SECURITY CHALLENGES AND THE EMERGENCE OFYOUTH

VIOLENCE IN NIGERIA

BY

HALILU BABAJI (PhD. RESEARCH SCHOLAR)

DEPARTMENT OF AFRICAN STUDIES

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE

DELHI UNIVERSITY, NEW DELHI-110007,INDIA.

2013 SECURITY CHALLENGES AND THE EMERGENCE OF YOUTH

VIOLENCE IN NIGERIA

BY

HALILU BABAJI (PhD. RESEARCH SCHOLAR) EMAIL-halilubabaji@gmail.com

DEPARTMENT OF AFRICAN STUDIES, FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

DELHI UNIVERSITY, NEW DELHI-110007

Keywords: Security, challenges, Youth, Violence

ABSTRACT

This paper examines security challenges and the emergence of

youth violence in Nigeria. The paper seeks to find out the

extent to which the internal security and the emergence of

youth violence have adversely impacted the political, economic

and social lives of Nigerian people. The result of the

investigation reveals that the security challenges in Nigeria

have long historical antecedence and traceable to bad

governance. The paper argues that the abysmal failure of

successive administrations in Nigeria to address challenges

such as poverty, youth unemployment and inequitable

2

distribution of wealth among ethnic nationalities, ultimately

resulted to anger, agitation and violence crimes against the

Nigerian state by some individuals and groups. Such crimes

include militancy, youth aggressiveness, kidnapping, bombing,

armed robbery, vandalisation of government properties, among

others. The paper further argues that the various activities

of the above mentioned, resulted in low income of the

government, low participation of local and foreign investors

in economic development, and insecurity of lives and property

of the citizens. The paper recommends the formulation and

effective implementation of policies and programmes capable of

addressing the root causes of insecurity in Nigeria, such as

youth violence, poverty, unemployment, social injustice,

marginalisation, bad governance, corruption among others. And

secondary data was mostly used in the study largely due to the

nature of the research problem.

INTRODUCTION

Nigeria, known as “the Giant of Africa”, is the most populous

country in Africa and the seventh most populous country in the

world. Nigeria is roughly divided in half between Christians,

who mostly live in the south and central parts of the country,

and Muslims, concentrated mostly in the north. A minority

practice Traditional religions especially the Igbo and Yoruba

religions. Its oil resources have brought great revenues to

3

the country. It is listed among the “Next Eleven” Economies.

Nigeria is a member of both the Commonwealth of Nations, and

the African Union.

Nigeria was the largest British dependency in the colonial

empire. Four times as large as the United Kingdom, it is the

most populous country in Africa. Nigeria, however, have very

little common history. It was only as late as 1914 that the

country was first administered as a single unit, and

consequently, even today, loyalties tend to be stronger

towards tribes and regions than to a central state. This has

led to the development of a federal rather than a unitary

constitution. The major problem facing Nigeria, therefore,

still remained the relationship between the regions and the

federal state. Certainly, people in Nigeria now look much more

often to their regional than to their federal government, and

their loyalties are more strongly rooted in their region

(Hatch: 1962).

The nature of the Nigerian state remains oppressive,

privatised, unpopular and unhegemonic. The state is barely

able to stand on neutral ground to mediate conflict, because

it lacks autonomy from the political class. It is difficult to

separate government from the state, much less the

personalities. Thus the style of the leader rubs off on the

state. The authoritarian provenances of the present power

brokers of state neutrality results in double standards, which

denude the emaciated legitimacy of the government. Powerless

groups, tend to suffer more. Minority communities are

suppressed by violent means, and communities and groups from4

more powerful ethnic groups are allegedly treated with

courtesy. Individual and ethno-religious groups easily see the

state as an agent of the enemy. Soldiers sent on routine

duties are described as an army of occupation and treated as

such, because they are seen as agents of oppression or

mercenaries of powerful men in government. The security

agencies have also lost credibility in the process (Ukiwo:

2002).

The security situation in Nigeria between 2004 to date has

obviously taken different dimensions. This period, however,

witnessed a constant pressure on the government due to severe

security challenges. Thus the internal security challenges in

Nigeria since the enthronement of democracy in 1999 has

received mixed reaction within and outside the Nigeria’s

political environment. However, the increasing spate of ethnic

militia and extremism in Nigeria and their continuous attacks

on both the government and the citizens had gradually opted

from optimism to pessimism, hope to hopelessness, wealth to

poverty and development to underdevelopment. And years of

misrule has taken great toll on Nigeria’s infrastructure and

body polity.

The security threats in Nigeria are concern with such

dehumanizing conditions as violent conflicts, the pandemic

HIV/AIDS, proliferation of arms and small weapons, endless

streams of refugees and internally displaced people, force

labour, exponential violence against women, the ‘curse’ of

natural resources, environmental degradation, abject poverty,

5

corruption, the lack of basic health care, terrorism, and the

rape of constitutionalism and the rule of law.

The phrase of security was thrust upon the international plane

in 1994 when, in its Human Development Report (HDR), the UNDP

broached an entirely new way of thinking about security. In

the report, the UN proposed a people-centred notion of

security. This was a remarkable, if not a path-breaking

departure altogether from traditional conception of security

as a state-centric notion. Thomas and Tow (2002), have equally

noted that security is a promising but still underdeveloped

paradigmatic approach to understanding contemporary security

politics. Security can also be seen as the expected number of

years of life spent outside the state of generalised poverty,

and protection from sudden and hurtful disruptions in the

pattern of daily life-whether in homes, in jobs or

communities.

Security as an essential concept is commonly associated with

the alleviation of threats to cherished values, especially the

survival of individuals, groups or object in the near future.

Thus, security as the name implies, involves the ability to

pursue cherished political and social ambitions (Williams:

2008). Characteristically security is universal (it is

relevant to all nations and people, rich or poor); Its

components are interdependent (threats to human security break

down the barriers of territorial immunity so that the

misfortunes of one people at one end of the world could

trigger a chain of events with devastating consequences for

people at the other end); It is much easier to prevent threats6

to human security than resort (mostly belated) to expensive

humanitarian actions; and human security is people-centred (it

is concern with how people live and breathe in a society, how

freely they exercise their many choices).

According to Paime (1992: 2) “there is a correlation between

security and survival”, whereas survival is an essential

condition, security is viewed as safety, confidence, free from

danger, fear, doubt, among others. Security is meaningless

without a critical discourse of something pertinent to secure.

Indeed, security could best be understood when situated within

the context, of a referent object. In the long sweep of human

history, the central focus of security has been people

(Rothschild, 1995: 68)

Thus, this is imperative considering the fact that micro

security starts with the stabilization of internal security of

a given nation state. The essence of this strategy is not only

to safeguard the lives of the citizens, but also to achieve

the desired growth and development in the state. The import of

internal security in a state like Nigeria has been carefully

articulated because; the available evidence demonstrates that

there is increasing rate of poverty among Nigerians. Also,

unemployment looms large, per capital income is low and high

rate of inflation has not be addressed. Similarly, Nigerians

are still facing challenges of poor health status, poor state

of infrastructures, high rate of illiteracy, low technological

development, among others (Anosike, 2010: 8).

7

The security challenges of the Nigerian state are that

democracy is most likely to be undermined, thereby paving way

for military incursion in the country. Also, the continuous

internal insurrection by armed youths across the country could

distort any meaningful efforts by the government to achieve

meaningful development in Nigeria. This is imperative because

as Isine (2008: 9) explain that: ...security is viewed as a

dynamic phenomenon as well as a social problem in the

country...it is the duty of the government to ensure the

security of lives and property of its citizens... youth

restiveness, agitations, protests and demonstrations these

days are very violent and leads to sabotage of vital

government installations.

These challenges may range from low level civil disorder,

large scale violence, even armed insurgency or terrorism.

These threats are directed against citizens or the organs and

infrastructure of the state itself. Hence, the problems are

degenerating. This is a worrisome revelation as it readily

suggests that the nation is under seize and that the police no

longer have the capacity to deal with the rising insecurity in

Nigeria.

INSECURITY AND YOUTH VIOLENCE IN

NIGERIA

Nigeria, like other African states, has a large youth

population that often plays a key role in conflict,

8

particularly violent ones. The phenomenon of youth

participation in conflict is deeply rooted in a crisis of

governance that has ensnared them. These crises have long been

manifested in many forms. Over the distribution of wealth,

power sharing, incapacity of the state to provide for and

protect its citizens, arbitrary and solitary exercise of

power, and the collapse of economic and social structures and

institutions. These issues stand to predispose youths toward

violence given that the structure of the state mechanisms are

unfavourable to young people actualizing their potentials.

Today, however, because of the deteriorating socioeconomic

conditions, coupled with high youth unemployment, young

Nigerian constitute a verse army of unemployed ready for

instant mobilization by the state as well as non-state agents

who oppose or antagonize the state.

In Nigeria, the prevalence of conflict, particularly violent

conflict-whether communal, religious, political, ethnic,

cultic, or criminal-is driven by youths. Youth in Nigeria have

in the process become valuable allies or potential

adversaries. Warring communities and groups hurriedly recruit

youths to stock their fighting machines and gain advantage

(Joseph: 2010). Some youth groups are used to carry out

violent acts. They have structures through which they benefit

(legally or illegally) from the system. For example, youths

such as those belonging to the Niger Delta militants, the Area

boys in Lagos, Yandaba in Kano state, Omata boys of Onitsha,

and political thugs, among others who take part in most of the

violence in the country, have formal and informal patrons who

9

support them financially or sponsor events in which they are

involved. In return, the patrons are assured of ‘protection’

or political support, which oftentimes inflicts disorder upon

society as the youths attempt to fulfil their part of the

bargain (Abubakar: 2005).

An attempt to explain the vulnerability of Nigerian youth to

violence is, however focus on the poor performance of the

economy and state institutional exploitation of unemployed

youth are critical for youth participation in violence.

Nigerian youths nevertheless remain on the receiving end of

several failed economic structural programmes and incipient

bad governance by most regimes from the 1980s to today. Youths

thus have tried to change their victim status to that of

victor by engaging in violence as a livelihood. Because the

system is exclusively elite-driven (and designed, from top

down), excluding youths from functional participation in the

system, the feeling of alienation is pervasive, points of

entry in to the system are limited or completely blocked. The

only apparent entrance is through conflict, mainly violent

ones. Even in part of Nigeria where there appears to be some

level of relative peace, the growing presence of unemployed,

educated and uneducated, skilled and unskilled youths poses

severe challenges. As political elites use youth as

instruments of violence to acquire and maintain political

power, the only form of political education they are

bequeathed is on the culture of violence.

Another ugly aspect about youth and insecurity in Nigeria

emerges from revelations about the evolution of this trend10

operations and networks in areas of violence around the

country. The situation in the Niger Delta, North-eastern part

of Nigeria, Plateau, and Benue-Taraba conflict axis is

particularly worrisome because of covert structures of

mercenary and guerrilla fighters consisting mainly of youths.

Youth in Nigeria crystallized in to dreaded groups that

swelled their ranks rapidly and used violence that affected

the psyche of Nigerian society and even the international

community. It is instructive to note that the civil wars in

Liberia and Sierra Leon started with about a hundred young

guerrilla fighters who recruited alienation brethren to

terrorize their nations, with far-reaching regional and

international implication.

SECURITY AND THE INTERNAL CHALLENGES IN

NIGERIA

Security is considered as any mechanism deliberately fashioned

to alleviate the most serious and immediate threats that

prevent people from pursuing their cherished values (Abubakar:

2005). In Nigeria, the achievement of desired level of

internal security was elusive. The efforts to address the

threats, conflicts and security challenges in Nigeria must

ultimately place emphasis on the unusual “suspects” such as

the economy (poverty, inequality, unemployment, low per capita

income, smuggling), and politics (nepotism, sectionalism,

election rigging, thuggery and hooliganism).

With the above elements, Nigeria witnessed the proliferation

of different militia and extremist groups that posed serious

11

security threats. Thus, such unwholesome behaviours which not

only affected economic, social lives, political and cultural

activities in many parts of the country, but also resulted in

lost of numerous lives and property of its citizens. The

polity and economy of Nigeria is driven by finite resources,

where politicians are driven by greed, and the population

consists of teeming population of unemployment youth, stands

higher chances of civil war and political instability. This

captures more of a Nigerian dilemma very well. And whilst the

politicians are making public coffers, the economy remains

neglected. Unemployed youths constitute a large swathe of the

Nigerian population. Militants and extremists are driven more

by ‘grievance’, knowing full well that the politicians are

driven by ‘greed’ (Joseph: 2010).

The internal security challenges and the wanton destructions

caused by militants and extremists have bared the fragility of

the Nigerian state, their own anarchy. Nigeria is

spectacularly sick in more many ways than one. Insecurity has

taken over the national discourse. Lawlessness and disorder

have become order of the day. Nigerian communities have

swiftly descended from communal violence, to car bombs and now

suicide bombing all undergirded by deficits of democracy and

development. This appears to be dump-founded in all aspect.

The vast majority of leadership, if not all, have created a

national space where both the lesser and higher crimes have

flourished in to national art form. Needless to say, militancy

and extremism in Nigeria which is now a threat to the entire

system are creation of irresponsible leadership. Nigeria has

12

been described by late sage, Chief Obafemi Owolowo as “a mere

geographical expression” it exists only on paper, and not in

the consciousness of our people. Nigerians are more committed

to their respective region, religion and tribes than the

Nations. The National Anthem is a verse-in-pretension.

The pathetic situation has critically examined the following

as an internal security challenges in Nigeria. The Boko Haram

known as (Jama’atu Ahlis Sunnah ladda ‘awati wal-jihad), the Niger Delta

crisis, kidnapping for ransom, and religious/ethnic crisis.

The Boko Haram

Another major security challenge in Nigeria which has

adversely affected the Nigerian state is the activities of

Boko Haram group. Etymologically, the term ‘Boko Haram’ is

derived from Hausa word ‘Boko’ meaning ‘Animists’, western,

otherwise non-Islamic education; and the Arabic word Haram

figuratively meaning ‘sin’ or literally, ‘forbidden’ (George:

2010). The Boko Haram is a controversial Nigerian Militant

Islamist group that seeks the imposition of shari’a law in the

northern states of Nigeria. Ideologically, the group opposes

not only western education, but western culture and modern

science (Hill: 2012). Comically, the Boko Haram group asserts

that the belief that the world is sphere is contrary to Islam

and should be rejected, along Darwinism and theory that rain

comes from water evaporated by sun.

Historically, the Boko Haram group was founded in 2002 in

Maiduguri by Ustaz Mohammed Yusuf. In 2004, it moved to Kanama

in Yobe state, where it set up a base called ‘Afghanistan’.

13

However the founder of the group, Mohammed Yusuf was hostile

to democracy and secular education system. This partly

explains why he vowed that the war he began in 2002 would

ultimately change the political and educational systems in

Nigeria, a dream not realised till his death in 2009 under the

police custody. The group does not mix with local people in

the area of its settlement and lots of its members that speak

only Arabic come from neighbouring Chad. The group claimed to

strongly believe in the Koranic phrase which says “anyone who

is not governed by what Allah has revealed is among the

transgressors”.

The activities of the group constitute serious security

challenges in the contemporary Nigerian state. The activities

of the group ranges from killing of innocent Nigerians

including Muslim clerics, attacking law enforcement agencies

and personnel, bombing of religious centres including mosques

among others. Even though the group started out as a purely

Islamic- group, the disposition of the group became

questionable for three reasons;

The sect is not only out for non Muslims, it is fighting

the government as well;

The sect has non-Muslims as its members; and

The sect has not spared some prominent Muslims, as they

had attacked mosque and killed Islamic cleric in their

operation.

The sect is a jihadist militant organisation based in the

northeast of Nigeria and north Cameroon. It is an Islamists

14

movement which strongly opposes man-made laws and

westernization. The movement is divided in to three factions.

The group became known internationally following sectarian

violence in Nigeria in July 2009, which left over 1000 people

dead. They do not have a clear structure or evident chain of

command. In 2011, Boko Haram was responsible for at least 450

killings in Nigeria, and responsible for over 620 deaths over

the first 6 months of 2012. Since its founding, the jihadists

have been responsible for roughly 50,000 deaths (HRW, January,

2013).

The Niger Delta militants

The Niger Delta an oil rich region in Nigeria is characterized

by the existence of wide spread poverty, squalor and

environmental degradation due to long period of neglect and

marginalisation by successive regimes both civil and military.

Several efforts have been made through representations of

traditional rulers, opinion leaders and public spirit

individuals on behalf of the people. These moves have been met

by successive regimes with disdain and draconian brute force.

Arms violence and arms proliferation currently witnessing in

the Niger Delta, is necessitated by such brute force, as the

people had no alternative than resorting to violence and

resulting to insecurity in the region.

The region witnessed severe security threats and the emergence

of other agitating groups affiliated to the Movement for the

Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND). The emergence of MEND

and other agitating groups in the struggle to addressing the

15

injustice by the Federal Government against the region

exacerbated the security problems not only in the region, but

also in the entire Nigerian state. These include Niger Delta

People’s Volunteer Force (NDPVF) led by Mujahid Dokubo-Asari

and the Niger Delta Vigilante (NDV) led by Ateke Tom (Amaizu:

2008).

However, the two groups (NDPVF and NDV), dwarf a plethora of

smaller militias supposedly numbering more than one hundred in

the Niger Delta region. These groups comprised mostly the

disaffected young men from Warri, Port Harcourt, Yenagoa and

their sub-urban areas. Against this backdrop, daily civilian

life was disrupted, forcing schools and economic activities to

shut down.

Kidnapping

Kidnapping as a social problem is the act of illegally taking

somebody away and keeping him/her as a prisoner in order to

get money or something in return for releasing him (Fanoro:

2009). The history of kidnapping in the south-east zone,

Nigeria could be traced to hostilities, conflict and violence

in the Niger Delta region. In the south east zone, especially

in Abia and Imo states, kidnapping activities were mainly

targeted at prominent indigenes and residents of these states.

This situation was pervasive shortly after the 2007 general

elections in Nigeria. This is partly because, the youths that

were used as political thugs by politicians during election in

these states subsequently engaged in kidnapping as means of

livelihood after elections. Indeed, confession by those

16

apprehended indicated that some politicians in these states

supplied guns to youth for the purpose of rigging the 2007

general elections. Unfortunately these guns were not retrieved

at the end of the elections.

Consequently, kidnapping later turned to profitable business

mostly among the youths in Abia, Imo, Ebonyi and other states

in the zone. However, the kidnapping of school children in

Aba, as well as common men in the metropolis forced all the

commercial banks to close down for several days in 2010

(Ajani: 2010). In rural areas, kidnapping of traditional

rulers and poor people were also rampant.

Ethnic and Religious crisis

Another internal security threat to Nigeria which some

observers have described is ethnic and religious violence.

Crisis in many part of Nigeria has claimed numerous lives of

Nigerians and property worth millions of Naira. The crisis

which has been sporadic in many places has continued to

witness the onslaught and massacre of large number of

Nigerians. In Jos, conflict seems to recur in every narrowing

cycle, and deadly riots rocked the city in 1994, 2001, 2008,

and 2010 till date. Also, available evidence has shown that

the crisis in Jos which has been fought on sectarian lines may

be traced to ‘sour relationship’ between the Christian and

Muslim communities in the area (James: 2013).

Electoral violence

17

In Nigeria, politics are militarised and violent conflict is

use as an electoral tool, leading to the inculcation of a

culture of violence in society. Armed groups are not a new

phenomenon in Nigerian polity. However, today’s armed groups

are better armed, better trained, and increasingly sophiscated

in their actions. Armed groups hired by politicians, have now

developed their own economic bases thereby freeing themselves

from their political patrons. This has led some groups to

engage in the political process themselves. Armed violence and

conflict is about access to resources, whether through

committing crime, playing on communal tension, stealing oil,

or winning election (Ginifer: 2005).

In Nigeria, a deeper analysis shows that political and

electoral fighting is the leading cause of violence, ahead of

social, ethnic and military clashes. Taking a closer look at

the protagonists, it realises that the security forces are one

of the main stakeholders in this regard, after political and

ethnic groups. In many cases in Nigeria, it is of course

difficult to differentiate the various actors. Sometimes,

armed gangs are recorded as both political and criminal. But

if considered to distinguish between the two, political groups

and security forces appear to cause more political-related

violent deaths than criminal organisation (Nigeria watch: 3rd

Report on violence, 2006-2011).

18

The Youth Dimension and Violence

Youth are frequently at the forefront of many of rebellions

and secessionist movement as they often see themselves at the

vanguard of the struggle for the emancipation of their

respective interests. In Nigeria, weak economic and political

structures have had a negative impact on the material

conditions of the youth and their social and political

culture. With limited choice and opportunities, including lack

of access to good education, employment and functioning health

system, Nigerian youth have had to subsist at the margins of

the state (Olanisakin: 2008). The accompanying frustrations

and consequent resentment against those perceived to be

enjoying the few available opportunities can lead to the

emergence of ‘desperadoes’ resolved to survive by any means

possible and wherever available.

Oil theft, illegal oil bunkering and sea piracy

The trade in stolen oil helps other transnational criminal

networks to spread across the Gulf of Guinea, creating global

links between oil thieves, pirates and traffickers in arms and

drugs. The damage caused by oil theft also often forces oil

companies to shut pipeline down. As a result, Nigeria is

producing oil at 400,000 b/d below its capacity of 2.5 million

barrels per day. Oil theft cost Nigeria, Africa’s second-

biggest economy after South Africa’s as much as 8 billion USD

a year. Averages of 100,000 barrel a day (b/d) were stolen in

the first quarter of this year 2013. Politicians, security

forces, militants, oil-industry staff, oil traders and members

19

of local communities all profit from “bunkering” of oil (John:

2013).

At the smallest scale, telltale plumes of smoke rise from

illegal refineries in the Niger Deltas labyrinthine creeks.

But large-scale bunkering involves siphoning oil from

pipelines on land or under water and loading it onto small

barges, from which it transferred to bigger ships in the Gulf

of Guinea that carry the stuff to international refiners.

Nigerian military has become deeply implicated in oil theft

since an amnesty was declared with militants. The military now

control the oil platforms, not the militants as it was before.

Most of the oil is being stolen by the rich; it is dishonest

for government and the oil companies to blame the poor for

stealing the oil. The people in the community are just the

foot soldiers. Clearly this is a sophiscated organisation.

Where do people get vessels, the money for bribes and

security? It cost millions. What the poor takes is very small.

The racket goes deep in to the security and political systems.

According to Stakeholder Democracy Network (SDN) each tapping

point can earn more than 50,000 USD a month but its investors

most pay armed guards, the military, contractors, local

communities and even oil company staffs.

IMPLICATION OF SECURITY CHALLENGES IN

NIGERIA

The growing rate of insecurity in Nigeria has kept the country

under siege. In Nigeria today, there are contentions as to

20

whether or not the system of national security is functioning

effectively. A number of public analysts freely opine that not

much is being done to combat crime in the face of the

resource. It is however noted that security challenges in

Nigeria are inextricably linked with history, culture, social

structure and economic conditions. Security challenges in

Nigeria may range from low level civil disorder, large scale

violence, even armed insurgency or terrorism. These threats

may be directed against citizens or the organs and

infrastructure of the state itself. Foreign powers may also

act as a threat to a country’s security by either committing

or sponsoring terrorism or rebellion without actually

declaring war (Gbanite: 2001).

The Nigeria’s security challenges are increasingly defined by

fragmentation of political authority, mounting political

influence of armed sub-state actors and increased vigilantism.

Perhaps the greatest and predominant security challenges in

Nigeria today is terrorism or terrorism related.

Major Challenges

Ongoing Boko Haram Crisis;

Ethnic and Religious violence;

Communal violence;

Niger Delta Militants;

Kidnapping and hostage taking;

Political Assassination;

Electoral violence;

Oil theft, illegal oil bunkering and sea piracy;

21

Youth violence and unemployment among others.

Youth Question

The youth serve as the cannon fodders of most of these

problems. The entire militant in the Niger Delta and

fundamentalist groups in the country are youth movements.

Lack of sound youth development programme account for

this.

Most of those killed are young people.

THE WAY FORWARD

In the Grand strategy for National security, security was

defined as: the aggregation of the security interest of all

individuals, communities, ethnic groups, political entities

and institutions which inhabit the territory of Nigeria. The

Grand strategy specifically states that the paramount

importance is attached to safety, security and the prosperity

of Individuals and institutions within Nigeria and what

belongs to Nigeria and Nigerians abroad (Albert: 2004).

The importance attached to security was well captured in the

Nigerian constitution of 1999: section 14 (2) (6) of the

constitution state that; the security and welfare of the

people shall be the primary purpose of the government:

Invariably therefore the constitution has saddled the

government with the responsibility of safeguarding lives,

property, welfare of Nigerians against both internal and

external threats including other forms of danger. Thus it is

incumbent on the Government to monitor public order and

22

safety, including law and order. It is however to be noted

that given the broader perspective of the national security,

government agencies alone cannot provide the desired peaceful

environment. Therefore, everybody has a role to play at

enhancing the national security and security is and should be

everybody’s business.

The way to overcome many of the security challenges is for

Nigeria to deepen her efforts at nation-building, take a hard

look at the root causes of the current problems in order to

find lasting solutions. These are some of the highlighted

measures which Nigeria has to adopt to alleviate the effects

of the security challenges which include the following;

Establishment of comprehensive data base to capture

relevant security data threats;

To improve the level of infrastructure, so also the

quality of health services, education, housing, road,

power supply among others;

Public enlightenment to improve security consciousness;

Reorganisation of security agencies;

Inter-agency cooperation within and among the security

agencies by sharing relevant intelligence information

amongst them;

Job creation among the youth and poverty alleviation;

Good Governance and Social Justice among others.

CONCLUSION

23

Nigeria’s security concerns and threat perception emanated

from many quarters. Over the years, the inability of the

government to address the root causes of dissatisfaction,

anger and agitation among various groups in the country

resulted in serious security challenges confronting the

contemporary Nigerian state. This ugly situation has not only

denied the Nigerian government enormous revenues, but also led

to serious problems such as unemployment, infrastructural

decay, and poor image of Nigeria at regional and global scene

among others. These problems are traceable to internal

security challenges in Nigeria occasioned by the activities of

Militias, Boko Haram group, Kidnapping, armed robbery and oil

bunkering among others.

Youth in Nigeria have in the process become valuable allies or

potential adversaries. Warring communities and groups

hurriedly recruit youth to stock their fighting machine and

gain advantage. The poor performance of the economy and state

institutional exploitation of unemployed youth are critically

for youth participation in conflict which create an unsecured

environment for institutional development. Many youth in

Nigeria crystallized in to dreaded groups that swelled their

ranks rapidly and used violence that affected the psyche of

Nigerian society and even the international community. Youth

are also use as an instrument of political violence in order

for the elites to acquire and maintain political power, and

they are bequeathed only on the culture of violence.

In consideration of the consequences of these challenges on

the Nigerian state and to save the country from the brink of24

total collapse, the need for good governance, justice, equity,

and tolerance among ethnic nationalities as well as religious

groups in Nigeria, is advocated and should be rigorously

pursued by both the government and the Nigerian people.

REFERENCES

Abubakar A, 2005. The Challenges of Security in Nigeria. News

watch Magazine, February 21, 2005.

Aghedo I and et’ al, 2009. “When the panacea becomes the

problem: The Niger Delta question and the Federal

solution in Nigeria”. Nigerian Journal of politics and

public policy. 5 (1 and 2).

Albert I O, 2004. Explaining the Security Challenges in

Contemporary Nigeria. Institute of African Studies

University of Ibadan, Ibadan press.

Anosike P. (October 6, 2010). Ohanaeze tasks FG on security.

Daily Sun Newspaper pg. 8.

Amaizu E. (October 8, 2008). 90 Year Old Royal Father

kidnapped in Delta. Vanguard Newspaper pg 10.

25

Akintunde C K, 2002. “Do or Die”, The week, Nov. 4. 2002

Aliu A et al, 2010. “Reign of Armed Gangs on the roads, homes,

dims Nigeria’s security Bar”, The Guardian, Friday, April

9.

Eme O I, 2004. “Insecurity Question in Nigeria: A thematic

Exposition,” The academy, vol. 4. No, 4 (July)

Fanaro A. (July 2, 2009). Nigeria’s national security in an

age of anxiety. The guardian Newspaper, p. 7.

Gbanite M. (January 8, 2001). National security and

intelligence in Nigeria under democracy: The way forward.

Next News, p. 4.

Ginifer J and et al, 2005. Armed Violence and Poverty in

Nigeria. Centre for international cooperation and

security, University of Bradford.

George T A, 2011. America’s Intervention in Boko Haram. IFRA

Research fellow institute University of Ibadan, Nigeria.

Hill J N C, 2012. Nigeria since Independence: Forever Fragile?

First published 2012, Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

Human Right Watch, January 2013

Ibrahim J and Igbuzor O, 2002. “Memorandum submitted to the

presidential committee on National security in Nigeria.

Isine I.( August 3, 2007). Militancy: Bayelsa state asked FG

to be of up

26

James Gow and et al, 2013. Militancy and Violence in West

Africa: Religion, Politics, and

Radicalisation. First published 2013 by Rout ledge, USA

John Vidal, 2013. £ 1 billion a month: The spiralling cost of

oil theft in Nigeria. The observe, Sunday 6 October 2013. Port

Harcourt.

Madike I, 2010. “Living on the Edge of Insecurity”, Sunday

independent, April 11.

Mbadiwe K O, 2012. A Nigerian political Biography, 1915-1990

by Hollis R. Lynch. Palgrave Macmillan, USA.

Olonsisakin F, 2008. In the line of fire. BBC Focus on Africa,

(April-June, 2008).

Robert D Kaplan, 1994. The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the

Dreams of the post cold war. Random House New York.

27

28