The recent destruction of over 2,400 illicit arms at the Muhammadu Buhari Cantonment in Giri, Abuja, marked a significant yet perplexing event in Nigeria’s ongoing battle against insecurity. Organized by the National Centre for the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons (NCCSALW), the ceremony saw high-ranking military officials and government representatives, including National Security Adviser Malam Nuhu Ribadu, gather to witness the destruction of weapons that could potentially arm over two battalions.
While the act was celebrated as a triumph against illegal arms, it raised critical questions about Nigeria’s security strategies. Ribadu’s assertion that soldiers and police were implicated in selling arms to terrorists and bandits was quickly challenged by the Defence Headquarters, indicating a potential rift in the narrative surrounding the nation’s security challenges.
In a country struggling with security threats and financial constraints, the decision to destroy arms is bewildering. Even if these weapons are deemed unserviceable or outdated, they could have been repurposed for other security forces, such as the Civilian Joint Task Force (JTF) actively combating terrorism in the North-East. This raises the question: why would a nation so in need of arms willingly destroy what little it has?
General Christopher Musa, Chief of Defence Staff, has previously lamented the challenges faced in acquiring military equipment, asserting that even when funds are available, Western suppliers often refuse to sell arms to Nigeria. This history of arms procurement difficulties, dating back to the Nigeria Civil War, underscores the urgency of enhancing Nigeria’s military capabilities. Yet, at an event showcasing the destruction of arms, the discomfort of high-ranking officials like General Musa becomes apparent.
The destruction of these weapons appears counterproductive, especially when historical precedents highlight a clear need for military resources. Past administrations, including that of former President Jonathan, faced obstacles in procuring arms, leading to desperate attempts to circumvent international restrictions. Instances such as the seizure of $9.3 million in cash for intended arms purchases by South African authorities reveal the lengths to which Nigeria has gone in search of military support.
While the Director General of NCCSALW, retired DIG Johnson Kokumo, categorized the destroyed arms as a mix of unserviceable and decommissioned weapons, he hinted at future destructions of newly seized arms. This raises an unsettling prospect: if Nigeria continues to destroy weapons, including those recently confiscated, what does it say about our ability to secure and arm our forces against mounting threats?
Moreover, this pattern reflects a troubling mentality within the security apparatus. The focus on destruction rather than repurposing raises concerns about priorities in arms management and procurement. It highlights a broader issue of reliance on foreign arms, neglecting Nigeria’s rich history of indigenous arms production. Pre-colonial Nigeria was known for its arms manufacturing, particularly in regions like Awka, which were systematically dismantled by colonial powers.
The current security climate demands a critical reassessment of how Nigeria manages its military resources. It is imperative to move away from a reliance on foreign arms, investing instead in local manufacturing capabilities. By doing so, Nigeria can build a self-sustaining military framework better equipped to respond to its unique security challenges.
In summary, the destruction of arms amid ongoing security challenges raises pressing questions about Nigeria’s strategic approach to military preparedness. Rather than contributing to national security, such actions may undermine efforts to combat the very threats the nation faces. A shift towards repurposing existing resources, investing in local production, and fostering a cohesive strategy for arms management is essential for a resilient and secure Nigeria.
