Connect with us

News

ANALYSIS: Vigilantes embark on unsanctioned mission, walk into ambush — yet blame government? How?

Published

on

ANALYSIS: Vigilantes embark on unsanctioned mission, walk into ambush — yet blame government? How?

By: Zagazola Makama

Let’s be honest. What happened in Kanam LGA, Plateau State, on July 6, 2025, was not just tragic, it was completely avoidable. But what’s worse than the incident itself is the wave of misinformation, public outrage, and unguarded finger-pointing now flying across social media as people scramble to lay blame squarely on the government and security agencies. Pause. How?

Here’s the fact: a large group of vigilantes mobilized on their own, without informing or coordinating with Operation SAFE HAVEN (OPSH) the legally recognized joint task force handling security in the area. They went rogue. They gathered themselves, left Kanam, claimed they were heading to Odare Forest to “deal with bandits”, and even stopped over at Kukawa community where, instead of waiting quietly, they reportedly attacked civilians and looted provision shops. They even seized over 20 motorcycles from locals. This wasn’t a coordinated security operation; this was a recipe for chaos.

Still, they pushed forward toward the forest. And then reality struck: they were ambushed by the same armed bandits they thought they’d surprise. Eight vigilantes died. Others went missing. Tragic, yes. But entirely self-inflicted.

Then came the media storm exaggerated headlines screaming “70 vigilantes killed!” which turned out to be grossly false. What’s the point of throwing such a dangerous figure into an already volatile situation? Is it for clicks? Or just an outright attempt to paint government and security forces as incompetent?

Worse still, people online are now blaming the National Security Adviser, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, service Chiefs and OPSH. But let’s ask a basic question: Who approved this operation? Who did they inform? What intelligence were they acting on? Or did they think bandits would greet them with jollof rice and welcome drinks?

Let’s not confuse emotions with facts. Operation SAFE HAVEN is not a tea club. It’s a robust multi-agency task force comprising the military, police, DSS, NSCDC, and others. It’s structured. Coordinated. It works on intelligence, logistics, and strategy. You don’t just bypass that entire structure and head off into the bush, machete in hand, and expect success.

And when it fails, you start screaming that “government has failed”. No, this is not failure of government. This is failure of process. This is what happens when people mistake bravado for bravery.

Of course, every loss of life is regrettable. Nobody should take that lightly. But we must equally call out reckless actions that put lives at risk and then fuel chaos through misinformation. OPSH confirmed eight deaths, not 70. Troops only got to know this when the ambush already took place and they only went for Search and rescue operations, recovering the missing people.

If vigilantes who are meant to support the formal security architecture choose to operate outside of it, then they bear the consequences of those actions. OPSH didn’t know. The military wasn’t briefed. No one in the chain of command approved it. What exactly were they expecting? The reason why they refused to informed the security forces is because nobody will regulate their activities, reason why on their way, they decided to loot shops and seized motorcycles from residents.

It’s high time people realize that securing communities is not a matter of spontaneous bravado or viral outrage. It requires planning, coordination, and discipline.

And to the media houses: please do your job responsibly. Verify your figures. “70 vigilantes killed” is not a statistic it’s a spark that could ignite tensions if not carefully managed. Eight is too many already.

Let’s stop turning self-inflicted wounds into national tragedies blamed on people who had no hand in the recklessness. The message is clear: coordinate with OPSH. Don’t go rogue. And above all, don’t cry foul when you didn’t play by the rules.

Enough with the dangerous mischief.

ANALYSIS: Vigilantes embark on unsanctioned mission, walk into ambush — yet blame government? How?

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Seven dead, five injured in multiple-vehicle crash along Lokoja–Abuja highway

Published

on

Seven dead, five injured in multiple-vehicle crash along Lokoja–Abuja highway

By: Zagazola Makama

At least seven persons were killed and five others injured on Tuesday morning in a multiple-vehicle collision along the Lokoja–Abuja highway near Gadabiu Village, Kwali Local Government Area of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

Sources told Zagazola Makama that the accident occurred at about 9:00 a.m. when a Howo truck, with registration number ANC 665 XA, driven by one Adamu of Tafa Local Government Area, Kaduna State, lost control and rammed into three stationary vehicles parked along the road.

The affected vehicles included a Golf 3 (GWA 162 KZ), another Golf and a Sharon vehicle.The drivers of the three stationary vehicles are yet to be identified.

The sources said the Howo truck had been travelling from Okaki in Kogi State to Tafa LGA in Kaduna State when the incident occurred. Seven victims reportedly died on the spot, while five sustained various degrees of injuries, including fractures.

The injured were rushed to Abaji General Hospital, where they are receiving treatment. The corpses of the deceased have been released to their families for burial according to Islamic rites.

The police have advised motorists to exercise caution on highways and called on drivers to ensure their vehicles are roadworthy to prevent similar accidents in the future.

Seven dead, five injured in multiple-vehicle crash along Lokoja–Abuja highway

Continue Reading

News

How misdiagnosis, narratives are fuelling Nigeria’s banditry escalation

Published

on

How misdiagnosis, narratives are fuelling Nigeria’s banditry escalation

By: Zagazola Makama

Nigeria’s banditry crisis is no longer escalating simply because armed groups are growing bolder. It is escalating because the country continues to misdiagnose the threat, apply blunt policy tools to differentiated actors, and unintentionally feed a violent criminal economy through ransom payments, politicised narratives and delayed state consolidation.

Across the North-West and parts of the North-Central, banditry has evolved beyond rural violence into a structured, profit-driven security threat. Yet public debate remains trapped between emotional appeals for dialogue and absolutist calls for force, leaving little room for the strategic clarity required to halt the violence.

At the heart of the escalation is money. Banditry today survives on a diversified revenue architecture that includes ransom payments, cattle rustling, illegal mining, arms trafficking, extortion levies on farming and mining communities, and collaboration with transnational criminal networks. Each successful kidnapping or “peace levy” reinforces the viability of violence as a business model.

Data released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) in December 2024 underlined the scale of this economy with the North-West accounting for the highest number of kidnap incidents and victims.

Zagazola argue that as long as communities remain unprotected and ransom payments continue as a survival strategy, banditry will regenerate faster than military operations can suppress it. This is not ideology-driven violence at its core; it is cash-flow-driven criminality as every payment funds the next attack.

Another accelerant is Nigeria’s persistent failure to differentiate categories of armed actors. Security assessments increasingly point to at least two distinct groups operating within the banditry ecosystem.

The first consists of low-level, defensive armed actors, often rural residents who acquired weapons after suffering attacks and whose violence is reactive rather than predatory. The second group comprises entrenched, profit-driven bandit networks responsible for mass kidnappings, village destruction, sexual violence, arms trafficking and territorial control.

Yet public discourse and policy responses frequently collapse these actors into a single category of “bandits,” resulting in indiscriminate dialogue offers, blanket amnesty rhetoric or, conversely, broad-brush security operations that alienate communities. This conceptual error, allows high-value criminal leaders to masquerade as aggrieved actors while exploiting negotiations to buy time, regroup and rearm.

Dialogue has repeatedly been applied in contexts where the state lacks coercive leverage. Experiences in Zamfara, Katsina, Sokoto and Kaduna states and parts of the North-West show a consistent pattern: temporary reductions in violence following peace deals, followed by rapid relapse and escalation. Officials who participated in the dialogue have openly acknowledged that many agreements collapsed within months.

The negotiations conducted without sustained military pressure, intelligence dominance and post-agreement enforcement mechanisms merely incentivise armed groups to pause tactically. When criminals negotiate from a position of strength, dialogue becomes appeasement.

Perhaps the most dangerous accelerant is the ethnicisation of banditry. Although criminal gangs include actors of identifiable ethnic backgrounds, the violence itself is not driven by ethnic grievance. Nonetheless, selective media framing and political rhetoric like what had been witnessed in Plateau have increasingly cast banditry through identity lenses, particularly in farmer–herder contexts.

This framing obscures the criminal logic of the violence and deepens mistrust between communities that are themselves victims. In Nigeria today, the fulani herdsmen and pastoralists communities are being weaponized and stereotyped as bandits. This dangerous persecution has strengthens bandit recruitment narratives, allowing criminal leaders to cloak profit-driven violence in claims of ethnic persecution or genocide.

Historical records and sociological studies show that Fulani, Hausa, Tiv, Berom and other communities coexisted for decades through complementary economic systems. The breakdown of this coexistence has been exploited by armed groups seeking cover, recruits and informants. Security agencies possess significantly more intelligence on bandit networks than is visible in public debate. Lawful interceptions, human intelligence and post-operation assessments routinely reveal financial motives, supply routes and internal hierarchies within armed groups.

However, public advocacy for dialogue often relies on forest-level engagements that security officials describe as “theatrical performances” by bandits choreographed grievances designed to elicit sympathy and concessions. The disconnect between classified intelligence and public narratives has allowed emotionally compelling but strategically flawed arguments to dominate national discourse.

Another escalation factor is the emerging convergence between bandit networks and ideological terrorist groups as Nigeria’s internal security landscape firmly indicates that what has long been treated as banditry especially in the North-West and parts of North-Central Nigeria has evolved into a hybrid jihadist campaign, driven by Boko Haram (JAS faction) and reinforced by JNIM elements operating from Sahelian-linked forest sanctuaries. Shared arms supply chains, training exchanges and joint operations could transform banditry from criminal violence into full-spectrum insurgency if unchecked. Nigeria’s past experience with Boko Haram demonstrates the cost of dismissing such convergence as isolated or exaggerated.

Military operations have succeeded in degrading bandit camps in several corridors, but the absence of immediate governance has allowed violence to recycle. Clearing operations not followed by permanent security presence, functional courts, reopened schools, healthcare and markets leave vacuums that criminal actors quickly refill. Bandits and other criminals thrive where state authority is episodic rather than continuous. Security victories without governance consolidation merely displace violence spatially and temporally.

Therefore, Nigeria must urgently reset its approach by formally adopting threat differentiation, choking financial lifelines, regulating community defence structures, and ensuring intelligence-led, precise enforcement against high-risk criminal networks. Dialogue, they say, must be selective, conditional and embedded within formal disarmament and reintegration frameworks not deployed as a moral reflex.

Above all, the state must reclaim narrative control by defining banditry clearly as organised criminal violence, not a sociological misunderstanding. As one senior official put it, “Banditry escalates where sentiment overrides strategy. The cure begins with honesty.”

Without that honesty, Nigeria risks allowing a violent criminal economy to entrench itself deeper into the country’s security architecture at a cost measured not just in money, but in lives, legitimacy and national cohesion.

How misdiagnosis, narratives are fuelling Nigeria’s banditry escalation

Continue Reading

News

ISWAP kills 10 JAS fighters in Kukawa as rivalry clashes escalates

Published

on

ISWAP kills 10 JAS fighters in Kukawa as rivalry clashes escalates

By: Zagazola Makama

No fewer than 10 fighters of the Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’awati wal-Jihad (JAS) were killed on Jan. 8 during a night attack by the rival Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) at Dabar Ledda, within the Doron Naira axis of Kukawa Local Government Area (LGA) of Borno State.

Security sources told Zagazola Makama that ISWAP fighters launched a surprise assault on a JAS checkpoint, locally referred to as an Irasa, in the Dabar Ledda area, overwhelming the position after a brief but intense clash.

Sources familiar with developments in the area told Zagazola Makama that the attack ended decisively in ISWAP’s favour, with about 10 JAS fighters killed. Following the operation, ISWAP elements were said to have withdrawn swiftly to their major stronghold located between Kangarwa and Dogon Chuku, also within Kukawa LGA.

Both group has, in recent years, focused on degrading each other’s capabilities in an attempt to consolidate control over key corridors around Lake Chad as well as Sambisa Forest.

However, the latest clash is expected to trigger a violent response. Intelligence reports suggest that JAS leadership, acting on directives allegedly issued by Abu Umaima, has ordered mobilisation of fighters across the northern and central parts of the Lake Chad region of Borno (LCRBA) in preparation for retaliatory attacks.

The planned counter-offensive could lead to an upsurge in large-scale attacks in the days and weeks ahead, particularly around the Kangarwa–Dogon Chuku corridor, an area that has witnessed repeated factional battles due to its strategic value for logistics, recruitment and access routes.

While the infighting has historically weakened Boko Haram/ISWAP overall cohesion, Zagazola caution that intensified clashes often come at a heavy cost to civilians, as armed groups raid communities for supplies, conscripts and intelligence. Kukawa LGA, already battered by years of insurgency, remains highly vulnerable whenever such rivalries escalate.

ISWAP kills 10 JAS fighters in Kukawa as rivalry clashes escalates

Continue Reading

Trending

Verified by MonsterInsights