By ALO360 Editorial Board
Nigeria is bleeding at a level that should alarm even the most hardened optimist. The recent killings of senior military officers in the insurgency-ravaged northeast are not just tragic losses; they are damning symbols of a security architecture that is failing from the top down.
Since the inauguration of President Bola Tinubu in May 2023, at least five high-ranking officers, including two brigadier generals, have been killed by terrorist groups such as Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP). These are not isolated battlefield casualties; they are indicators of systemic vulnerability within Nigeria’s military operations.
The losses are too many to be ignored. In November 2025, Brigadier General Musa Uba was killed after being captured by ISWAP fighters in Borno State. Earlier in 2026, Lieutenant Colonel Umar Faruq, commander of the Kukawa base, was killed in another assault, while Lieutenant Colonel S.I. Iliyasu died in an ambush in Konduga. Major U.I. Mairiga, who headed the Mayenti base, was also killed during coordinated attacks on military formations in the state.
Just yesterday, reports filtered that Brigadier General O.O. Braimah had been killed during an attack on a military base in Benisheikh, with claims that the armoured vehicle he attempted to escape in failed to start.
This pattern raises troubling questions. How does a country that allocates trillions to defence still deploy troops with unreliable equipment? What is the state of logistics and preparedness of the Army? Where exactly is the money going?
Nigeria’s 2025 defence and security budget stands at a staggering ₦6.57 trillion. Over the past 15 years, the sector has consumed roughly 12.5 percent of the national budget. Yet, the results on the ground tell a different story; one of deteriorating security, emboldened insurgents, and mounting casualties, even among top-ranking officers. This contradiction is no longer defensible.
When brigadier generals fall in combat, it is not merely a tactical loss; it is a strategic failure. It signals that the enemy is not only resilient but increasingly capable of breaching the highest levels of military command. It also raises deeper concerns about intelligence, logistics, and the overall coordination of Nigeria’s counterinsurgency efforts.
The situation is made worse by persistent allegations of corruption within the system. Reports suggesting that funds meant for maintaining military equipment may have been diverted are not new, but they remain largely unaddressed. If true, such failures are not just administrative lapses; they are deadly.
Meanwhile, the international community is taking notice. The recent advisory by the United States Department of State urging its citizens to reconsider travel to Nigeria, alongside the withdrawal of non-essential embassy staff, sends a clear message: confidence in Nigeria’s security environment is eroding. This is not just a diplomatic signal; it is a reputational crisis.
Back home, the pattern is painfully familiar. Following attacks, the presidency issues statements offering condolences and assurances. After the killing of Braimah, Tinubu praised the “courage and heroism” of the fallen soldiers and urged troops not to be discouraged. These words, while necessary, are no longer sufficient. Nigerians have heard them before.
Only recently, the president visited Jos and declared that the cycle of killings would end. Yet, within 24 hours, fresh violence erupted in parts of the country. Such rapid contradictions between promise and reality only deepen public distrust and reinforce the perception of a government struggling to assert control.
Nigeria is now ranked the fourth most terrorised country in the world, according to the Global Terrorism Index. This is not a position any nation should occupy, least of all one with Nigeria’s resources and potential.
The truth is stark: increased spending without accountability has yielded diminishing returns. A bloated budget cannot substitute for strategic clarity, operational efficiency, and political will. Throwing money at insecurity without fixing the underlying systemic issues is akin to pouring water into a leaking basket.
President Tinubu must confront this reality with urgency and honesty.
First, there must be a transparent audit of defence spending, with a focus on procurement, maintenance, and deployment of military assets. Second, the government must strengthen intelligence gathering and inter-agency coordination. These areas remain weak links in Nigeria’s security chain. Third, there must be accountability for failures, especially where negligence or corruption is suspected.
Most importantly, leadership must move beyond rhetoric.
The repeated loss of lives, both civilian and military, is not just a security issue; it is a governance crisis. Nigerians are not asking for perfection; they are demanding protection. They are asking for a government that can secure its territory, defend its people, and justify the enormous resources allocated to that task.
Anything less is unacceptable.
Until these questions are answered and decisive action is taken, the deaths of Nigeria’s soldiers — including its most senior officers — will continue to stand as a grim indictment of the presidency.