14/11/2025
Sovereignty is supposed to be a country’s first line of protection. Yet today Nigeria’s global posture and domestic security paint a more complicated picture.
First, our diplomatic footprint is frayed. More than two years after a mass recall of envoys, a large share of Nigeria’s ~109 diplomatic missions still operate without substantive ambassadors — a gap that weakens our ability to defend national interest, manage crises, and sustain commercial and security partnerships.
Second, the international spotlight has become a source of pressure as well as peril. Recent public threats of foreign military action over allegations of mass persecution have shocked many Nigerians and exposed how quickly external rhetoric can escalate into geopolitical risk — even when claims remain disputed. Those statements matter because they change the calculus for foreign partners, investors, and regional security actors.
And yet Nigeria is not helpless on paper. By common measures of capability we rank among Africa’s more powerful militaries — a sign of scale, personnel and equipment. But military ranking and peacekeeping pedigree do not automatically translate into internal security or citizen protection. Our forces are dispersed across counter-insurgency fronts, underfunded in critical logistics, and operating inside a complex political and economic environment that non-state actors exploit.
So why does insecurity persist despite apparent strength? Because modern protection is multi-dimensional:
• Military capacity matters, but so do governance, rule of law, corruption control and community trust.
• Diplomatic reach matters — empty embassies mean fewer ears and fewer advocates when crises cross borders.
• Socio-economic fractures and competition over land, resources and identity create recruitment pools for violent groups.
•