In a scathing rebuke of the current security crisis in Nigeria, former President Olusegun Obasanjo has publicly raised the alarm on the inability of President Bola Tinubu’s administration to safeguard citizens — and warned that Nigeria may now have to turn to the international community for rescue. According to Obasanjo, when a government cannot discharge its sacred duty to protect lives and property, citizens have the right to seek help beyond national borders.
🔥 What Obasanjo Said — A Stark Warning
Speaking during a public engagement in Jos, Plateau State, Obasanjo lamented the surge in killings, kidnappings, and other violent crimes spreading across Nigeria — and questioned why the federal government now seems more inclined to negotiate with terrorists and bandits than to decisively defeat them. “Why are we negotiating? Why are we apologising? With the technology we now have — drones, surveillance, intelligence — why are we not using it to neutralise criminals?” he asked.
Obasanjo dismissed arguments that insecurity is regional or tribal. He argued that once a Nigerian life is lost — regardless of ethnicity, religion, or region — the entire nation should consider it a national tragedy. He insisted Nigeria must not be allowed to descend into fear, sectarian narratives, or selective justice.
📌 The Context: Rising Insecurity and Government Response
The remarks come amid growing frustration across Nigeria over recurring waves of kidnappings, school-girl abductions, mass attacks on rural communities, and rising tolls on innocent lives. Many citizens feel that the government’s response is increasingly reactive, inconsistent, and reactive to public outrage rather than prevention-oriented.
Just recently, the federal government under President Tinubu declared a nationwide security emergency as the number and severity of terror-related attacks surged across several states. Among the measures announced: recruitment of additional police officers, redeployment of personnel, and the promise of tougher action against identified terror groups and bandits.
Yet, for many Nigerians — and now for a former head of state — this appears insufficient. The fact that the government is reported to be engaging in talks and sometimes negotiations with kidnappers and criminal networks has raised profound questions about the moral, strategic and constitutional implications of such an approach.
📉 Criticism from Lawmakers, Civil Groups — And Growing Pressure
Obasanjo’s condemnation echoes that of a coalition of former federal lawmakers under the banner of House to the Rescue (HTR), who recently issued a strongly worded statement rejecting negotiations with bandits and terrorists. The group characterized such engagements as “an abdication of responsibility,” arguing that sitting at the same table with kidnappers — those who abduct children, violate women, terrorize whole communities — undermines the sovereignty of the Nigerian state.
Similarly, civil society voices — including published statements from socio-cultural associations — have criticized what they describe as the government’s “preference for negotiation over decisive military action,” suggesting this strategy has enabled kidnappers to convert banditry into a lucrative criminal enterprise, with little fear of retribution.
These developments signal a growing national consensus: that the state’s duty to protect must be non-negotiable — literally.
🌍 Why This Matters — For Nigeria and the World
Obasanjo’s call is deeply significant, not only for internal politics but also for Nigeria’s standing on the global stage. When a former president urges the international community to intervene, it sends a distress signal that the national fabric may be unraveling — with dire implications for regional security, foreign investment, and Nigeria’s leadership role in Africa.
Moreover, as Nigeria grapples with insurgents, bandits, and other non-state actors, the pattern of negotiation — appeasement, ransom payments, or forced truces — risks institutionalizing criminality. History offers painful lessons: countries that once negotiated with violent groups often see those groups grow in power, legitimised by political deals.
To many Nigerians, this is unacceptable. The government’s core responsibility under the constitution is to protect life and property — not to broker deals with those who destroy both.
✔️ What Obasanjo (and Concerned Citizens) Are Asking Of the Government
Cease negotiations with terrorists and bandits — Stop legitimizing criminals by bringing them to the negotiation table.
Deploy full national security capacity — Use technology, intelligence, coordinated force, and actionable strategies to dismantle terror networks urgently.
Prioritize citizens’ safety over political optics — Banditry, kidnappings, and insurgency are not political talking points; they represent real human suffering and loss.
Engage Nigerians and civil society meaningfully — Healing the nation requires inclusive strategies, transparent communication, and shared responsibility.
Restore trust in state institutions — When the government abandons its duty, people lose confidence — and that vacuum often gets filled by fear, panic, or worse.
📝 Final Thoughts — A Country at a Crossroads
Nigeria stands at a perilous crossroads. On one side is the path of negotiating with terrorists — a path that risks eroding the authority of the state, encouraging more violence, and destabilizing the nation further. On the other side is the path of decisive action: recognizing that the safety of citizens is non-negotiable, deploying the full weight of the state’s security apparatus, and restoring trust in government through concrete, accountable actions.
With his remarks, Obasanjo has thrown down a gauntlet. He has reminded the nation that dignity, sovereignty, and human life must never be subject to bargaining.
For Nigeria to survive and thrive, the government must choose: protect the people — or surrender the country to fear.
0 Comments