SERVICE CHIEFS: BEYOND THE SHUFFLE
The security chiefs should go all out to create a more secure Nigeria
President Bola Tinubu has fulfilled a major midterm ritual by appointing new service chiefs to replace those with whom he started his administration. While General Olufemi Oluyede has been elevated to the Chief of Defence Staff, Major-General Waidi Shaibu, Air Vice Marshall S.K. Aneke and Rear Admiral Idi Abbas are now the Army, Air and Naval Chiefs respectively. Only the Chief of Defence Intelligence, Major-General Emmanuel A.P. Undiandeye retains his position. But beyond the career advancement and fulfillment for these military officers, there is an overriding necessity for a rejig of the national security apparatus and its leadership. The entire doctrinal pillars of our national security are overdue for a drastic revision.
In a post on his verified X handle, @officialABAT, the president explained that the new appointments were part of ongoing efforts to strengthen Nigeria’s national security architecture while charging the new helmsmen “to deepen professionalism, vigilance, and unity within our Armed Forces as they serve our nation with honour.” Incidentally, in his inauguration speech on 29th May 2023, the president had promised this much. While pledging to make security a top priority “because neither prosperity nor justice can prevail amidst insecurity and violence,” Tinubu had declared: “To effectively tackle this menace, we shall reform both our security doctrine and its architecture.”
For this to happen, the president should set timelines for the new service chiefs to solve specific aspects of our embarrassing insecurity. The nation must now look forward to a season of better security for citizens and the state. Today, Nigerians live in fear: afraid of being kidnapped or killed in their homes or on the road. In rural communities, many have abandoned their farms, with dire implications for living and livelihoods. While armed gangs and sundry challengers of the state roam the streets in many of the states, the massive deployment of military troops for internal security operations has hardly made a difference. Therefore, for the ordinary Nigerian, the replacement of the service chiefs would only have meaning if they can translate into better security for the country.
The persistence of all-pervading insecurity has for long cast a pall of disappointment on the nation’s armed forces and their sense of responsibility. Over this period, the national budget has continued to feature huge allocations of resources for security. It has become difficult to distinguish between traditional defence expenditures and the cost of armed forces involvement in internal security operations. Between the combined armed forces and the police, State Security and Civil defense, the huge outlay on security has taken a huge toll on the economy. And yet, there is scant improvement in the security situation.
Meanwhile, it has not escaped public attention that the change of service chiefs is coming at about the same period when reports of ‘attempted coup’ are being circulated in a section of the media following confirmation that 16 military officers are currently facing disciplinary actions for breach of service regulations. So, the new service chiefs have their jobs cut out for them. To succeed, the first issue they must address is that of the welfare of their officers and men. While enlistment in the military or the police is a national sacrifice, it is not a suicide mission. Their personnel must be adequately equipped.
The change in service chiefs must mean more than a ritual of power furniture shifting. The president must step forward to hand out a new and different mandate to them. We need to change our concept of national security to a more dynamic one. Our strategies must keep abreast of the sophistication in the methods of the agents of insecurity. Violent persons and groups by whatever nomenclature – ‘bandits’, ‘hoodlums’, ‘unknown gunmen’– or their garden variety cousins, kidnappers, and terrorists – cannot be allowed to challenge state authority at will, and with such frequency. Democracy impels us to prioritise citizen security and place it at par with state security. The security of the state and its key operators is meaningless if it is not matched by the security of the general citizenry.
