Rev. Fr. Dr. Anthony Mario Ozele
Under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Nigeria’s security crisis has not improved; it has deepened, spread, and normalized. Despite bold rhetoric and leadership changes, the administration has failed to reverse escalating terrorism, banditry, mass abductions, and communal killings. It’s become obvious that President Tinubu’s security policies are strategically incoherent, excessively militarized, poorly coordinated, and detached from civilian protection, resulting in a dangerous erosion of state authority and public confidence.
President Tinubu assumed office pledging renewed security leadership and decisive action. However, more than two years into his administration, violent non-state actors continue to operate freely across large swathes of the country. Entire communities remain under siege, highways are unsafe, and rural populations are abandoned to armed groups. The persistence and expansion of violence indicate policy failure at the highest level, not merely inherited challenges.
Key Failures of the Tinubu Security Agenda
- Absence of a Coherent National Security Strategy
The administration has failed to articulate or implement a clear, unified national security doctrine. Policy announcements remain reactive and episodic, lacking measurable objectives, timelines, or benchmarks centered on civilian safety. - Overreliance on Militarized Responses
President Tinubu’s approach continues the long-standing mistake of prioritizing force deployment over intelligence-led, preventive security. Military operations are launched without sustained territorial holding, intelligence dominance, or community trust, allowing armed groups to retreat, regroup, and return stronger. - Weak Leadership and Coordination of Security Institutions
Despite reshuffling security leadership, systemic dysfunction persists. Inter-agency rivalry, overlapping mandates, and poor intelligence sharing remain unresolved. This reflects a failure of presidential oversight and control over the security architecture. - Failure to Protect Citizens as a Policy Metric
The administration measures success through arrests, raids, or statements—not through reduced civilian deaths, safer communities, or restored livelihoods. As a result, massacres, abductions, and displacement continue with minimal political consequence. - Neglect of Structural Drivers of Violence
President Tinubu’s security policy has not meaningfully addressed the socioeconomic and governance conditions fueling violence, including youth unemployment, rural poverty, arms proliferation, porous borders, and environmental stress. Security is treated as a battlefield problem rather than a governance crisis.
Consequences of Policy Failure
• Normalization of mass killings and kidnappings
• Collapse of citizen trust in federal authority
• Expansion of vigilantism and ethnic militias
• Weakening of Nigeria’s democratic legitimacy
• Accelerating drift toward state fragility
To avert further deterioration, the presidency must:
• Accept political responsibility for security outcomes, not merely operational setbacks.
• Redefine security success around civilian protection and territorial control.
• Rebuild intelligence capacity and inter-agency coordination under firm presidential oversight.
• Integrate social, economic, and justice reforms into national security planning.
• End performative security governance and replace it with transparent, accountable leadership.
In conclusion, President Tinubu’s security policies have failed to halt Nigeria’s descent into pervasive insecurity. Continued denial, deflection, or cosmetic reforms will only entrench violence further. Security is not an inherited excuse but a presidential obligation. Without urgent, fundamental policy reorientation, the Tinubu administration risks being defined not by reform, but by the normalization of national insecurity.
Rev. Fr. Dr. Anthony Mario Ozele is a priest of the Catholic Diocese of Warri