By Abu Jemimah Lami
Nigeria continues to grapple with overlapping security crises driven largely by armed banditry and insurgency. These threats have evolved beyond isolated criminality into persistent challenges that undermine national stability, economic development, and public confidence in the state. From mass kidnappings in the North-West to prolonged insurgency in the North-East, Nigeria’s security forces have remained under intense pressure. While successive governments have introduced a range of military and policy responses, the sustainability of these efforts remains a critical question.
Banditry in Nigeria is characterized by organized armed violence, including cattle rustling, village raids, mass abductions, and extortion. Operating largely in ungoverned or weakly governed spaces, bandit groups exploit poverty, porous borders, and limited state presence. Insurgency, particularly in the North-East, has deeper ideological roots, driven by extremist groups that challenge the authority of the Nigerian state. However, the distinction between banditry and insurgency has increasingly blurred, as criminal groups adopt insurgent tactics while extremist factions engage in kidnapping and illicit economic activities to fund their operations. This convergence has complicated Nigeria’s security environment and stretched the capacity of conventional responses.
The Nigerian government has relied heavily on kinetic approaches to contain these threats. Military offensives, airstrikes, and joint task force operations have recorded periodic successes, including the recovery of territory, the elimination of key commanders, and the rescue of abducted victims. Security agencies have also pursued intelligence-led operations and inter-agency cooperation to disrupt criminal networks. Despite these efforts, violence persists, often resurfacing after short periods of calm. This pattern raises concerns that current responses are reactive rather than transformative, focusing more on suppression than on long-term stability.
One of the key challenges to sustainability is the heavy militarization of Nigeria’s security response. While force is necessary to confront armed groups, it has proven insufficient as a standalone strategy. Military operations frequently clear areas without establishing lasting governance or economic recovery. In the absence of effective civil administration, displaced communities struggle to return, and criminal actors often regroup or relocate. Moreover, prolonged military deployments strain personnel, logistics, and budgets, making such operations difficult to maintain over time without diminishing returns.Another critical issue lies in the socio-economic foundations of insecurity.
Banditry and insurgency thrive in environments marked by unemployment, inequality, and social exclusion. In many affected regions, young people face limited access to education and livelihoods, making recruitment into armed groups an attractive survival strategy. Security responses that ignore these underlying conditions risk addressing symptoms rather than causes. Without deliberate investment in development, social services, and economic inclusion, insecurity is likely to regenerate even after tactical military successes.Institutional weaknesses further undermine sustainability.
Nigeria’s centralized security structure often limits rapid, locally informed responses to emerging threats. Security agencies face challenges related to coordination, intelligence sharing, and accountability. In some cases, allegations of corruption, human rights abuses, and poor civil-military relations have eroded public trust, reducing community cooperation that is essential for effective intelligence gathering. When citizens view security forces with suspicion or fear, the flow of actionable information diminishes, weakening overall response capacity.
The financial dimension of insecurity also presents a long-term challenge. Banditry and insurgency are sustained by illicit economies, including ransom payments, illegal mining, arms trafficking, and cross-border smuggling. As long as these revenue streams remain intact, armed groups retain the capacity to recruit, rearm, and adapt.
Efforts to disrupt these financial networks have been uneven, and without stronger regulation, enforcement, and regional cooperation, criminal economies will continue to fuel violence.For Nigeria’s security responses to become sustainable, a shift toward a more comprehensive approach is required. Security must be understood not only as the absence of violence but as the presence of opportunity, justice, and effective governance. Military action should be integrated with development initiatives that restore livelihoods, rebuild infrastructure, and strengthen local institutions. Community-based security mechanisms, when properly regulated, can help bridge trust gaps and provide early warning against emerging threats. Legal and institutional reforms, including debates around decentralization and state policing, also deserve serious consideration as part of a broader security architecture.
Nigeria’s response to banditry and insurgency has demonstrated resilience and determination, but sustainability remains uncertain under the current model. Tactical victories achieved through force have not consistently translated into lasting peace. Without addressing the socio-economic drivers of violence, strengthening institutions, and restoring state legitimacy at the local level, insecurity is likely to persist in new forms. A sustainable security strategy for Nigeria must therefore move beyond guns and troops toward a holistic framework that combines security, development, and governance in equal measure.
Abu Jemimah Lami is a graduate of History and International Studies from IBB University, Lapai, and a Corps Member serving with the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR), Abuja. She can be reached via jemimahabu36@gmail.com.
