’s America First mantra for MAGA suggests no more foreign adventures. And this week, the likes of Bannon, Carlson, Gabbard, et al have pleaded with Trump to hold fire, and not get dragged into another Iraq.

    But I sense here that Trump cannot help himself – and Netanyahu is playing to Trump’s ego. Likely the pitch from Netanyahu to Trump will be that this can be his place in history. By providing a limited military intervention, with limited risks given the Islamic Republic is on its last legs, Trump can save the world from Iran’s nuclear threat and free Iran of a brutal regime. It can be final payback for the Iran embassy hostage siege, for the US embassy in Lebanon and marine barracks bombings.

    And while Trump’s peace efforts in Ukraine and Gaza are failing, Netanyahu will be presenting this as low hanging fruit and an opportunity for Trump, gifted to him by Netanyahu himself. Meanwhile, the Christian fundamentalists in the GOP, and the Iran hawks will be lobbying aggressively for Trump to seize the opportunity.

    Can he resist in favor of cutting a diplomatic deal with Iran, which might fall short of the mark, and leave him open to criticism that TACO – that Trump had the ability to end Iran’s nuclear program once and for all, and to bring down the regime, a long run enemy of the US, and he bottled it?

    I have my doubt, the opportunity, or temptation just looks too enticing for Trump.

    •            This article was first published in www.kyivpost.com

  • Addressing security challenges through constitutional amendment

    Addressing security challenges through constitutional amendment

    As the nation grapple with series of security challenges, there has been clamour for various reforms to enhance the workings of the nation’s security personnel. Some, including state governors, legislators and many Nigerians alike have advocated for the establishment of state police, while some others have argued against it for fear of abuse. The 10th House of Representatives have introduced a new dimension to the review system, bringing together security chiefs to make their own input into the constitution review process. TONY AKOWE reports.

    Since the return to democratic rule in 1999, the Nigerian constitution has gone through five different alterations by the National Assembly. However, for the first time, the National Assembly, especially the House of Representatives are putting the security agencies into consideration why trying to amend the constitution. Although the 10th House of Representatives has promised to deliver a new constitution by December 2025, they have brought the security agencies in the country into the picture. The aim, according to Benjamin Kalu, Deputy Speaker and Chairman of the House Committee on Constitution Review is to get the views of the security chief on areas they need constitutional amendment to enhance their operations. He said the central aim he said is to synthesize and collate, directly from the security chiefs who are the key actors in the national security architecture, their candid perspectives on the “sickness” in the constitution that impedes the effective delivery of their mandates.

    He said “over the years, laws have been crafted on various aspects of national life, including security governance, often without a proper diagnosis of the real gaps and challenges as experienced by those on the frontline. To proceed with constitutional amendments without first hearing from you would be akin to a medical doctor prescribing treatment without a thorough diagnosis or treating a patient without listening to their symptoms. As legislators, we recognize that the work of parliament is much like that of a physician: we must depend on accurate laboratory diagnosis to prescribe the right medication to cure an ailment. We are here to listen to you, those who wear the shoes and know exactly where it pinches. Whether the issues are rooted in inter-agency harmonization, command authority, intelligence coordination, or other critical aspects, your insights are indispensable. You, our security sector stakeholders, are best positioned to articulate the constitutional and operational bottlenecks that hinder your effectiveness.”

    He said the outcome of the dialogue will help the legislators to make an informed decision in the course of the review of the constitution. To the Deputy Speaker, the overall objective of the dialogue aimed to advance the ongoing Constitution Review process, focusing on security and policing reforms, facilitate inter-agency collaboration for a unified approach to national security, discuss and refine legislative proposals, particularly those on state policing and intelligence coordination, enhance border security strategies and promote regional stability and encourage robust public engagement and stakeholder input. He said “Our commitment is to first diagnose, by gathering your experiential knowledge, institutional challenges, and actionable recommendations. Only then can we, as legislators, responsibly frame the “prescriptions”: the constitutional amendments and legislative reforms necessary to address these challenges. Importantly, this is not a one-off event. Before the finalization of the constitution review process, we will return to you, the stakeholders, to review the proposed prescriptions, collate further feedback, and ensure that the final version of the constitution truly reflects the needs and realities of Nigeria’s security sector. This approach ensures that the solutions we design are comprehensive, inclusive, and sustainable. The legislature, as we always say, is the solution hub for the hydra-headed problems facing our country. Through this collaborative, diagnostic approach, we aim to craft a legislative framework that delivers long-lasting national solutions”.

    READ ALSO: How we survived herdsmen attack that claimed 200 lives in Benue community – Residents

    This view is also held by Speaker of the House, Abbas Tajudeen who stressed the urgent need to review existing laws, close and streamline overlapping one and enact new ones to strengthen and reposition the security architecture to be able to confront existing and emerging security challenges that now threaten the nation. The Speaker said the complex and dynamic nature of the security challenges facing the nation demands new approaches and strategies that are multi-dimensional, adaptable, inclusive, and technology-driven. He said these new approaches and strategies must be backed by legal and institutional frameworks that would ensure enhanced capacity, capability, and competence for overall effectiveness. He stressed the need to deepen discussions on the constitution review by focusing on how best to achieve comprehensive security and policing reforms, improve cooperation and coordination between security agencies, enhance border security for national and regional stability as well as make inputs into proposed security related bills including the bill that seeks to establish state police.

    Speaker Abbas said further that terrorism, banditry, piracy, militancy, and oil theft in different parts of the country combined to make life difficult for Nigerians. We therefore resolved to take the necessary legislative measures that would support the government’s drive to end insecurity. He also reiterate the need for renewed attention on House Bill 617, which supports the creation of state policing systems. This topical issue continues to generate public interest and concern. H also spoke on the need to enhance border security saying “the issue of border security is also critical and needs urgent legislative attention. The porous nature of Nigeria’s expansive border makes it vulnerable to crime and criminality. Although we have enacted the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons Law, 2024, legislation on border security is necessary to strengthen this law and make it more effective. Stronger legal support in these and other critical areas can improve safety and give our people more confidence in our security agencies. Community involvement is also key to making our country safer. Security is not just the job of the military or the police; it is the collective responsibility of all Nigerians. Therefore, our reforms must reflect the voices of everyday Nigerians, and this justifies the importance of this dialogue. I am confident that the outcomes of this dialogue will meet our collective expectations”.

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu admitted that the country stand at the crossroads of constitutional responsibility and national necessity. The President said “for decades, our Constitution has served as the bedrock of our democracy. Yet, the pace of change in technology, in the complexity of security threats, and in the dynamics of our federal structure has far outstripped the capacity of some constitutional provisions”. He said the time has come to realign Nigeria’s security architecture with her live realities, saying “our national experience has shown that neither centralisation nor fragmentation alone can secure the vast and diverse territory of Nigeria. The growing agitation for State Police, the complex demands of cybersecurity, and the urgent need for efficient intelligence sharing among agencies all point to one truth: our constitutional framework must evolve or risk becoming a danger to the very unity it was meant to protect”. The President said consensus security in the 21st century is cooperative, not competitive, adding that “terrorism in the North East, banditry in the North West, piracy in the Gulf of Guinea, farmer-herder clashes in the Middle Belt, and separatist agitations in the South East all share one characteristic: they transcend the capacity of any single agency or tier of government. This is why this dialogue is timely. It offers an opportunity to entrench constitutional provisions that encourage real-time intelligence sharing, joint operations planning, and unified strategic responses. As the commander-in-chief of our armed forces has emphasised repeatedly, security agencies must act as one, united in purpose, coordinated in action”.

    He said further that through enhanced intelligence fusion, joint task force operations, and synchronised air and ground offensives, Nigeria’s security forces have successfully dismantled several terrorist camps in the North-East, dislodged criminal enclaves in the North-West, and reduced incidents of piracy in the Gulf of Guinea. This integrated approach has led to a noticeable reduction in high-profile kidnappings and bandit attacks, with improved responses to cross-border threats, demonstrating the effectiveness of a whole-of-government strategy in safeguarding national security.”

    Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Christopher Musa is worried that security agencies are impeded in their operation by certain legal constraints, saying as security threats continue to evolve, ranging from terrorism and insurgency, cyber warfare and hybrid threat,  it has  become imperative that a legal and institutional framework  evolves in tandem. General Musa stressed the need for a more robust, agile, and responsive national security system, adding that the Armed Forces of Nigeria is presently operating with a legal structure that is increasingly inadequate to address the complex future environment in which it function, saying “Our current laws were not designed to support the potential welfare of communities, particularly as we achieve threats and non-trivial future engagements. Operational ambiguities regarding command authority, undefined arrest and detention procedures during internal operations and traditional overlaps with other security agencies are adversely affected by efficiency and operational coherence.  These are concerns that have practical implications on mission success and the safety of our citizens. Therefore, Legislative reforms, particularly to the Armed Forces Act and key sections of the Constitution are not just overdue, but are critical.  They must be pursued with urgency and clarity of purpose”. He highlight some key legislative areas where reform is urgently required to include the recognition of modern security threats, including terrorism, cyber warfare, and misuse of digital platforms. The review he said should “consider the establishment of a field court martial and a sitting court martial in all military divisions and commands for speedy justice and accountability and the creation of a permanent commercial tribunal within each military division to ensure consistent access to justice. In the same vein, we advocate for explicit constitutional recognition of court-martial as superior courts of record, with concurrent judicial powers alongside federal and state high courts. This review should also consider empowering the armed forces to detain and investigate suspects during internal operations. This will reduce delay and enhance efficiency of kinetic and non-kinetic efforts.  Furthermore, the Nigerian Navy should be constitutionally authorized to collaborate with the Nigerian Customs and Immigration Service along the inland waterways to combat piracy and smuggling challenges, which remain persistent in our coastal and riverine areas. We also recommend the introduction of the merit-based selection process where the Chief of Defense staff provide three nominees per service to the President for appointment. This will foster transparency, professionalism, and constitutional continuity. We also propose the insertion of a clause enabling court-martial to try individuals captured in act of terrorism and insurrection under martial law conditions.  This will streamline the justice process in hiring scenarios and a high-stake authority”. The security chief said security is not merely about boots on the ground or advanced system.  It is also about the strength of our law, the clarity they bring, and the power they confer,  and the protection they guarantee”

    The National Security Adviser, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu said security and constitutional order are inseparable, adding that resilient, inclusive and forward-looking constitution is one of our most effective tools in preventing the conditions that give rise to insecurity.  Ribadu said “the constitution is not just a legal document.  It is the bedrock of national unity, justice and stability.  In our diverse and complex society. The constitution must continue to evolve to reflect the hope, and challenges of the Nigerian people.  At the Office of National Security Advisor, we understand that addressing national security requires more than just a kinetic approach.  It involves addressing grievances, protecting human rights, fostering trust between citizens and the state and ensuring that every Nigerian, regardless of ethnicity, religion, or region, feels a sense of belonging.  These are all constitutional issues.  I commend the National Assembly and all stakeholders here today for initiating this dialogue. It is only through inclusive, consultative, and transparent processes such as this that we can truly build a constitution that strengthens our federation and enhances our national security”. 

    While drawing a nexus between economic crimes and terrorism financing, Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo said “most of what we have in Nigeria today is economic crime. Most of these people they come to Nigeria to kidnap, raise funds to be able to fund insecurity in neighboring countries. So, there is a lot we need to do. If we continue to pay lip service, we don’t really look at the issues on ground, we will just be joking. Again, in reviewing our laws, we can’t deal with insecurity and not talk of terrorism financing. We must look at the EFCC Act and strengthen it. We must look at the issue of our border. Nigeria is at a point now that the US was before 9/11 attack. After the attack, the US sat down. They looked at emerging threat. When we talk about internal security, the first thing that come to mind is the military. That is a sign of failure of our internal security agencies. Let’s tell ourselves the truth. For me, the police in terms of adequate funding, I do not see a reason why the police should even rely on budgetary allocation. When you are fighting internal security, you must mobilize your citizens. We must sit down and look at our laws. With the attention we are paying to cyber security, we are still living 20 years behind.  You cannot continue to run a cyber security architecture on an ad hoc arrangement. There must be proper security framework. Let us look wholistically at our challenges. Let us anticipate broadly. Look ahead. Look at emerging security threats and proffer solutions to them.”

    The EFCC Chairman, Ola Olukoyede pick holes in the border control system of the country which allow the entering of illegal aliens into the country to operate freely. He disclosed that just recently, the commission arrested about 194 foreigners in one single operation at a building in Lagos for various offenses, adding that investigation revealed that about 15 of those arrested were ex-convict from their own countries.

    He said 50 of those arrested have already been convicted by the court and have started serving their sentence, stressing the need to focus on emerging security challenges, while also amending the nation’s laws to remove operational challenges faced by agencies in carrying out their responsibilities and prosecuting offenders.

    State Police

    The President also join the debate for state police. He said the debate over State Police is no longer theoretical. It is grounded in the daily fears and lived anxieties of Nigerians. According to him, “farmers afraid to tend their fields, traders unsure of safe passage, and communities abandoned to self-help”. He said the dialogue between the lawmakers and security operatives “must courageously interrogate the constitutional shifts required to move policing from the Exclusive List to the Concurrent List, enabling States with capacity to assume greater responsibility for their own security, while preserving national cohesion. We must learn from global best practices, adapting decentralised policing models that enhance local accountability without sacrificing national oversight”.

    The Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun believe that there was no need to amend the constitution to allow for state police. He believe that instead of having state-controlled police which can be abused, there was the need to strengthen the Nigeria Police and well-funded to carry out its constitutional responsibility. The Police boss the Nigerian Police Force is constitutionally established under section 214(1) of the 1999 constitution as amended, which provides that “there shall be a police force for Nigeria which shall be known as the Nigerian police force and subject to the provisions of this section, no other police force shall be established for the federation  or any part thereof.  Furthermore, section 215(1) provides for the appointment of the Inspector General of Police by the President on the advice of the Nigerian Police Council.  It also places the operational command and administration of the force under the leadership of Inspector Gener of Police. These constitutional provisions make clear the centralized character of policing in Nigeria and the operational authority entrusted to the Inspector General of Police under the supervision of the President and Police Council.

    He said “one of the most pressing and controversial issues under discussion today is the proposal to amend the constitution to allow for the establishment of state police, including the evaluation of HB 617, which seeks to provide legislative authority for this. Let me state  unequivocally that the National Police Force  acknowledges the rationale  behind the demand  for state police,  including the desire  for locally responsive policing,  quicker reaction to community-level threats,  and decentralized law enforcement presence. However, our assessment based on current political, institutional and social economic realities suggests that Nigeria is not yet decisively or politically prepared for the initialization of police powers to the state level. Key concerns include the possibility of political misuse of police powers at the state level, lack of funding capacity by most states to maintain and equip a state control force, the potential for fragmentation of national security, intelligence and command,  the absence  of a regulatory architecture  to ensure standard  and operational cohesion. Instead of fragmenting our policy authority, we propose that the focus of constitutional  and legislative reform  be directed towards  strengthening the Nigerian Police Force  through improved funding  and autonomy, establish state and community policing frameworks under the Nigerian Police Force’s provision,  standardize recruitment, training,  and discipline across any policing  functions. We urge the National Assembly  to consider legislative reforms  that prioritize enhanced  federal policing capacity  while allowing  for structured auxiliary support  from sub-national units  under strict  constitutional  and operational  safeguards”. 

  • Inter-Agency Unity: The power of collective action in national security

    Inter-Agency Unity: The power of collective action in national security

    By Tunde Ogunsakin

    There is no doubt that maintaining internal security in any country is a collective responsibility and the need for synergy among distinct security bodies cannot be overemphasized. Maintaining internal security is fundamentally anchored on maintaining inter-agency unity which means cordial relationships and cooperation among security agencies. It is quite apparent that each of the component elements of security agencies in Nigeria has a different, but complementary role to play.

    Inter-agency unity refers to the collaboration and coordination among different agencies, organizations or departments to achieve common goals. The power of collective action is significant as it can lead to more effective solutions, improved resource allocation and enhanced problem-solving capabilities.

    According to Weiss (1987), inter-agency unity exists when two or more organizations/agencies that share a problem area agree to deal with the issue by establishing a link via a formal contract that provides for resources and for the adjusting of internal and/or external procedures to support the new arrangements adequately.

    Inter-agency unity is a vital mechanism for managing conflicts and containing insecurity. Several successes have been recorded in the sphere of inter-agency unity; this is because each of the security agencies has a unique capability and operational skills that can complement one another, and the Nigerian situation cannot be an exception.

    The essence of inter-agency unity can be outlined to include: the need for security synergy and exchange of ideas and information among security agencies; to create a platform for collective networking and planning of security activities, thereby building a database for preventive action; to provide a forum for the analysis of conflict indicators and processing of security-related information for early warnings and timely response; and to serve as a channel for the dissemination of security reports to all stakeholder’s efforts.

    READ ALSO: How we contracted infections using school toilets – Pupils

    Inter-agency unity in Nigeria has become necessary because one or more agencies has not been performing its responsibilities optimally considering the ever-increasing and dynamic security challenges. The combination of two or more hands has become necessary. A government agency may be willing to perform its responsibilities effectively but may be constrained due to the huge cost of running these agencies. However, concerted efforts have been known to produce maximal results in this regard.

    In appraising the roles of the different security agencies, it would be justified to state that if these constitutional roles are well played, especially in cooperation in the spirit of inter-agency unity, crimes, criminalities and violent conflicts in the society will be minimal.

    Although, there has been a continuous emphasis on the essence of interagency unity, however, nothing appears to have changed in the level of un-cooperativeness among the agencies. This situation calls for the urgent action of the top echelon of all the security agencies in order to ensure national security and achieve maximum results in the security management of the country.

    The core security institutions charged with the responsibility of ensuring security are: Nigeria Police Force; Nigeria Security & Civil Defence Corps; Nigerian Army; Nigerian Navy; Nigerian Air Force; Department of State Security (DSS); Defence Intelligence Agency; National Intelligence Agency (NIA); Nigerian Customs Service; Nigeria Immigration Service; National Drugs Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA); etc.

    FACTORS MILITATING AGAINST INTER-AGENCY UNITY IN NIGERIA

    Challenges to national security have expanded significantly from the traditional state-based threats of the Cold War era to include unconventional threats from non-state actors.  New threats are diffuse and ambiguous and include terrorism, cyber-attacks, drug trafficking, infectious diseases, and energy threats.

    They arise from multiple sources and—because their interrelated nature makes it difficult, if not impossible, for any single agency to effectively address them alone—they therefore require that governments enhance collaboration with intera-gency and international partners, among other actions.

    The challenges militating against inter-agency cooperation for the Armed Forces of Nigeria and other security agencies in national security operations are many, some of them are lack of strategic guidance for inter-agency cooperation, inadequate intelligence, technical equipment, and insufficient capacity for national security operations. It must also be noted that Nigeria’s porous borders facilitate the infiltration of adversaries from West Africa, which means that four countries in the region rank among the ten most terrorized globally.

    As a result of Nigeria’s porous borders, no single agency can effectively tackle the complex security issues facing the nation, which calls for deeper collaboration among security agencies. We must understand that modern security threats, and coordination influenced by technology and non-state actors, require a coordinated response to ensure national security.

    The operating environment has evolved to a point where no single service or agency can effectively and independently tackle the threats to national security. It is therefore crucial that synergy is developed with other security agencies in the implementation of the whole of societal approach to the threats.

    Where synergy is lacking among security agencies, there can never be a coordinated approach to the prevailing security challenge. In the Northeast for example, the Nigerian Air Force provides air support, aerial surveillance, casualty evacuation and logistics airlift for troops while the Nigerian Navy has deployed its Special Boat Services and operationalized its Forward Operation Base in Baga as part of the overall operations on the Lake Chad waters.

    There is also the institutional constraints. Many of the allegations leveled against security agencies and its personnel, include arbitrariness in exercising its power, corruption, perversion of justice, and delays in the administration of justice. Some of these issues can militate against inter-agency cooperation.

    Inadequate manpower due to numerous on-going operations is also a problem. The challenging security environment has necessitated numerous deployments in ongoing operations across the country. This can sometimes impede the possibility of different agencies coming together to carry out joint operations. This situation does not give effect to inter-agency unity and the gains of collective action. 

    Poor conditions and inadequate equipment constitute another factor. The poor condition of service of the average security officer and inadequate funding of agencies can also militate against inter-agency unity. Mammus (2010) asserted that the major challenge of inadequate security is the dearth of the workforce, shortage of funding, lack of logistic support and infrastructure, absence of technological equipment to cover all the areas of the state are responsible for the current state of the general national insecurity in Nigeria.

    What about absence of inter-service communication! This is required to ensure prompt command and control, and it hampers the quick relay of information among the services, especially when clashes are in the formative stages. Absence of inter-service communication hampers inter-service unity and thereby largely deprives us of the gains of collective action.

    The issue of superiority complex is also there. Sometimes, instead of emphasis being placed on the gains that can be realized from inter-agency unity, there is misplaced emphasis on one security agency being superior to the other. This does not allow for the much-needed unity that is required to bring about collaboration and synergy towards ensuring adequate security of lives and properties.

    This was enunciated by Samuel (2014) that instead of collaboration and cooperation, each attempted to see his agency as superior to another. This often stemmed from poor judgment, ignorance or/and poor training among our security agencies as to see themselves working for the same common purpose towards the overall security of the nation.

    Differences in agencies’ structures, processes, and resources can hinder successful collaboration in national security, and adequate coordination mechanisms to facilitate collaboration during national security planning and execution are not always in place.

    Also constituting a problem is a situation where personnel often lack knowledge of the processes and cultures of the agencies which they ought to collaborate with.

    THE POWER OF COLLECTIVE ACTION THROUGH INTER-AGENCY UNITY

    Available evidence indicates that poor inter-agency collaboration among Nigeria’s security institutions is one of the major factors militating against effective conflict resolution and security management in Nigeria.

    The consequences of not working effectively together culminate in increasing fear of insecurity and diminished trust in the capabilities of the security system to protect the lives and property of civilian populations across Nigeria in general and terror zones in particular.

    From Boko Haram in the Northeast, banditry and criminal kidnapping in the Northwest, secessionist agitations in the Southeast and Southwest, the security system in Nigeria is practically overstretched.

    In this situation, only the working together of the units that make up Nigeria’s security system will de-escalate conflict and neutralize security threats through complementary operations and credible intelligence sharing among others.

    CREATING STRUCTURES

    I have always been a proponent of inter-agency unity, From 2012 to 2014, as the Commissioner of Police, Special Fraud Unit in Lagos. I was able to establish collaborative efforts and synergy with numerous agencies and stakeholders. At the Special Fraud Unit, I set up a Stakeholders’ Forum comprising different individuals, corporate bodies, institutions and entities from all walks of life.

    This afforded us the opportunity to regularly brainstorm and leverage on superior knowledge and expertise in the performance of our duties. Prof Adeyemi a United Nations consultant also Dean and professor at the University of Lagos was the chairman of the stakeholders’ forum and we were able to draw from the academic perspective and integrity of investigation of cases to achieve some breakthroughs in the cases we were handling at that time.

    In 2012, sequel to a presidential directive, I conducted investigation into the Fuel Subsidy Fraud and in the course of this investigation, I collaborated with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), The Nigerian Navy, The Nigeria Custom Service and numerous financial and regulatory bodies.

    This collaboration, in no small measure assisted me in ensuring that a thorough and in-depth investigation was conducted into the fuel subsidy fraud. I also collaborated with the Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC) and all the financial institutions while investigating fraud cases at the Special Fraud Unit, Lagos.

    One of the gains of collective action that is noteworthy during my tenure as the Commissioner of Police, Special Fraud Unit was the building of an Interrogation Office fully equipped with state-of–the-art technological equipment for interrogating suspects. With the assistance of the stakeholders’ forum, we built a 3-storey standard forensic investigation laboratory office with modern investigative equipment to ease the performance of our duties.

    Also, in 2014, I was the Commissioner of Police, River State Police Command where I launched serious onslaught against kidnapping and other violent crimes. I collaborated with the military and other security agencies in crime fighting. My posting then was at a time when there was upsurge in kidnapping and oil bunkering. However, through inter-agency unity, I was able to tackle the upsurge in crime at that time and there was relative peace in the state.

    Through collaborative efforts and synergy from the military and other security agencies, I also launched a programme ‘SAY NO TO KIDNAPPING’. This programme was largely very successful as it changed the mindsets of many of the youths to embrace other legitimate means of livelihood instead of embracing kidnapping and other forms of crimes.

    The programme exposed the ills of kidnapping and other criminal activities to the youths and other inhabitants of the state. Suffice it to say that through inter-agency unity, we were able to restore peace and sanity in the state as people were able to sleep with their two eyes closed.  

    In the same spirit, as an Assistant Inspector-General of Police, in 2015, I oversaw the Zone 6 Police Command in Calabar, then comprising Akwa-Ibom, Cross River, Ebonyi and Rivers State Police Commands. Through inter-agency unity with the military and other security agencies, we were able to jointly put in place new operational strategies towards the elimination of kidnapping, pipeline vandalism, crude oil theft, illegal oil refining and illegal oil bunkering and other criminal activities.

    The zeal to restore sanity in the area was so profound that I requested from the Inspector-General of Police at that time to deploy Police helicopters to my Office to join the massive onslaught against the criminals, which he graciously granted. It is heartwarming to state that the gains of our collective action through inter-agency unity in this regard were monumental. There was no hiding place for the criminals as many of them were arrested and prosecuted. 

    Furthermore, in 2016, apparently based on the enormous successes recorded as the Assistant Inspector-General of Police in charge of the Zone 6 Police Command in Calabar, I was posted as the Assistant Inspector-General of Police, in charge of the Zone 12 Police Command then comprising Bauchi State, Borno State and Yobe State Police Commands.

    On assumption of office in Bauchi, I stepped up my inter-agency unity drive which is very critical in combating terrorism and other criminal tendencies that were rife in my area of responsibility. It should be noted that the rate of insurgents’ activities in Borno and Yobe States which were under my command and control then was on the rise at that time.

    This scaled up efforts were evident in the collaboration and partnership between the Nigeria Police, the military and other security agencies; and this impacted positively on joint operations and other important assignments that were carried out while ensuring that normalcy was restored to the area.

    LESSONS FROM THE US AND OTHER CLIMES

    The 9/11 Commission observed that United States government’s single greatest failure preceding the September 11, 2001, attacks was the inability of the United States federal agencies to effectively share information about suspected terrorists and their activities.

    However, consequence upon the failure of inter- agency unity in the US which made 9/11 possible, the American security agencies came out of the ruins of the 9/11 episode stronger as there has not been any successful foreign terrorism planned attack on US soil since 9/11.  How have they done it? Let’s recall.

    Let’s recall “Operation Chevrolet,” the plot to kill Saudi ambassador to the USA. An Iranian car salesman domiciled in the USA in connection with terror merchants within Iran and in a Mexican drug cartel had planned to assassinate the ambassador in Washington at a popular upscale restaurant.

    But the unity among the security agencies of FBI, CIA, DOJ, led by the USA Terrorism Task Force put in motion a counter terrorism counter intelligence that goaded on the perpetrator and on the eve of their dastardly plans, arrested the contractor and others when his flight to Mexico from IRAN was diverted to New York. He was arrested, and charged to court and convicted with a life sentence.

    Another instance was the 2006 largest counter terrorism global inter-agency collaboration which was launched as operation “overt” involving CIA, FBI, the British intelligence crime mapping system, and M15. Through this collaboration, the telephone and email conversation of the terrorists in Britain to Pakistan and USA were monitored. The terror point was to take off at Heathrow airport. Eighteen (18) potential suicide bombers were to be distributed to nine (9) flights to destinations in USA and Canada simultaneously. Different components of the explosive devices were to be assembled inside the planes and detonated over the Atlantic

    To foil their clandestine plot, over 1000 British intelligence and surveillance officers were deployed while operatives in Pakistan were put on alert for coverts intelligence.

    As their D-Day became closer, the plotters were placed under close watch, their movements were monitored on CCTV, cameras and bugging devices were planted in their homes and cars to pick up all their conversations

    Having gathered sufficient information, the ringleader of the terror plot, Rashed Rauf, was eventually arrested by the Pakistani authorities. His arrest provided intelligence for the British crime agencies raid the homes of the terror merchants which led to the arrest of 25 of the plotters in the UK.  Details of the blueprint of the terror plots were recovered in their homes and their computers seized. There was thus enough evidence to charge them to court which -subsequently led to their conviction.

    MOVING FORWARD

    We must as a matter of urgency organize a regular leadership conference to harness our shared vision of a secured Nigeria. This leadership meetings would be expected to permeate to the states and LGAs with a view to engendering a harmonious and united workforce among all the security agencies. Inferiority complex and superiority battles between and among security agencies only aggravate the insecurity of everyone and deepens national insecurity

    We must put in place a proper Command and Control mechanism for institutionalized control mechanism that would avoid rancor within the agencies. This Command-and-Control structure will supervise and ensure proper intelligence gathering, monitoring and sharing nationwide.

    Using technology, Artificial intelligence. We must as a matter of urgency set up a criminal data base project, and merge all identification, databases NIN, passport, driver license, sim registration are identity databases linked to the NSA office and utilize facial recognition and artificial intelligence in public areas, Airports, prisons and key urban areas.

    Banditry in the Northwest has exposed how unmanned or poorly manned border zones can compromise national security. The widespread smuggling and use of illicit drugs by criminals have also been implicated as a contributor to growing security and its unfolding dynamism.

    The use of drugs by bandits, Boko Haram terrorists, kidnappers and armed robbers is no longer a secret. As of 2017, 14.3 million Nigerians between 15 and 64 years old used hard drugs such as Cannabis, Tramadol, Codeine or Morphine, and this affects the nature of criminality and conflict in Nigeria.

    That the use of these drugs continues to proliferate implies that the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency, NDLEA, cannot do it alone without effectively collaborating with other security agencies.

    To leave the border posts, airports and seaports alone to the Customs and Immigration without the support and collaboration of other security agencies will amount to opening our country to terrorists, drug lords, proliferation of arms which would ultimately fall into the hands of bandits, robbers, secessionists, oil thieves etc. and create problems for other agencies.

    If other security agencies do not work with NDLEA, for instance, those who get high on drugs will deploy it to do banditry and kidnapping which will then become a problem for the police, army and NSCDC. Security agencies in Nigeria must close ranks and eliminate rivalry. Security is arrived at when every part of the security system (police, army, NSCDC, NDLEA, Immigration, Customs and others) discharges its roles efficiently and balances its weaknesses with the strength of other security agencies.

    A national policy framework on inter-agency unity/cooperation should be designed by the government for national security (national inter-agency cooperation model).

    A centralized intelligence gathering database should be provided for coordination and information dissemination among security agencies.

    Training and re-training of security personnel on security management.

    There is the need for public-private partnership and community engagement to combat general insecurity in the country

    Improvement of the general welfare of all the security forces is very essential. Good and excellent reward packages for the workforce in all the security agencies would serve as a motivating force to propel them for better performance. The quality of remuneration will mitigate frequent frictions among them, as each will focus on their duties and be ready to synergize and collaborate when the need arises.

    The mass and social media too could be of immense help by maintaining an unbiased posture and ensuring that the clashes that sometimes arise because of the conduct of security officers and men of the different security agencies are not blown or reported out of proportion to the extent of causing tension and degenerating into major inter-agency rivalry.

    For compliance with the terrorism (prevention and prohibition Act 2022), the NSA office should be a meeting point for proper coordination and collaboration and synergize for the greater purpose of ensuring the general security of the country. The NSA should develop a template for mandatory reporting. This will bridge the gap of inadequate cooperation and dissemination of information among sister agencies.

    The NSA can institute a directorate of strategic planning, communication and civil engagement with representatives from all the security agencies which will constantly engage with the populace on policies and conflict with a view to finding solutions to national security problems.

    Tied to this is the need for regular joint training, workshops and intellectual exchange among the different agencies to foster inter-agency unity and enhance better coordination during joint operations.

    Agencies can enhance and sustain their collaborative efforts by establishing compatible policies, procedures, and other means to operate across agency boundaries, among other practices.

    CONCLUSION

    There is a challenge and a big task before us all.  Inter-agency unity is not served on a platter of gold. It must be worked out knowing the gains that can accrue therefrom. Before me here are service chiefs, officers at the top echelon of respective services with very intimidating credentials. Our agencies’ missions and visions are better realized when we work together in one accord. I challenge you all to come together, notwithstanding the agency you belong to, consciously embrace one another with our common goal, security and secured nation as the only target.

    Inter-agency unity exemplifies the power of collective action, showcasing how collaborative efforts can yield benefits. By harnessing the strength of diverse organizations, a unified approach fosters innovation, effective problem solving, and resistance in addressing complete issues for successful

    inter-agency collaboration, establishing clear communication channels, mutual respect and shared objectives as a sine qua non.

    The common goal is peace and a secure nation to foster economic growth. Let us work together in the same direction to achieve peace and security as in doing so everybody (every agency) wins. Achieving peace and security should be considered a TEAMWORK because Together Everyone Achieves More. You can take the bull by the horn and put an end to interagency rivalry. The time for inter-agency unity is now.

    Being speech delivered by Tunde Ogunsakin, Assistant Inspector General of Police (Rtd) at Tansian University Umunya, Anambra State where he was awarded honorary doctorate degree for his outstanding contributions to human development in Nigerian society, on March 29, 2025.