The 30,000 Fulani terrorists troubling Nigeria

WHEN a foreign institution appears to be acquainted with much more precise information about a nation’s security challenges than the nation’s own intelligence apparatus, alarm bells ought to ring across every corridor. Such a situation provokes mind-boggling questions about intelligence gathering, strategic coordination, and the overall effectiveness of the country’s national security architecture. The recent report by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), which estimates that about 30,000 armed Fulani militants are operating across Nigeria, exposes a disturbing reality: Nigeria’s security crisis has become so grave that foreign observers now seem better positioned to quantify certain dimensions of the threat than the Nigerian institutions specifically established and funded to do so. The report  titled “Nonstate Violators of Religious Freedom in Nigeria: Fulani Militants,” paints a troubling picture of highly-mobile armed groups operating in cells ranging from a handful of fighters to formations numbering hundreds. According to the commission, these groups move through forests, rural settlements, and border corridors with alarming ease. Their activities have been linked to killings, kidnappings, village raids, destruction of livelihoods, and mass displacement. While many of the victims have been Christians, Muslims have also suffered killings, kidnappings, and raids. Terrorism, after all, recognises no creed once unleashed.

Nigeria is facing a diffuse, adaptable, and transnational security threat that cannot be confronted with routine responses or bureaucratic complacency. For years, Nigerians have watched armed groups traverse forests, occupy territories, establish camps, collect illegal taxes, kidnap travellers, and launch deadly attacks. The pattern has become depressingly familiar. The country’s security agencies cannot continue to explain away failure while criminal networks continually demonstrate superior mobility, superior adaptability, and, in some cases, superior intelligence. Martin Luther King Jr. famously noted that “the ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people, but the silence over that by the good people.” The wisdom in this statement is timeless. Nigeria cannot afford institutional inertia while communities live under siege. The Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), for example, should justify the resources invested in it by the Nigerian people. The agency exists to gather, analyse, and disseminate intelligence necessary for protecting Nigeria’s territorial integrity. It is tasked with combating terrorism, violent extremism, kidnapping, and banditry. Yet the persistence and expansion of these threats raise legitimate questions about the agency’s operational effectiveness. Intelligence should not merely explain attacks after they occur; it should prevent them.

ALSO READ: Boko Haram: 434 abducted Ngoshe residents released in Borno

The same applies to Nigeria’s substantial investments in space and satellite infrastructure. There is NigComSat, whose personnel have benefited from advanced training in satellite operations. Nigerians are eager at these trying times to see the impact and effectiveness of the establishment in supporting security operations. Modern warfare is increasingly intelligence-driven. Nations defeat mobile insurgents not merely through superior firepower but through superior information. Satellite imagery, communications interception, geospatial analysis, and real-time surveillance have become indispensable tools of modern security architecture. Likewise, the Defence Space Administration, operating from the Space Centre in Abuja, was established precisely to provide military space technology and intelligence support. The National Space Research and Development Agency (NASRDA) possesses remote-sensing capabilities that should contribute significantly to identifying suspicious movements, monitoring forest corridors, and tracking criminal enclaves. Equally important is the National Intelligence Agency (NIA), whose mandate encompasses foreign intelligence and counterintelligence

Nigerians are bound to ask: why are these capabilities not deployed to combat insecurity in the country? Where are the geospatial analysts trained with humongous public funds? How exactly are the huge budgetary allocations for these agencies being disbursed and utilised? Where are the surveillance outputs? Where are the threat maps? Where are the intelligence-driven operations? Where are the early-warning systems that should prevent attacks before they occur? If armed groups ar infiltrating Nigeria through cross-border routes, as many reports suggest, then intelligence gathering beyond the nation’s frontiers becomes indispensable. Intelligence is not valuable because it explains yesterday’s tragedy. Intelligence is valuable because it prevents tomorrow’s catastrophes and disasters. Reports over the years have suggested that many of the armed elements operating under the guise of pastoralism are not Nigerians. They move across porous borders, establish temporary camps, disperse into smaller cells, and exploit difficult terrain. Alongside them, there are bandits motivated by ransom, criminal syndicates engaged in illegal mining, and other networks of people involved in illicit financial activities. Painfully, the convergence of terrorism and organised crime in Nigeria has created a hydra-headed monster that threatens Nigeria’s national cohesion.

What is particularly disturbing is the apparent inability of the Nigerian State to match the agility of the terrorist groups. Terrorists seem to have unhindered access to sophisticated weapons, while lawful regional security initiatives like Amotekun continue to face limitations in acquiring the tools necessary for deterrence and intelligence gathering. Communities remain vulnerable and security formations often appear under-equipped. Such a contradiction demands urgent investigation. A state that struggles to monitor the movement of terrorists across vast territories faces a crisis far deeper than mere operational shortcomings. Even more concerning are persistent allegations of compromise within certain segments of Nigeria’s security establishments. While credit must be given to Nigerian military personnel who continue to serve with courage and professionalism, no keen observer can deny that corruption, sabotage, intelligence leaks, and infiltration have repeatedly surfaced as concerns in Nigerian military’s counterterrorism efforts. A war cannot be won if those entrusted with fighting it are simultaneously undermining it. Military officers, security operatives, politicians, traditional rulers, businessmen and power holders found aiding terrorism— through financing, logistics, intelligence leaks, or political protection—must be fished out. The fight against insecurity cannot succeed while sacred cows continue to graze freely in the fields of national security.

The Federal Government must deepen cooperation with international partners. Intelligence sharing, satellite monitoring, communications interception, border surveillance technologies and specialised training must be prioritised. Meanwhile, the creeping expansion of terrorist activities into the South-West deserves immediate attention. Recent security incidents in Oyo State and other parts of the region suggest that criminal networks are probing new territory. Governors in the region cannot afford the luxury of political distractions, endless ceremonies, and partisan rivalries while threats gather momentum. The essence of governance is protection of lives and property. President Bola Tinubu, during the Eid-el Kabir celebrations, declared that no individual had the right to take another person’s life. The moral clarity of that statement cannot be disputed. Yet, noble declarations must be matched by relentless action. Nigerians expect concrete and measurable outcomes.

 The terrorists troubling Nigeria are organised, mobile, and determined. The Nigerian State must become more organised, more mobile, and more determined. The alternative is to allow criminality to dictate its future. That is a future no patriotic Nigerian should accept. History will not judge this generation of Nigerian leaders by the speeches they have delivered. It will judge them by whether they secured the lives entrusted to their care.