By Audu Liberty Oseni
Nigeria’s persistent insecurity is neither sudden nor inexplicable. It is the predictable result of long-standing elite compromise that has weakened state institutions, distorted security governance, and undermined public trust. Over the past 15 years, violent conflict has led to mass killings, displacement, the abandonment of farmlands and schools, and deepening poverty and hunger across several regions of the country.
Despite constitutional responsibilities, the Nigerian state has progressively lost the moral and institutional capacity to protect lives and property. This deterioration is not accidental. It reflects a pattern in which political, military, and economic elites avoid accountability, protect key perpetrators, and prioritise political interests over national security. When powerful actors benefit from disorder, insecurity becomes entrenched.
A major driver of this crisis is the failure of conflict communication. Rather than promoting transparency, credibility, and public engagement, official communication around insecurity is often dominated by denial, propaganda, and misinformation. This communication culture has not only impeded public understanding of the crisis but also eroded confidence in state institutions.
A striking example is the case of Brigadier-General M. Uba. When ISWAP captured him and later released a video of his gruesome killing, the military initially denied the incident, with the Acting Director of Army Public Relations, Lt.-Col. Appolonia Anele, describing the reports as “fake” and “misleading.” Such contradictions are not minor communication errors—they reflect deeper institutional reluctance to acknowledge security failures and a persistent attempt to manage optics rather than reality. This undermines public trust and weakens the legitimacy of security agencies.
The consequences of these systemic failures are well documented. Human Rights Watch reports over 11 major attacks on schools by Boko Haram and bandits, resulting in the abduction of more than 1,600 children. Media investigations show that over 40,000 people have been displaced due to insecurity, while at least 965 soldiers and police officers have been killed in various attacks over a two-year period. These figures should have triggered a comprehensive, whole-of-government response. Instead, the state has often resorted to silence, denial, or politically curated narratives.
Nigeria cannot continue to recycle insecurity through propaganda-driven communication. Effective security governance requires truth-telling, transparency, and participatory communication that acknowledges realities, builds public trust, and engages communities in co-producing solutions. The state and its elite must embrace a communication culture rooted in honesty rather than performance; accountability rather than blame-shifting; and citizen engagement rather than institutional defensiveness.
Addressing insecurity in Nigeria will require more than military operations. It demands the courage to confront facts, admit failures, and rebuild state legitimacy. Transparent conflict communication is not a public relations option—it is a governance necessity. Until Nigeria adopts truth-based communication and the political will to confront elite compromise, insecurity will remain cyclical and unresolved.
● Liberty Oseni, PhD, is the Director, Centre for Development Communication, and sent this via email.
