Foreign powers will not solve Nigeria’s insecurity. Superpowers act in pursuit of their national interest. Nigeria must do the same. Counterterrorism succeeds when the state leads, coordinates, and sustains pressure. Outsourcing security strategy invites dependency and disappointment. Therefore, Abuja must own the fight politically, operationally, and morally.
Nigeria stands at a decisive crossroads in counterterrorism. As this article goes to press, coordinated attacks continue across multiple regions. Bombings, kidnappings, and targeted killings persist, despite international signalling and episodic foreign interventions. External force did not deter violent networks in late 2025. Nigeria must therefore act with clarity, resolve, and sovereign purpose.
One of the most consequential steps taken in 2025 was the proposed designation of terrorist groups and affiliated individuals. Nearly forty entities were identified, spanning financiers, facilitators, protectors, and legitimisers. This approach reflects the modern counterterrorism doctrine. Violence collapses when money, logistics, protection, and ideological oxygen disappear. Naming these layers matters. Enforcing the law against them matters more.
Nigeria’s central challenge is not legislative absence. It is an enforcement failure. Compromise corrodes operations. Sabotage weakens prosecutions. Selective application erodes legitimacy. Terrorist networks exploit these gaps with discipline and patience. President Bola Tinubu must therefore set a non-negotiable enforcement agenda this January. Capture operatives. Disrupt cells. Neutralise leaders when lawful and necessary. Above all, prevent recruitment before violence metastasises.
Foreign powers will not solve Nigeria’s insecurity. Superpowers act in pursuit of their national interest. Nigeria must do the same. Counterterrorism succeeds when the state leads, coordinates, and sustains pressure. Outsourcing security strategy invites dependency and disappointment. Therefore, Abuja must own the fight politically, operationally, and morally.
International cooperation still matters. Nigeria should lead a pragmatic coalition against Islamist terrorism across West Africa. Intelligence sharing, border security coordination, financial tracking, and joint training raise the cost of violence. Nevertheless, cooperation must complement domestic resolve, not replace it.
Understanding how individuals and groups acquire the terrorist label clarifies the policy terrain. International consensus remains elusive. The United Nations has long struggled to define terrorism uniformly. Instead, it condemns tactics such as bombings, hijackings, kidnappings, and mass-casualty violence. This focus on methods, rather than motives, offers Nigeria strategic latitude. Acts that target civilians for coercive ends are indefensible. The state should prosecute them without ambiguity.
Scholar Bruce Hoffman once described the terrorist as a violent intellectual committed to force in pursuit of goals. That insight remains relevant. Terrorism blends ideology with calculation. It feeds on grievance, identity, and opportunity. When violence persists longer than necessary, citizens begin to suspect official tolerance or collusion. That perception damages trust and accelerates radicalisation.
Nigeria must therefore address the conditions that terrorists exploit. Security operations alone cannot end insurgency. Economic exclusion, youth unemployment, corruption, electoral malpractice, and perceived injustice supply recruits faster than bullets eliminate them. In my opinion, prevention is the most decisive battlefield. Address grievances credibly. Restore faith in institutions. Protect the vote. Enforce accountability.
International cooperation still matters. Nigeria should lead a pragmatic coalition against Islamist terrorism across West Africa. Intelligence sharing, border security coordination, financial tracking, and joint training raise the cost of violence. Nevertheless, cooperation must complement domestic resolve, not replace it.
President Tinubu has the constitutional authority and political mandate to reset Nigeria’s counterterrorism posture. January 2026 should mark the beginning of disciplined enforcement, preventive governance, and strategic clarity. Terrorism thrives in hesitation. It withers under sustained, legitimate state power.
History offers usable guidance. During a wave of global hijackings, the United States articulated firm counterterrorism principles under President Richard Nixon. Nigeria should adapt these principles to its context:
- Reject terrorism unequivocally. No cause justifies criminal violence.
- Lead through law and diplomacy, while pursuing collective solutions.
- Prosecute and punish terrorists using all lawful measures.
- Deploy every available resource to secure the release of hostages.
- Deepen cooperation with regional and global partners.
No simple solution exists. However, credibility demands action. When a state signals intent and fails to act, it invites further attack. Therefore, Nigeria needs a coherent national security strategy that reduces vulnerabilities, limits damage, and accelerates recovery after attacks.
President Tinubu has the constitutional authority and political mandate to reset Nigeria’s counterterrorism posture. January 2026 should mark the beginning of disciplined enforcement, preventive governance, and strategic clarity. Terrorism thrives in hesitation. It withers under sustained, legitimate state power.
Oludare Ogunlana is a security and intelligence scholar and principal consultant at OGUN Security Research and Strategic Consulting LLC.
