News
FOREIGN POLICY AND THE PATH TO PEACE IN A DANGEROUS NEIGHBOURHOOD
FOREIGN POLICY AND THE PATH TO PEACE IN A DANGEROUS NEIGHBOURHOOD
By: Michael
Mike
Nigeria’s foreign policy to promote peace and prosperity is a constitutional obligation as much as it is a considered and sensible manifesto pledge, writes Hon Yusuf Tuggar, Minister of Foreign Affairs.
I was born in a civil war and was not able to vote for my leader until I was in my 30s. Nigeria is now a country guided by the rule of law and a constitution that clearly defines our system of government. This includes our foreign policy objectives, and rightly so, because in an interconnected world, we define our sovereignty in the context of certain, key principles: our right to self-determination; our right to defend our autonomy and secure our borders; and responsibility to respect our obligations under international law.
As foreign minister, I think these provisions are not just reasonable but vital – both for our own democracy, domestic peace and prosperity but also for a more just and stable international order. But the point is this: it is the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, not the manifesto of a political party or predilections of a particular politician, that lays out these provisions. In a democracy, we have the privilege of healthy debate about our values, policies and performance. But if we are to live up to the responsibilities that come with democracy, that debate should be informed, fair and reasonable.
I respect the Constitution and its vision for Nigeria’s place in the international community, as do many of us. It has been an honour and a privilege to protect and promote those constitutional principles. They are the best guarantees for legitimacy, and the authority all governments need if they are to deliver. It is complex and time consuming. To our cost, we have learnt that there are no short cuts. Some Nigerians find fault in our Constitution, while others seek to amend it. There is always room for serious debate in a healthy democracy. But the fact remains it is the very document that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and every public official has sworn to uphold since 1999.
Nigeria’s Constitution declares that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria, from whom government, through this Constitution, derives all its powers and authority. The same Chapter of the Constitution goes on to state Nigeria’s five foreign policy objectives: promotion and protection of the national interest, African integration and support for African unity, promotion of international cooperation for peace and mutual respect, respect of international law and treaty obligations and promotion of a just world economic order. Those who suggest Nigeria does not have a foreign policy or those who agitate for a shift away from an Afro-centric foreign policy are wrong; either they are ill-informed, or deliberately disingenuous.
The irony of it all is that Nigerians are able to speak in support of our military-ruled neighbours, governed without constitutions, precisely because Chapter Four of our own constitution guarantees them these rights and freedoms. This is not the same for the citizens ruled by the very regimes for which they seek to cheerlead of those countries governed without constitutions. Nigerians who are older than 30 know this to be true because we have been there, done that. Somehow in the passage of time, some forget that the military regime here that despatched troops to restore democracy in Sierra Leone and Liberia in the 1990s had first – and by force – taken that same democracy and rule of law away from us – just as military regimes continue to do the world over.
The Constitution also makes clear why any responsible Nigerian government should be concerned when neighbours are governed without a constitution or codified rules. It goes without saying that the sovereignty of our neighbours is their business. They can grant powers to whatever governing structures they deem fit and should expect their autonomy to remain safeguarded. But when our Interdependence Sovereignty overlaps, we equally have a right to exercise control over our borders in those cases where neighbours face insurgencies that significantly comprise territorial integrity and state authority.
International Legal Sovereignty also becomes an issue when we consider that respect for international law and treaty obligations is one of our irreducible foreign policy objectives. This is not the Tinubu administration’s foreign policy; it is a constitutional provision that every Nigerian President and government official swears to uphold. Nigeria is a member of ECOWAS, which is founded on treaties and protocols to which our foreign policy objectives commit us. All 15 member countries are signatory to the treaties and protocols, which is why it was no surprise that President Tinubu, as one who swore to uphold the Constitution, abided by it when ECOWAS leaders collectively objected to Unconstitutional Changes of Government.
In reality, the contemporary nation-state system is highly competitive and Nigeria exists in a self-help world. Our Constitution and international laws are meant to serve as guard rails in navigating the system. And by virtue of our size, we have the additional responsibility of being the regional power. Regardless of how some may try to diminish our standing, it is the way other countries perceive us. Our Constitution further reifies this leadership role right from the preamble- dedicating ourselves to promoting inter-African solidarity, to the foreign policy objectives- promotion of African integration and support for African unity and elimination of discrimination in all its manifestations.
The Tinubu administration comes at a time when an interlocking suite of occurrences have made our neighbourhood less secure; implosion of Libya, failure of the EU Sahel Strategy, terrorism and criminal gangs, effects of climate change and population explosion. Nigeria did not create these challenges and was equally contending with its own domestic issue as these challenges escalated. Nigeria was not part of Operation Barkhane or the G5 in the Sahel, which were intended as efforts to fight terrorism and irregular migration but instead strengthened some irridentist Azawad/Tuareg groups that controlled border areas. This created a cauldron of disharmony between them and their national militaries, trained for a lifetime to keep their countries intact.
Nor was Nigeria part of the Partnership Framework with Third countries that conditioned aid and trade deals for Sahelian migration transit states in exchange for reducing the flow of migrants, with penalties for those who do not comply. In the case of Niger, a moment of truth was the passing of Law 2015-36 in May 2015 when its government, in consultation with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and technical and financial support from the European Union and its member states, criminalized ancillary activities of the migration economy, such as providing transportation and accommodation to foreign nationals anywhere north of Agadez, in direct contravention of ECOWAS Protocol on the free movement of people. They were persuaded to use a blunt hammer to crack a delicate nut. There is a highly politicised migration crisis in parts of Europe, that together we can and should resolve. But it was reckless to seek to solve one problem by creating another.
There is a reason why we have free movement in West Africa; seasonal migration- referred to in Hausa as ‘Ci Rani’. Seasonal migration in the semi-arid Sahel can be a matter of life and death, which is why we have always had turbaned Tuaregs going as far as Lagos and Port Harcourt to work as Maigadis (security) during the dry months, only to return back north during the rainy season. The weaponisation of sub-Saharan migration in Europe as a political tool led to the securitisation of the Sahel region, further exacerbating the security situation by forcing many of those affected to turn to criminal activities and terrorism. European migration figures show majority of migrants are from Syria, Afghanistan and Central Asia, not sub-Saharan Africa.
Yes, we need to work with our Sahelian neighbours to fight terrorism, by maintaining a right of pursuit into each others territories. But it would be myopic to think of this in absolutist terms, because we can accede to all conditionalities laid by them, it would still not be enough to tackle the challenges without a lasting solution to the bifurcated Libyan State as a source of weapons, training and fighters, as well as the shadowy involvement of a range of other state and non-state actors.
To achieve a lasting peace in Libya and the Sahel, Nigeria needs to deal with all the countries in the neighbourhood as well as all the major powers. For this reason, it does not make sense to simply deduce that Nigeria has to distance itself from France because that is the prevailing trend in its former colonies. The fulcrum of the Tinubu administration’s foreign policy is Strategic Autonomy, providing us with the clarity to engage with any and all nations based on our national interests and not those of others. As a nation, Nigeria is adult enough and sophisticated enough to deal with countries without being unduly influenced, because that has been part of our historical and civic tradition. You cannot cure an illness by picking which symptoms to consider and which to ignore.
Nigeria and ECOWAS will continue diplomatic efforts towards Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso. At a minimum, we have shared interest in peaceful co-existence. President Tinubu has sent a number of high-level delegations that included a former Head of State, traditional rulers and religious scholars. President Tinubu pushed for the unconditional removal of ECOWAS sanctions imposed on Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso. What he has consistently asked of the countries in question is for them to come up with a timetable for the restoration of constitutional rule and, in the case of Niger, the release of ousted President Bazoum.
Their response was to declare their intention to leave ECOWAS. With the one-year notice period coming to an end in January 2025, President Tinubu further pushed for ECOWAS to extend the grace period for another six months whilst intensifying diplomatic efforts. The response to this initiative last month was evidence-free allegations that Nigeria was harbouring foreign soldiers and as sponsoring state terrorism. Whenever President Tinubu and other democratic leaders offer stoic statesmanship and an opportunity to work together towards our common interests, it is met by confected controversy designed to divert and distract from a failure to meet the basic responsibilities of public administration. I know why coup leaders might seek to do that: it’s harder to understand the motives of apologists closer to home.
On my part, since assuming the office of Minister of Foreign Affairs on 21st August 2023, I have engaged diplomatically without pause, proposing personal visits and inviting senior government officials and representatives. Response has been akin to a diplomatic cold shoulder. We constituted a ministerial advisory committee that visited Niger and Mali and facilitated the visit of the Nigerian CDS to meet with his counterpart in Niamey. I regret that a proposed return visit was suspended by Niger after a date had been set. But let there be no doubt: we will continue to pursue diplomatic efforts assiduously, with a Ministry of Foreign Affairs that has existed for 67 years.
Nigeria’s principle of strategic autonomy is one that abhors the presence of foreign forces and private military companies in our region, whether from east or west. Nigeria presently has troops on peace keeping operations in Guinea Bissau and Gambia, with Sierra Leone on the way, where it is also supporting the setting up of a logistics base in Lungi. Nigeria is also leading the actualisation of the ECOWAS standby force, all in an effort to fight terrorism and instability within our region under the rule of law. We work closely with our partners on sharing of intelligence in order to guarantee the same rights and freedoms are enjoyed by all the people of the region.
As several of my colleagues in the region remind me, we are the hegemon, whether we admit it or not. And global politics works almost like physics, with polarity, ordering principles, distribution of power, balancing, etc. Nigeria has never had expansionist tendencies, never been threatening towards our neighbours and always chosen the path of peace and conciliation. This in part may have to do with the makeup of our polity and social fabric. Being such a huge country, we are used to the virtues of principled compromise. It is not by accident that we are the only country on the continent with six former leaders living in peace and harmony within our borders. Diversity, not division, is our strength. This is as true for Nigeria as it is for the smallest of countries – and collectively for all of our region.
FOREIGN POLICY AND THE PATH TO PEACE IN A DANGEROUS NEIGHBOURHOOD
News
Fire razes about 50 shops at Ibadan market
Fire razes about 50 shops at Ibadan market
By: Zagazola Makama
A fire outbreak has destroyed about 50 shops at the Bode Market area of Ibadan, Oyo State, with no casualties recorded.
Police sources said the incident occurred at about 2:00 a.m. on Friday following reports from members of the public.
A team of police operatives led by the Divisional Police Officer of Mapo Division responded to the scene, while firefighters were immediately contacted to contain the blaze.
The fire was eventually extinguished through the combined efforts of firefighters and residents.
Police cordoned off the area to prevent hoodlums from taking advantage of the situation to loot affected shops.
Although about 50 shops were completely destroyed by the fire, no lives were lost and no injuries were reported.
The cause of the fire has yet to be determined, while the value of the property destroyed is still being assessed.
Police said investigations into the incident have commenced.
Fire razes about 50 shops at Ibadan market
News
Late Community Leader Daniel Pulle Laid to Rest Amid Tears as Killing Continues to Stir Questions in Plateau
Late Community Leader Daniel Pulle Laid to Rest Amid Tears as Killing Continues to Stir Questions in Plateau
By: Zagazola Makama
Hundreds of mourners from different faiths and communities on Saturday gathered in Gana-Ropp, Ropp District of Barkin Ladi Local Government Area of Plateau State, to bid a final farewell to community leader, Mr. Daniel Pulle, popularly known as Nagunda, whose killing has continued to generate concern and controversy across the area.
Pulle, 60, was buried according to local customs amid emotional scenes as family members, traditional leaders, community elders, youths, women, and sympathisers paid glowing tributes to a man many described as a symbol of peace, unity and selfless service.

The late community leader was reportedly killed on the evening of June 28, 2026, in circumstances that remain unclear. His death has heightened concerns over networks of criminal militia groups operating in Barkin Ladi and renewed calls for a thorough investigation to identify and prosecute those responsible.
Throughout the funeral ceremony, grief-stricken residents remembered Pulle as a humble and accommodating leader whose influence extended beyond ethnic and religious boundaries.

Many speakers described him as a bridge-builder who maintained cordial relationships with all segments of the community, including neighbouring Fulani settlements, despite the complex security challenges that have affected parts of Plateau State in recent years.
His reputation for peaceful coexistence was reflected in the large turnout at his burial, which drew hundreds of mourners comprising both Christians, Muslims and Fulani from within and outside Barkin Ladi Local Government Area.
As prayers and tributes filled the atmosphere, many mourners struggled to hold back tears while recalling his contributions to community development and conflict resolution.

Residents said his death has left a vacuum in Gana-Ropp, where he was widely regarded as a respected voice of moderation and dialogue.
Although security agencies have yet to announce any arrest in connection with the killing, the incident has continued to generate widespread speculation among residents.
Community sources told Zagazola that one line of speculation centres on a prolonged leadership dispute involving Pulle and another member of the community. According to the sources, the disagreement had been the subject of litigation for an extended period before the court reportedly ruled in Pulle’s favour.
Other residents linked the incident to disagreements over land ownership and mining activities in the area.
According to community members, there had been disagreements between Pulle and some youths over parcels of land reportedly earmarked for mining activities involving Chinese investors.

The sources explained that while similar mining-related land transactions had reportedly been carried out successfully in other parts of Barkin Ladi, including neighbouring communities, efforts to execute a comparable arrangement in Gana-Ropp were met with resistance from some local residents.
However, none of the claims regarding the motive behind the killing has been officially confirmed by security authorities, and investigators have yet to disclose any findings linking the incident to either the leadership dispute or the land-related disagreements.
Many appealed to the Plateau State Government and security agencies to ensure that those responsible are identified and brought to justice.
“This is not just the loss of a family; it is the loss of an entire community,” one elderly mourner said. “Nagunda believed in peace and lived for his people. We owe him justice.”
Others noted that despite differences that naturally arise within communities, Pulle consistently advocated dialogue rather than confrontation and remained accessible to people across religious and ethnic divides.
As the late community leader was lowered into the earth amid prayers and sobbing relatives, mourners said the greatest tribute to his memory would be the restoration of peace and justice in Gana-Ropp.
Residents expressed hope that a transparent investigation into the circumstances surrounding his death would not only bring closure to his family but also help prevent further tension within the community.
Late Community Leader Daniel Pulle Laid to Rest Amid Tears as Killing Continues to Stir Questions in Plateau
News
The Plateau Narrative War: Why Naming Criminals Should Not Be Mistaken for Profiling Communities
The Plateau Narrative War: Why Naming Criminals Should Not Be Mistaken for Profiling Communities
By: Zagazola Makama
The reactions that followed Zagazola Media Network’s report identifying the suspect killed during the attempted attack near the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS), Kuru, has again exposed a deeper challenge in Plateau’s long-running conflict, the battle over narratives is increasingly becoming as fierce as the violence itself.
At no point did our report describe the good people of Berom as a militia. We referred to a suspected Berom militia member, (Peter from Trade Center Community in Plateau) based on what is circulating on various local indigenes platforms as well as available information from multiple security and local sources.
A 17 minutes video shared by Zagazola showed a Whatsapp conversation where one Berom youth was speaking to another telling him that he recognized the attacker as one Peter who was from his area at Trade Center and that he is a BEROM. That automatically qualified him to be a Bandits, terrorists or any name we chose to call him. Because more disturbing was the fact that the gun that was used for the attack was traced to be a rifle used by the same Berom Militia to attack and kill a Nigerian Soldier in another Berom community.
So, there is a world of difference between identifying the background of a suspect and criminalising an entire ethnic group. Those who deliberately blur that distinction are only choosing to mischievously misrepresent it.
Therefore, our report did not describe the Berom people as a militia. It referred to a suspected criminal from the Berom extraction as the militia member. Conflating the actions of an individual or an armed group with an entire ethnic community is misleading, just as suggesting that identifying a suspect’s background automatically amounts to profiling an entire people is equally misguided, problematic and misleading.
Curiously, this distinction appears to matter only when it is politically convenient. For years, reports identifying Fulani bandits have circulated widely with little objection from many of those who now insist that ethnicity should never be mentioned in security reporting. In fact, many have argued that identifying armed Fulani groups was necessary for transparency and accountability.
“Everyday we hear the Berom Youth leader profiling the entire Fulani communities as terrorist groups. Miyetti Allah association has severally been called a terrorist organization. He will always come out to warn that supporters of terrorists will also be considered as terrorists. In his numerous emotional speeches, he always pointed at a peaceful Fulani community and told the world that it is through those communities that the terrorists are coming to attack the Berom Communities. Sometimes, he will name some of the communities as training grounds for terrorists. This is normal as it fits in the narratives because they are FULANI.
And when the Fulani’s are killed in any part of the Berom Communities, instead of condemnation, the Berom Leader will come out and say that the Fulani themselves were the ones who scheme the killings in order to have a reason to attack the Berom people. The man has used this same script in more than 10 different attacks against the Fulani by his people.
Now, a different standard appears to be emerging. When the identity of a suspect allegedly points elsewhere, the conversation suddenly shifts from the attack itself to the identity of the attacker, and eventually to the journalist who reported it.
The irony is difficult to ignore. Plateau’s conflict has never been a simple story of one community attacking another. Security operations over the years have led to the arrest of armed suspects from different ethnic backgrounds. Weapons have been recovered from various communities. Security personnel have repeatedly confronted armed groups operating under different identities. Innocent civilians have been killed across ethnic and religious lines. Infact, troops have come under heavy attack by Berom Militia leading to the killing of an Officer recently.
Pain does not recognise ethnicity. Neither should justice. That reality is uncomfortable because it refuses to fit neatly into a single narrative. (We are targeted for Genocide). The unfortunate consequence is that every security incident increasingly becomes a contest over perception rather than an opportunity to confront criminality.
Perhaps the hardest truth to accept is that many attacks on the Plateau today are reprisals for previous attacks. One killing produces another. One burnt settlement leads to another. Every side points to yesterday’s victims to justify today’s violence. That endless cycle has turned grief into an inheritance passed from one generation to another. This is what we find and we have all the documented stories with facts, time and coordinates.
Meanwhile, misinformation has become another weapon of war. False narratives spread faster than verified facts. Every incident is immediately reshaped to fit an existing political or ethnic storyline. Social media amplifies rumours. WhatsApp manufactures witnesses. Every community believes only its own version of events. Facts become secondary.
Every community readily acknowledges the crimes committed against it but often hesitates to openly confront violent actors operating from within its own ranks. The Berom communities have always defended these criminal networks describing them as the defenders of the Berom Land. This is why in many cases, they will come out to confront the military asking for the release of any perpetrator no matter the crime.
This pattern is not unique to one ethnic group.
Across Plateau’s troubled communities, violent individuals often find defenders long before investigators complete their work. Once arrests are made or suspects are neutralised, debates frequently shift from accountability to allegations of bias, while the original crime gradually fades into the background. Meanwhile, the victims remain dead.
For example, the so-called advocate of peace simply attempted to shift the conversation from the act of terrorism perpetrated by the militia from the Berom extraction to the naming of the Berom Militia. They are more concerned about the name attached to the criminal instead of the act. Worst still, they attempted to disown him because he was caught in the act.
One of the less discussed realities of the Plateau crisis is that many attacks are reprisals. A village is attacked; another community retaliates. Livestock are stolen; farms are destroyed in response. One funeral becomes the justification for another. This vicious cycle has continued for years, producing victims on every side while strengthening extremists who benefit from perpetual hostility.
Equally concerning is the growing role of misinformation. Competing narratives now spread almost instantly after every incident. Social media platforms become arenas where facts compete with rumours, and carefully crafted ethnic narratives often gain traction before investigators even arrive at crime scenes. Mainstream media are deliberately not reporting these issues. In such an environment, objective reporting inevitably becomes unpopular because facts rarely satisfy entrenched positions.
Yet journalism cannot become hostage to public sentiment. If armed Fulani bandits are identified where evidence supports that conclusion, the same standard should apply to any other armed group. Conversely, where evidence changes or proves insufficient, responsible journalism equally demands correction. That is how credibility is built not through selective silence but through consistency. In this case Zagazola was right. PETER was a Berom son. Does this criminalize every Berom, no. It only criminalised Mr Peter and his networks of Militia.
Now, the larger question is whether Plateau’s stakeholders are prepared to confront criminality wherever it exists. The overwhelming majority of Berom, Fulani and other ethnic communities in Plateau desire peace. Farmers want to cultivate their land. Herders want to graze their livestock. Traders want to move safely. Children want to attend school without fear. Unfortunately, these aspirations continue to be undermined by a relatively small number of violent actors whose actions often receive moral justification from competing ethnic narratives.
As a Fulani herder, you cannot passed through certain communities without being lynched. So also the Berom people, same fate are mated on them the same way. Both communities have no go areas and to prevent the killings, troops of Operation Enduring Peace, created buffer zones where cattle are prevented from encroaching farmlands.
Justice cannot operate with two different measuring sticks. One of the uncomfortable truths about the Plateau conflict is that violent actors exist on all sides. That reality has been documented repeatedly by security agencies, intelligence reports, court records, arrests and operational outcomes. Armed groups have emerged from different communities. Weapons have been recovered from different communities. Suspects have been arrested from different communities. Some have even been killed while attacking security forces.
Acknowledging that reality is not hatred. It is honesty. What has remained disappointingly absent over the years is consistent moral courage from community leaders across the divide. Whenever security agencies arrest armed Fulani criminals, many Fulani leaders dismiss the reports as collective persecution. Whenever armed youths from Berom communities are arrested or neutralised during violent incidents, some leaders respond with outright denial or insist that the victims somehow killed themselves. Every incident quickly becomes another battle of competing narratives instead of an opportunity to confront criminality.
That is precisely why independent journalism matters. Our responsibility is not to comfort one side or the other. Our responsibility is to document events as accurately as possible, correct mistakes where credible evidence demands it, and continue reporting without fear or favour.
Some have suggested that identifying armed groups from different communities somehow fuels division. We disagree. What fuels division is selective outrage. What fuels division is defending criminals because they speak your language or pray the same way you do. What fuels division is pretending that violence exists only on one side while ignoring atrocities committed on another. Criminals thrive where communities refuse to confront them.
The Plateau crisis will not end through propaganda. It will not end through denial. It will not end by blaming journalists for reporting uncomfortable realities. It will end only when every community accepts one principle: a criminal is a criminal, regardless of ethnicity. It will end when parents stop celebrating armed youths as defenders while condemning identical crimes committed by others.
It will end when political leaders find the courage to support genuine dialogue instead of allowing fear of public backlash or political correctness to dictate peace efforts. It will end when facts become more important than narratives.
Plateau remains one of Nigeria’s most beautiful states, and the overwhelming majority of its people Berom, Fulani, Anaguta, Afizere, Irigwe, Mwaghavul, Ron and many others want nothing more than to live in peace. The violence is concentrated in relatively few areas, yet its consequences stain the reputation of the entire state. That should concern all of us.
Zagazola Media Network has no quarrel with any ethnic group. We have no interest in promoting one narrative over another. Our only commitment is to the truth as established by credible evidence.
Those who disagree with our reports are free to challenge them with verifiable facts. Journalism welcomes scrutiny. But replacing evidence with outrage has never solved a single conflict.
Peace will remain elusive as long as communities measure justice by the identity of the suspect rather than the gravity of the offence.
Zagazola Media Network
The Plateau Narrative War: Why Naming Criminals Should Not Be Mistaken for Profiling Communities
-
News2 years agoRoger Federer’s Shock as DNA Results Reveal Myla and Charlene Are Not His Biological Children
-
Opinions4 years agoTHE PLIGHT OF FARIDA
-
News1 year agoFAILED COUP IN BURKINA FASO: HOW TRAORÉ NARROWLY ESCAPED ASSASSINATION PLOT AMID FOREIGN INTERFERENCE CLAIMS
-
News2 years agoEYN: Rev. Billi, Distortion of History, and The Living Tamarind Tree
-
Opinions5 years agoPOLICE CHARGE ROOMS, A MINTING PRESS
-
ACADEMICS2 years agoA History of Biu” (2015) and The Lingering Bura-Pabir Question (1)
-
Columns2 years agoArmy University Biu: There is certain interest, but certainly not from Borno.
-
Politics1 year ago2027: Why Hon. Midala Balami Must Go, as Youths in Hawul and Asikira/Uba Federal Constituency Reject ₦500,000 as Sallah Gift
