Insecurity

By Aliyu Ya’u

His Excellency, Dikko Umar Radda’s position on rural banditry has provoked considerable reactions, with some questioning his resolve to confront bandits rather than seek a peace agreement.

Given that he lacks control over the paramilitary and armed forces present in the state, it is fair to say that he has taken commendable steps by establishing the state’s community policing group and encouraging the civilian population to engage in self-defence. 

I fully empathise with his frustration, especially in light of the constant criticisms and pleas from victims suffering due to the terror of rural banditry. Understandably, his excellency may feel disheartened and powerless to prevent these criminals from continuing their activities. 

Further, everyone, especially the civilian population, would welcome a peace accord in a real conflict situation. In such situations, all parties’ demands are tabled and deliberated, and sustainable solutions are found and implemented. 

However, in the case of an unorganised and unregulated group like rural bandits of the North-western and North-central Nigeria, who wreak havoc daily without reasonable justification. 

The question lies not in the society respecting the peace accord, but in the modalities employed to guide the peace settlement. Another question is whether the peace accord is sustainable, using historical parameters to assess the credibility and reliability of the commitment of the violent party involved. 

Any peace accord between a government, society, and an armed group should be based on disarmament, demobilisation, and reintegration (DDR). 

According to the United Nations Peacekeeping operation unit, DDR is “a process of removing weapons from the hands of members of armed groups, taking these combatants out of their groups and helping them to reintegrate as civilians into society.”

The question is whether the militias or bandits are ready to surrender all their weapons, demobilise from their dens, and reintegrate into the larger society. Unless the government can confirm these terms with the bandits’ leaders, mediators, and sureties, it will not be obligated to build a wall of ash blocks. 

Other questions include, How strong and convincing are the commitments laid down or presented by the militias? How committed is the leadership to the pact? What are the demands? How cogent and soluble are they? Do they have a unified command structure? Is the command structure capable of issuing an effective directive that will be respected by various dens and groups committing heinous bandit crimes? 

These armed groups are often small; in most cases, a group comprises 10 or fewer bandits who act autonomously, unless they need to cooperate against a sedentary enemy community. The absence of a centralised governing body makes it difficult to build an effective peace agreement with the groups. How could a peace accord with hundreds of bandit groups roaming the regions’ thick and interconnected forests that span hundreds of kilometres and access many states be possible? 

Another aspect deserving the government’s focus is the scope of Katsina state’s peace accord. What areas will it encompass? Will the armed bandits responsible for heinous crimes in Katsina state prevent others from neighbouring states from crossing into the area to commit banditry? It’s crucial to recognise that we are not dealing with an insurgent group, a separatist movement, or an ideological terror organisation; rather, the state is confronting multiple disorganised criminal entities. 

The focus should be on the following: The state’s primary concern is achieving lasting peace, not a temporary ceasefire. The bandits should establish a reliable leadership structure that is known and accessible, and willing to take full responsibility if they breach the agreement. They should clearly specify what sets their current commitments apart from those made with previous governments. Additionally, they should submit their complaints for the state’s review and assessment. The sureties must first confiscate or disarm the bandits before any peace accord is signed.

Aliyu Yau holds an M.Sc. in Defence and Strategic Studies and is a public policy and conflict analyst based in Kaduna.

By Zayyad I. Muhammad

On Saturday, November 1, 2025, U.S. President Donald J. Trump made his famous “guns-a-blazing” remark and described Nigeria as “the now disgraced country.”

On Sunday, November 2, he repeated that the United States could deploy troops to Nigeria or launch airstrikes to stop alleged killings.

In what appears to be a reaction to Trump’s comments, terrorists and bandits in Nigeria have intensified attacks, especially the mass abduction of pupils, students, and worshippers.

On November 17, bandits abducted 25 female students from Government Girls’ Comprehensive Secondary School, Maga, Kebbi State.

On November 18, daredevil gunmen attacked Christ Apostolic Church, Oke-Isegba, Eruku, kidnapping 38 worshippers during an evening service.

On Friday, November 21, gunmen raided St. Mary’s School in the Papiri community of Niger State’s Agwara District, abducting 215 pupils and 12 teachers.

That same day, after Trump appeared on Fox News and declared, “I think Nigeria is a disgrace,” reports emerged that ISWAP fighters had abducted 13 teenage girls working on farmlands in Askira-Uba, Borno State.

Armed groups across Nigeria have long understood the symbolic power of their targets. But the timing and composition of these attacks suggest deeper motives:

Three separate days. Four mass kidnappings. Hundreds of victims. Mostly female victims. This is not a coincidence. This is a strategy.

Observers cite four major reasons:

1.  To escalate the situation and attract international attention. Nothing provokes global outrage like the mass abduction of schoolgirls or worshippers. Terrorists crave visibility, especially when a powerful international figure has threatened intervention.

2.  To instil fear and embarrass the government , psychological warfare, so to speak. Targeting female students and worshippers strikes directly at the heart of communities. Schools and places of worship are supposed to be sanctuaries; when they are violated, society trembles.

3.  To use abducted victims, especially girls, as human shields. If the U.S. were ever to conduct air strikes, the bandits and terrorists understand the protective value of having dozens of young female hostages in their custody.

4.  Ransom opportunities: To exploit heightened international interest as leverage for ransom or negotiation. Heightened American interest increases the “value” of hostages. Criminal groups see an opportunity to negotiate for large payouts.

President Trump’s threats have become a local weapon for the terrorists. To be fair to President Trump, he may not intend it, but his sensational remarks have become ammunition in the arsenal of Nigeria’s armed groups. They interpret his words as an opportunity or a provocation and recalibrate their tactics accordingly.

Also, to be fair to President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, he or his government cannot control the statements made by foreign leaders. Still, they can control how prepared the country is for the consequences. This moment demands urgency. The Nigerian delegation to the US, led by Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, is engaged in sterling diplomatic work. Thus, apart from local efforts, this visit indicates to the Nigerian leadership that a well-planned diplomatic strategy can prevent reckless foreign commentary from escalating domestic crises.

Local and international efforts must work together!

Zayyad I. Muhammad writes from Abuja via zaymohd@yahoo.com.

By Abdullahi Mukhtar Algasgaini

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has issued an immediate order for the withdrawal of all police officers assigned as personal security guards to Very Important Persons (VIPs) across the country.

The directive, announced on Sunday, aims to redeploy these officers to their core duties of frontline policing and public security.

The order was issued following a security meeting in Abuja, which was attended by the heads of the nation’s security agencies, including the Army, Air Force, the Department of State Services (DSS), and the Inspector-General of Police.

According to the new directive, any VIP requiring personal protection must now seek such services from the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), which will be responsible for providing armed guards.

This move comes as many regions of the country, particularly rural and remote areas, suffer from a severe shortage of police personnel.

This deficit has hampered the force’s ability to effectively protect lives and property.

President Tinubu stated his administration’s commitment to increasing police presence nationwide to tackle the security challenges plaguing the nation.

This initiative aligns with the federal government’s earlier approval to recruit 30,000 new police officers, alongside a partnership with state governments to enhance police training facilities across Nigeria.

By Umar Sani Adamu, 

For a long time, Western media outlets, foreign politicians, and advocacy groups have repeatedly described Nigeria as the scene of an ongoing “Christian genocide” at the hands of Muslims, particularly Fulani herdsmen. The charge is serious, emotional, and widely circulated. However, a closer examination of the facts on the ground reveals a much more complex and painful truth: the primary victims of the country’s deadliest insecurity crisis, armed banditry, are overwhelmingly northern Muslims.

Multiple independent investigations have found no evidence of a systematic, religiously motivated campaign to exterminate Christians. A 2024 BBC Global Disinformation Unit report, fact-checks by AFP and Al Jazeera, and even cautious statements from Open Doors, the Christian persecution monitor frequently quoted by genocide advocates, have all warned that the term “genocide” is being misused and exaggerated in the Nigerian context.

The violence plaguing the country is real, but it is predominantly criminal, not confessional. Since 2015, armed banditry, kidnapping for ransom, cattle rustling, village raids and mass killings have turned Zamfara, Katsina, Kaduna, Sokoto and parts of Niger State into killing fields. These states are 90–98 per cent Muslim. Most bandits are ethnic Fulani Muslims who prey primarily on Hausa Muslim farming communities.

Complex numbers tell the story that western headlines rarely do:  

– Zamfara State alone recorded over 1,200 banditry-related deaths in 2023,  almost all Muslim.  

– In the first nine months of 2025, more than 2,800 people were killed by bandits across the North West, according to the Nigerian Atrocities Documentation Project. The vast majority were Muslim.  

– The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom stated in its 2025 report that banditry “disproportionately affects Muslim-majority areas”.

While Christians have suffered real losses in Middle Belt farmer-herder clashes and church attacks, the scale and frequency pale in comparison to the daily carnage in the Muslim North West.

 When the clergy cross the line

This month, Plateau State Police Command arrested a Catholic priest for allegedly supplying AK-47 rifles and thousands of rounds of ammunition to bandit gangs operating across Plateau, Kaduna and Bauchi. Weapons recovered from the cleric have reportedly been linked to recent deadly raids. He was paraded on November 12.

It is not an isolated case. In February 2025, another Reverend Father, a deaconess and several church members were arrested in Taraba for allegedly running arms to both Boko Haram and bandit groups. Similar arrests of Christian clergy and lay workers have occurred in Benue and Nasarawa.

Social media reaction was swift and furious: “They label every Fulani man a terrorist, yet a Reverend Father is caught red-handed arming the same killers,” wrote one widely shared post.

Why the false narrative endures

Images of burnt churches and grieving Christian widows travel fast on global networks. Footage of torched Muslim villages in remote Zurmi or Tsafe rarely does. Poor, Hausa-speaking northerners lack the lobbying machinery that amplifies Middle Belt voices in Washington and London.

As one northern governor privately admitted: “When they shout ‘Christian genocide’ abroad, the grants go to NGOs in Jos and Enugu — never to the millions of displaced Muslims rotting in camps in Gusau and Birnin Gwari.”

The way forward

Nigeria’s crisis is one of state failure, poverty, climate stress and organised crime not a holy war. Treating banditry as jihad only deepens division and delays solutions. Community policing, economic revival in the rural North, and ruthless prosecution of arms suppliers regardless of collar or turban offer the only realistic path to peace.

Until the world stops peddling a convenient myth, the people bearing the heaviest burden — ordinary Muslim farmers, women and children of the North West — will continue to bleed in silence.

There is no Christian genocide in Nigeria. There is, however, a predominantly Muslim tragedy that the world has chosen not to see.

Umar Sani Adamu can be reached via umarhashidu1994@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Sulaiman

Security experts have long warned that Nigeria’s porous borders are a major threat to national stability. This concern was echoed again when Dr Bulama Bukarti, a security researcher, lamented how almost anything can be smuggled into the country due to ineffective border control.

In reaction to Bukarti’s remarks, Dr Aliyu Yakubu Yusuf of Bayero University, Kano, shared a firsthand account that underscores the depth of the problem.

Dr Yusuf narrated that on a trip from Damagaran in the Niger Republic to Kano earlier this week, he sat in the front seat of a commercial bus and witnessed what he described as “a chain of extortion masquerading as security.”

According to him, as the bus approached the Babban Mutum border on the way to Ɓaɓura, he observed “so many annoying checkpoints,” sometimes only a few meters apart. Police officers, soldiers, immigration officials, road safety personnel, and customs operatives were all stationed along the route. Yet, none conducted any meaningful inspection.

“Each time we reached a checkpoint, the driver would simply pull out a one-thousand-naira note and hand it to an officer, then we would move on,” he said. Some officers even addressed the driver by name, apparently familiar with him as a regular traveller.

Dr Yusuf said the driver disclosed that there are 35 checkpoints between Damagaran and Kano, and at each one, he must part with between ₦500 and ₦2000, depending on the officials present. He estimated that drivers spend at least ₦30,000 during a single trip.

“Throughout the four-hour journey, not a single officer asked the driver to open his boot,” he added, expressing disbelief that such laxity exists despite Nigeria’s ongoing fight against insecurity.

His account reinforces concerns that many checkpoints serve as avenues for bribe collection rather than effective security screening—leaving the country vulnerable while motorists bear the financial burden.

“We are jokers, wallahi,” Dr. Yusuf concluded.

By Hadiza Abdulkadir

The Department of State Services (DSS) has announced the arrest of Musa Abubakar, believed to be a major supplier of arms to criminal groups in Plateau State and northern Nigeria. The operation was based on intelligence reports leading to his detention on November 12, 2025.

A DSS source confirmed that Abubakar admitted to producing and distributing high-calibre weapons and ammunition used in violent attacks across Plateau and neighbouring regions.

The arrest followed a targeted raid on his weapons manufacturing facility in Mista Ali, Bassa Local Government Area, Plateau State. Authorities reportedly found Abubakar with IED components, chemicals, and manufacturing equipment, all seized by DSS operatives.

This development comes days after the recapture of Abdulazeez Obadaki, alias Bomboy, a prison escapee linked to the Owo and Deeper Life Church attacks. DSS headlined recent successes in counterterrorism efforts, including the detention of nine high-profile suspects involved in incidents in Plateau and Benue states.

Among those detained is Timna Manjol, 46, who pleaded guilty to firearms charges related to the attacks, according to court documents. Manjol is affiliated with First Baptist Church in Mangu, Plateau.

Security analysts view these arrests as part of the DSS’s ongoing crackdown on violent extremism in the region.

By Usman Salisu Gurbin Mikiya 

Katsina, as the name resonates, is widely regarded as a home of hospitality — a land where people live in harmony and mutual respect. It is a place of comfort where the warmth of its people makes life pleasant and fulfilling.

Recently, however, the long history of relative peace has begun to fade; an uncharacteristic catastrophe once thought distant has started unfolding, becoming a major concern for residents of Katsina Metropolis and beyond, especially as it adds to the decade-long insecurity bedevilling the state.

The issue of phone snatching in Nigeria originated from wristwatch snatching in Southern Nigeria, particularly in Lagos and other highly populated state capitals. It often occurred in strategic areas with heavy traffic, and over time, it evolved into a practice of phone snatching.

In Northwestern Nigeria, phone snatching started in Kaduna State about eight years ago. I vividly recall my visit to Kaduna in 2020, when I was on assignment for my media organisation. A Keke Napep rider warned me to hide my phone from criminals after noticing me pressing it through his mirror.

What began as an alarming trend in Kaduna escalated into a catastrophic issue, with phone snatching syndicates extending their activities into Kano, creating panic and undermining public safety.

During one of my visits to Kano, two of my brothers, on different occasions, warned me not to use my phone while on a tricycle in certain areas. They cautioned that I could lose my life over a phone, as snatchers were everywhere, and even advised me to choose the Keke Napep I boarded carefully.

Indeed, what started as an alarming wave in Kaduna has gradually spread like wildfire, creeping into Kano and now reaching Katsina. Once considered a distant menace, the problem has arrived at the very doorstep of Katsinawa, turning a basic necessity —the mobile phone — into a source of constant fear. This epidemic of criminality is no longer a local crisis but a regional catastrophe demanding urgent attention.

In Katsina Metropolis, residents of Sabuwar Unguwa are no strangers to this menace, as multiple reported cases of phone snatching have occurred, particularly targeting visitors and strangers in the area.

During Governor Ibrahim Shehu Shema’s administration, wayward youths, popularly known as Kauraye, emerged in Katsina. They crippled businesses and created tension in the metropolis, especially in areas such as Sabuwar Unguwa, Inwala, Sabon Layi, and Tudun Ƴan Lahidda.

Their reckless activities frustrated Governor Shema to the point where he took decisive measures that restored sanity and ended the menace.

Similarly, during Governor Aminu Bello Masari’s administration, persistent attacks by delinquent youths, suspected to be from Inwala in the ATC area, forced the government to establish a special Civil Defence outpost. This step drastically reduced the menace.

In his first year in office, Governor Dikko Umaru Radda also faced resurging activities of wayward youths in Sabuwar Unguwa. He personally led security agents in night operations, which eventually restored peace in the area.

However, with three different phone snatching incidents recorded within just three days on major roads, it is clear that social vices are escalating in the city. If not urgently addressed, they risk crippling businesses and threatening public safety.

The first incident occurred on 20th September, when Mrs Sada Shu’aibu was attacked near Sabuwar Dan Marna graveyard, and the attackers attempted to snatch her phone and inflicted serious injuries on her body. 

The following day, 21st September, during the grand finale of the Maulud procession, Usman Marwan was brutally attacked by phone snatchers at his business centre near the MTN office in Kofar Ƙaura.

Furthermore, on 26th September, another victim narrowly escaped death after being attacked by snatchers. This incident has heightened concerns among residents of the metropolis.

With insecurity already ravaging some local governments in Katsina State, the fact that the capital city is now battling phone snatching suggests that Katsina is increasingly under the control of thugs.

This menace has resurfaced under the leadership of Governor Radda, who had earlier recruited hundreds of youths to fight insecurity in the state. Many residents are now watching closely to see how he will respond to this rising threat.

Phone snatching can still be contained within a short period if several urgent measures are taken, including:

The government should initiate a law prescribing either the death penalty or life imprisonment for anyone convicted of phone snatching, alongside a shoot-on-sight order for fleeing offenders.

The government should declare a state of emergency on phone snatching so that the fight against this menace does not derail broader security efforts in the state.

Usman Salisu Gurbin Mikiya, M.Sc. student, Department of Mass Communication, Bayero University, Kano. He can be reached via his Email: usmangurbi@gmail.com.

By Zayyad I. Muhammad

The insecurity challenges in Nigeria, particularly banditry, have defied simplistic solutions. While the kinetic approach, military and law enforcement operations, has achieved some notable successes, it has not produced the outcome of sustainable peace. Instead, it has often fueled a cycle of violence between state and non-state actors, while local communities continue to suffer. To break this cycle, there is a compelling need to complement kinetic measures with non-kinetic strategies such as dialogue, community engagement, education, intelligence-driven peacebuilding, and socio-economic empowerment.

The kinetic approach is necessary but insufficient. It weakens the operational strength of criminal groups but fails to address the root causes of insecurity, such as poverty, unemployment, social injustice, and a lack of community trust in the government. In some cases, heavy-handed operations or operational errors can create resentment among local populations, inadvertently attracting recruits to criminal networks.

The non-kinetic measures are designed to fill the gaps left by the actions of military and security forces, as well as to reduce unnecessary pressures on security forces. These include: building trust through dialogue with traditional rulers, religious leaders, and local influencers, including the actors themselves; creating opportunities for youth through education, vocational training, and employment; rehabilitation and reintegration, including providing pathways for repentant bandits or militants to rejoin society; intelligence gathering and strengthening human intelligence networks within communities to prevent attacks before they occur.

In combating insecurity, multi-stakeholder engagement is imperative, as national security cannot be achieved solely by the federal government. A sustainable strategy requires the active participation of state governments in tailoring responses to local realities. Support from local governments in intelligence gathering and community mobilisation is also essential. 

Engagement of traditional and religious institutions as custodians of local values and mediators in conflict resolution, as well as collaboration with civil society and development partners to address humanitarian and socio-economic needs, is equally important. The government should also introduce local language media programs through social media and other media, it will reach and enlighten the bandits and other insurgents

The current approach of adopting a hybrid security framework that blends military action with non-kinetic approaches to create both deterrence and reconciliation is commendable. This dialogue approach should be institutionalised through community dialogue platforms. Furthermore, establishing regular consultation forums where local leaders and security agencies exchange intelligence and build trust is also important. 

Investment in youth empowerment and the development of targeted programs for skills acquisition, entrepreneurship, and agricultural employment should be integrated into the non-kinetic approach to undercut the appeal of criminal networks. 

Another vital element is strengthening data-driven decision-making by basing security strategies on rigorous research, mapping conflict-prone areas, and conducting historical analyses of community dynamics. Fighting insecurity is a continuous process; any slack will have a negative impact. Therefore, creating measurable benchmarks and developing monitoring frameworks to evaluate the success of both kinetic and non-kinetic interventions over time will be beneficial.

No government can afford to sustain a security approach that fails to deliver positive outcomes. A purely kinetic strategy risks perpetuating violence, while a strictly non-kinetic approach may embolden criminal groups. The way forward lies in a carefully balanced model that applies force where necessary, while simultaneously addressing the root causes of insecurity through dialogue, trust-building, and socio-economic development. Only by harmonising both approaches can Nigeria break the cycle of violence and build a foundation for sustainable peace and security.

Zayyad I. Muhammad writes from Abuja via zaymohd@yahoo.com.

By Sale Rusulana Yanguruza 

When a leader and loved one passes away, we often reflect on their legacy, the meaning of their life, the impact they made during their lifetime, and the significant contribution they made to society. Upon receiving the sad news about the demise of the immediate former President Muhammadu Buhari, what quickly came to mind was his honourable and distinguished efforts to end insecurity, eliminate corruption, and transform the agricultural sector in Nigeria.

His love for Nigerians prompted him to contest in three elections, and he lost the first two. The losses made him shed tears, but he still contested again. He didn’t give up and strived in 2015; he won and was declared the winner of the presidential election. On corruption, Buhari wasn’t just a fighter against corruption in Nigeria; he was a leader who despised untrustworthy individuals. A president who came to office with a unique energy aimed to end his enemy,”corruption”, and politicians who loot citizens’ property.

When Femi Adesina was granted an interview immediately after Buhari’s demise was announced, he boldly said, “Buhari was as clean as a whistle. Nobody can accuse him of anything that has the slightest affinity to corruption.” Adesina’s words imply that Buhari was incorruptible, as no one could accuse him of corruption; his life was a testament to his integrity. While Buhari saw corruption as a disease that was drastically hampering and tempering development in Nigeria, he stated, in his words during an anti-corruption speech in 2016, “If we don’t kill corruption, corruption will kill Nigeria.”

No one can doubt Buhari’s assertion that corruption must be eradicated before Nigeria can develop. However, unfortunately, during his first tenure, Buhari made significant efforts to ensure that all stolen assets by politicians were returned to Nigerians and implemented measures to prevent further occurrences. Yet, as time went on, Buhari was said to be poised, which led him to spend about three months abroad during his first tenure as the president of Nigeria. That story paved the way for a lot of rumours, which people spread, saying he had died, but with God’s grace, he was back and continued with his activities, finished his tenure, and sadly, today, he has met his maker.

Buhari has backed his commitment by putting in place some necessary measures, such as the Treasury Single Account (TSA), the Whistle-Blowing Policy, and the establishment of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, to combat the systemic theft of public resources and, by extension, its pernicious effects on human rights and development. Yes, Buhari is known for Mai Gaskiya, which earned him votes in 2015. He was the first president who made leaders who had stolen the country’s finances fear him when he was declared president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2015, beating the incumbent president, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan.

 Looked at Buhari and Boko Haram

When Buhari was elected, before his swearing-in as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on May 29, 2015, he met with the President of Chad, Idriss Déby, to discuss collaboration on ending insecurity, particularly from Boko Haram in Borno State. Buhari didn’t stop there; he took an official visit to Niger to discuss the issue with the president, aimed at addressing the Boko Haram problem. As Vanguard reported on June 1, 2015, the visit by the newly inaugurated Nigerian leader to Niamey was directed and aimed at decapitating the head of the group as a final solution to the insurgency that had wreaked havoc on the country’s North-East region.

Do you know that Buhari’s first trip as president of Nigeria to an outside country was about insecurity? 

Chad and Niger were Buhari’s first foreign visits outside Nigeria after he was sworn in as president, with the matter of insecurity bedevilling the region, particularly in the northeast. In his inaugural speech in 2015, Buhari said, “The most immediate challenge is Boko Haram insurgency. Progress has been made in recent weeks by our security forces, but victory cannot be achieved by basing the Command and Control Centre in Abuja. The command centre will be relocated to Maiduguri and remain until Boko Haram is completely subdued. But we cannot claim to have defeated Boko Haram without rescuing the Chibok girls and all other innocent persons held hostage by insurgents. This government will do all it can to rescue them alive.”

To support Buhari’s statement, when I attended the Town Hall Meeting organised by News Central Television in Maiduguri, Professor Babagana Umara stated that the Chibok Secondary School, where the girls were abducted, had reopened and is running actively, with Teaching and learning currently taking place in the school.

Undoubtedly, all this was part of the efforts put in by the former President of Nigeria, President Muhammadu, who gave his attention and good synergy to end it. Without a doubt, the long-standing insecurity in the region was drasticallyreduced. Though Boko Haram has carried out some recent attacks, one cannot deny the fact that the former President was at the forefront in reducing it in the region during his tenure.

Is Buhari an Agricultural Transformer? 

Buhari has always been a president who advocated for Nigerians to take agriculture very seriously. President Buhari stated this while delivering a lecture on Tuesday in Abuja at the launch of the National Young Farmers Scheme, a program designed by the National Agricultural Land Development Authority (NALDA). The program aims to spark greater interest among young people in farming.

According to the President, agriculture remains the backbone of the Nigerian economy, being the largest contributor to the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Although the advice was intended for Nigerians, today our youth have largely accepted the President’s advice and returned to farming, which they were previously unable to do.

Legacy is not leaving something for people; it’s leaving something in people.” – Peter Strople

Rest in perfect peace, Baba.

Sale Rusulana Yanguruza wrote via salesaifullahi931@gmail.com.

By Ahmed Abdulkadir

It was with a mix of curiosity and concern that I came across an article published by The Daily Reality on July 12, 2025, titled “How the Lack of Strong Opposition Masks the Government’s Failures in Katsina.” The write-up was emotionally charged, laced with sweeping generalisations and unverified claims against the administration of Governor Dikko Umar Radda. But beyond the passion and provocative headline lies the need for a more measured and fact-based perspective—one grounded in reality rather than rhetoric.

Let us take a closer look at the major allegations raised in the article and critically examine them with verifiable facts and thoughtful context.

The “Failure” of a PhD Holder? A Misplaced Premise

One of the more glaring assertions in the article is the idea that Governor Radda’s possession of a PhD was oversold during his campaign and that his government has since failed to meet expectations. But such a claim is not only simplistic—it is unfair.

Yes, Governor Radda holds a doctorate degree, a fact that underscores his academic pedigree. However, governance is not a matter of titles or certificates—it is about policies, programs, and political will. The proper question should be: What has he done since assuming office in May 2023?

So far, the Radda administration has rolled out programs in agriculture, healthcare, and security reform. For instance, his data-driven community development model now guides the distribution of fertiliser, agro-support, and loans, ensuring that those who truly need support get it. His collaboration with the Bank of Industry for interest-free loans to MSMEs is unprecedented in the state. His administration has also launched the Health Insurance Scheme for Retirees—the first of its kind in Katsina’s history.

If there are areas needing improvement, no doubt. But to write off the administration as a “failure” just two years into a four-year mandate without a balanced assessment is more political than logical.

Insecurity: Who Really Bears the Blame?

The article devotes significant attention to the security situation in Katsina State. It laments the rising tide of banditry and communal violence, laying the blame squarely on the state government’s shoulders.

There is no denying the pain and fear that many communities in Katsina face. Attacks in places like Yargoje and Faskari are fresh scars in our collective memory. But to understand the security challenge in Katsina, one must first recognise that it is a national crisis, not a localised failure.

Security in Nigeria is under the exclusive control of the Federal Government. The police, the military, and the intelligence agencies all answer to Abuja. Governors, including Dr. Radda, are often described as “chief security officers” in name only—they command no troops, control no weapons, and fund security operations from limited state budgets.

That said, the Radda administration has not folded its arms. It has recruited and trained community vigilantes, equipped local security outfits, and created a Directorate of Humanitarian and Social Support to cater to victims of banditry and displacement. These interventions may not be silver bullets, but they reflect proactive governance in a highly constrained security architecture.

Education: A Long Road, not a Quick Fix

Another issue raised in the article is the high number of out-of-school children in Katsina. On this point, the critics are absolutely right. Katsina ranks among the states with the highest rates of out-of-school children in Nigeria. But what they failed to mention is that this is not a new problem, nor one created by the Radda administration.

The roots of the educational crisis in Katsina go back decades. Years of underfunding, weak infrastructure, socio-cultural barriers, and insecurity have combined to undermine education in the state. What matters now is what the current government is doing to address it.

Governor Radda has begun the process of improving school enrollment, especially for girls. New schools are being built in underserved areas. He has introduced teacher recruitment and training initiatives. And there are plans underway to integrate Qur’anic education with formal curriculum to bridge the gap between Almajiri and Western education.

Is it enough? Not yet. But progress is being made—step by step.

Opposition Politics: Is There Really a Vacuum?

Perhaps the most politically charged claim in the article is that Katsina suffers from a lack of effective opposition, which allows the government to operate without scrutiny. This is an old and recurring lament in Nigerian politics, especially in states where the ruling party dominates.

Yes, the All Progressives Congress (APC) won the 2023 governorship with a comfortable margin. Yes, the party also secured all three Senate seats and most House of Assembly positions. But to interpret this dominance as the death of opposition politics is disingenuous.

The PDP remains active in Katsina. The SDP fields candidates. Civil society voices are alive and well. In fact, the very article in question—published without censorship—is evidence that dissenting voices are being heard.

If opposition parties are underperforming, the responsibility lies with them to reorganise, re-strategise, and connect meaningfully with the grassroots. Democracy is not sustained by the volume of complaints but by the quality of alternatives.

A Balanced View, not a Biased Verdict

In conclusion, while the concerns raised by Daily Reality are important and deserve public discourse, their presentation lacks balance and fails the test of objectivity. The article reads more like a political broadside than a serious critique of governance. It ignores nuance, omits progress, and assumes malice where complexity exists.

Katsina State, like much of Nigeria, is grappling with real challenges—security, education, healthcare, and youth unemployment. But it is also a place where honest efforts are being made to build a better future. The truth, as always, lies somewhere in the middle, not in the extremes of praise or condemnation.

Governor Radda may not have achieved everything yet, but his administration has not been idle, incompetent, or indifferent. Let us hold him accountable, yes—but let us also be fair, factual, and future-minded in our assessments.

Ahmed Abdulkadir is the Board Chairman of Katsina State Radio and Television Services.