In Nigeria, the persistence of insurgency in the North — especially the recurring campaigns of terror and violence that continue to claim lives and destabilize communities — cannot be blamed solely on the sophistication of jihadist groups or the porousness of borders. Rather, mounting evidence suggests that a far more insidious and structural problem lies at the heart of the war: systemic corruption within the country’s military and security establishment. As civil-society groups and investigative reports increasingly show, much of Nigeria’s defence budget is diverted, mismanaged or embezzled — weakening frontline troops, demoralizing personnel, and effectively handing victory to insurgents.
📉 Corruption, Secrecy, and the Misuse of Defence Funds
Despite enormous budgetary allocations to the security sector over many years, Nigeria remains trapped in cycles of violence. According to the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC) and Transparency International (TI-Nigeria), corruption and lack of transparency in the defence sector continue to fuel insecurity.
Recent briefings emphasize several patterns: secretive procurement processes, lack of external auditing, inflated contracts, and “phantom” or ghost expenses.
As one policy-brief puts it, “unchecked corruption in the defence and security sector has contributed to funds mismanagement, prolonged violence threats, high casualty rate … weak response to crisis, and repeated weapons diversion.”
In effect: while billions of naira (and dollars) are apportioned annually to “secure the nation,” the benefit rarely trickles down to the troops on the ground — who often go without proper weapons, ammunition, training or even timely payment of allowances.
The Arms-Scandal Case: $2.1 Billion — And Possibly Much More
One of the most glaring manifestations of this systemic rot was the much-publicized $2.1 billion arms procurement scandal. In 2016, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) detained the then-Chief of Air Staff, Adesola Amosu, among other top military officers under suspicion of diverting funds meant for the fight against insurgency.
Investigations revealed that the scandal was far deeper and broader than initially disclosed. What began as a $2.1 billion investigation reportedly ballooned into a staggering $15 billion in mismanaged or diverted funds over time.
Assets recovered from Amosu alone — including palatial houses, bank drafts totaling N2.3 billion, cash, and property seizures — scarcely match the scale of the funds that went missing.
This is not an isolated scandal, but a pattern. As critics point out, billions have flowed through the security vote, defence procurement, allowances, and other channels — much of which remains unaccounted for.
Consequences on the Battlefield: Underfunded Troops, Demoralization & Ineffective War
The misallocation of defence resources has severely undermined Nigeria’s ability to effectively fight insurgency. A scathing 2025 academic review concluded that despite substantial counterinsurgency funding, the country has suffered a prolonged escalation of violence — a situation directly linked to corruption in counterinsurgency financing.
Because many funds are siphoned off before procurement or disbursal, the soldiers meant to defend the nation are often under-equipped, underpaid, and poorly supported. This leads to low morale, desertion, and even disillusionment in the ranks.
Furthermore, where procurement did occur, it was fraught with irregularities: contracts awarded against recommendation, acquisition of unairworthy aircraft or weapons systems lacking essential components — in many cases rendering them useless.
The result: countless frontline soldiers are forced to fight terrorists who are often better equipped and more motivated. Civilians — already facing terror from insurgents — also suffer collateral damage, while community trust in the military erodes.
A System That Rewards War: Why the Conflict Never Ends
Behind the tragedies and losses lies a pernicious incentive structure. Corruption in the defence sector has become deeply institutionalized — transforming the war effort into an opportunity for illicit enrichment.
Every rank promotion, every new appointment in the armed forces or associated agencies opens a new channel for profiteering. Inflated procurement contracts, phantom services, excessive security-vote disbursements, and unmonitored allowances create a continuous stream of illicit profits for a few — while the majority of the armed forces, and by extension, the nation, pay the price.
This dynamic helps explain a chilling paradox: the more money allocated to defence, the worse the security situation becomes. As warned by analysts at CISLAC and TI-Nigeria, without robust transparency and accountability, the military budget becomes just another tool for enriching a few, not securing the many.
Moreover, the long-standing secrecy surrounding defence spending means that even when investigations are initiated, much of the evidence remains hidden, and loopholes in audit laws and public-information laws (e.g. the Freedom of Information Act 2011) make civilian oversight extremely difficult.
The Human Cost: Troops Sidelined, Civilians Suffering, Insurgency Victorious
It is not just numbers and contracts — real human lives and communities bear the cost of this corruption.
Soldiers on the front lines often complain about a lack of adequate weapons, insufficient ammunition, and meager allowances and salary — a far cry from the high-tech equipment promised when budgets are passed.
Troops who voice grievances over inadequate welfare, lack of rotation from front-line postings, or substandard resources are sometimes silenced — humiliated, or even charged for mutiny.
Retired or injured soldiers (or their families) often receive little or no support. Meanwhile, well-placed few build lavish homes and live in luxury — a stark, bitter injustice.
For ordinary citizens in the North, insurgency continues unabated. Communities remain in fear — tens of thousands displaced, livelihoods destroyed — while the people entrusted with their protection operate in a system that benefits from chaos.
In short, corruption does not just weaken the war effort — it actively sustains insurgency.
What Must Change: Transparency, Oversight, and Civilian Accountability
If Nigeria is ever to break this vicious cycle, structural reforms are non-negotiable:
Defence and security funding — including security votes and procurement contracts — must come under rigorous civilian oversight. Independent audits, transparent procurement procedures, and public disclosure of defence expenditures should be mandatory. Experts at CISLAC and TI-Nigeria have repeatedly urged for such reforms.
The legal and institutional framework — including the FOI Act and the audit laws — must be strengthened to close loopholes and make accountability real.
Whistleblower mechanisms should be institutionalized, enabling individuals to anonymously report financial irregularities, phantom contracts, or welfare abuses without fear of retaliation.
Welfare, training, and equipment for actual troops — not inflated payrolls or fictitious contracts — should be prioritized, ensuring that those risking their lives have the tools and morale needed to fight.
Conclusion: Corruption Is Not Just a Side Issue — It Is the War
The ongoing insurgency in Northern Nigeria is too often framed as a tragic but inevitable byproduct of terrorism, poverty, or regional instability. In reality, a major — and arguably more preventable — driver is the very system entrusted with defending the country: a defence architecture riddled with corruption, mismanagement, secrecy, and impunity.
If the military hierarchy and defence institutions continue to “feed on the war” — that is, to profit from chaos rather than prevent it — then every budget increase, every recruitment, every appointment, will serve to deepen the cycle of insecurity. What is urgently required is not more weapons or more troops, but radical transparency, civilian oversight, accountability, and structural reforms.
Until that happens, the fight against insurgency will remain unfinished — not for lack of funding, but for lack of integrity.
0 Comments