Nigeria’s military must confront its intelligence failures

The massacre of more than 200 civilians in Yelewata and Daudu communities in Benue State on June 14, 2025, stands as one of the most grievous security failures in Nigeria’s recent history. Yet, the response of the military hierarchy, centred once again on claims of insider sabotage, raises deeper concerns about the persistent vulnerabilities in the nation’s defence and intelligence architecture.

On June 20, 2o25, General Christopher Musa, Nigeria’s Chief of Defence Staff, addressed the media in Abuja. He revealed that troops assigned to safeguard the affected communities had been deliberately misled by false intelligence. They were allegedly diverted by a fictitious report of an impending attack on another nearby village. In their absence, assailants executed a coordinated and brutal assault on Yelewata and neighbouring Daudu, killing over 200 individuals and displacing many more. Particularly disturbing was the fact that the attackers appeared to have precise knowledge of where internally displaced persons were located, setting ablaze targeted shelters and inflicting maximum devastation.

“Nigeria must adopt a performance-based approach to military leadership, where appointments and promotions reflect competence and outcomes, not merely tenure or political patronage.”

The military’s conclusion that local residents provided real-time intelligence on troop movements to the attackers underscores the scale of infiltration and the apparent failure of Nigeria’s internal security safeguards. This explanation, however, is not new. The Nigerian military has often cited betrayal from within as a justification for its operational shortcomings. What is alarming is the repeated nature of such failures and the lack of demonstrable institutional reform in response.

Read also: Nigeria must act to end the cycle of rural violence

After nearly two decades of confronting insurgency, rural banditry, and communal violence, it is deeply troubling that the Nigerian armed forces remain so susceptible to manipulation. This persistent vulnerability calls into question the operational effectiveness of the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI). These agencies are entrusted with the critical responsibility of pre-empting threats, detecting internal sabotage, and providing reliable intelligence to guide military operations. However, the frequency with which attacks occur without forewarning, often with devastating consequences, raises concerns about their strategic competence and institutional reliability.

While the mandates of these intelligence bodies are central to national security, their repeated failure to anticipate or prevent large-scale violence suggests either a serious breakdown in intelligence gathering or a sustained dereliction of duty. The image of institutions designed to function as the hawk’s eye, yet unable to detect or deter even the most visible threats, is a damning indictment. Intelligence services must be proactive and precise; when they consistently fall short, lives are lost and public confidence erodes. The current state of affairs demands urgent reform, enhanced oversight, and a renewed commitment to building a credible and functional intelligence infrastructure.

President Bola Tinubu’s emergency visit to Benue on June 18, while commendable in symbolic terms, cannot replace the urgent need for institutional accountability. The scale of the killings and the circumstances surrounding them must provoke more than routine expressions of outrage or promises of intensified military operations. The crisis in Benue is neither isolated nor unprecedented. Similar incidents have unfolded across Plateau, Kaduna, Zamfara, and Taraba, creating a pattern of violence that continues to deepen mistrust between communities and the state.

If members of affected communities are indeed colluding with armed elements, then the state must urgently rethink its approach to intelligence management and local engagement. Intelligence networks must be rebuilt with community trust as a central pillar. This will require long-term investment in human intelligence systems, the integration of local actors with proven credibility, and the deployment of modern surveillance tools that reduce dependence on singular or unverifiable informants.

In parallel, there must be a reassessment of leadership within the armed forces. The continued recurrence of operational lapses points to failures at the command level. Senior officers whose oversight has coincided with repeated security breaches should not remain in office by default. Nigeria must adopt a performance-based approach to military leadership, where appointments and promotions reflect competence and outcomes, not merely tenure or political patronage.

Read also: Benue killings: Tinubu orders military to restore order, urges Alia to reconcile warring factions

Equally important is the role of civilian oversight. Nigeria’s National Assembly must exercise its legislative responsibility by conducting a comprehensive audit of defence spending, intelligence coordination, and operational readiness. Parliamentary committees on defence and national security should be empowered and resourced to carry out regular reviews of the effectiveness of military strategy, the conduct of operations, and the integrity of defence institutions.

Moreover, the federal government must articulate a clear and modern national security doctrine. Nigeria cannot continue to rely on reactive deployments and rhetorical reassurances in the face of an increasingly complex security landscape. The doctrine must prioritise intelligence-led operations, inter-agency cooperation, and civilian protection. It must also address the root causes of insecurity, including rural poverty, land disputes, and the proliferation of small arms across the country.

Ultimately, rebuilding public confidence in the military will require more than restructuring or strategic planning. It will demand visible accountability, timely justice, and a demonstrable commitment to the protection of life. The Nigerian people can no longer be expected to endure loss on this scale without a corresponding transformation in the institutions tasked with their safety.

The tragedy in Benue must not be reduced to another grim statistic in Nigeria’s long record of internal conflict. It must serve as a catalyst for urgent reform and a turning point in the country’s approach to national defence. If the military is to reclaim the trust of the population, it must first prove that it is capable of learning from failure and committed to preventing its repetition.