- By Ken George Eneduwa
Nigeria’s security challenge has reached a point that no longer allows for easy comfort. What confronts the country now is not only violence, but a steady erosion of confidence in the systems meant to prevent it. When senior officers go missing and ordinary citizens are taken with little resistance, it becomes hard to ignore the deeper signs of strain beneath the surface.
The reported capture of Brigadier General Uba by armed groups remains one of the clearest warnings of this decline. An officer of such rank, taken during duty, and with no clear account of his condition, raises questions that go beyond the single incident. It points to gaps in awareness, response, and coordination. These are not minor lapses. They touch the core of national defence.
The assault on the Apostolic Church in Eruku, Kwara State, where worshippers were subjected to fear and confusion, adds to the unease. So too does the abduction of school children in Kebbi State. In each case, the pattern has been familiar. Attack first. Reaction later. Statements follow. Closure remains uncertain.
There was a period when such events did not follow this same rhythm. During the tenure of General Christopher Gwabin Musa as Chief of Defence Staff, intelligence work showed more discipline and structure. Coordination across units was steadier. While no system was flawless, there was a stronger sense of direction and early warning. Movement of hostile groups drew firmer attention. Planning and execution were more closely linked.
Since his departure, the tempo has shifted. Responses appear slower. Information seems to arrive in fragments. Threats that should be anticipated are now discussed only after damage has been done. This change has not gone unnoticed by those who watch the situation closely.
This is not a moment for political manoeuvring around matters of life and safety. Soldiers, worshippers, students, and families deserve protection grounded in clear judgment and steady command. Competence should guide decisions, not convenience or proximity to power.
In this context, it is difficult to ignore the role General Musa once played. His record suggests familiarity with the flow of intelligence, terrain challenges, and the demands of joint operations. His experience carries value at a time when certainty is scarce. Mentioning his name is not about praise. It reflects a practical concern that the country now needs leadership marked by experience and calm focus.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu faces a choice that requires careful thought. Returning General Musa to a strategic position within the security framework, whether as Defence Minister or in another senior role, would be a measured step rooted in urgency, not sentiment. The situation calls for hands that understand both the field and the weight of decisions made at the centre.
Beyond individual appointments, broader reform is needed. Intelligence networks must be rebuilt with care and protection for local sources. Military and police units should work in closer harmony, sharing timely information instead of operating in isolation. Field commanders require authority and resources to act without crippling delay. Morale within the forces must also improve through better welfare, training, and equipment that match the risks they face.
Leadership in defence should rest on ability and experience. Regional loyalty and political favour should not guide choices that affect national survival. The cost of delay is counted in lives and lasting fear.
Nigeria will not find its way out of insecurity through grand speeches or surface fixes. It will do so through steady resolve and informed leadership. In this light, the call for General Christopher Gwabin Musa to return to a central role reflects a wider concern for order, discipline, and clarity in a time that has grown uncertain.
