By Adebayor Adetunji, PhD

In the broad and competitive terrain of Nigerian politics, loyalty is often spoken of, yet rarely sustained with consistency, courage and visible action. But within the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, one Northern appointee has demonstrated this quality not as a slogan, but as a lifestyle, as a political principle and as a national duty — Hon. (Dr.) Bello Muhammad Matawalle, Minister of State for Defence.

Since his appointment, Matawalle has stood out as one of the most loyal, outspoken and dependable pillars of support for the Tinubu administration in the North. He has never hesitated, not for a moment, to stand firmly behind the President. At every turn of controversy, in moments of public misunderstanding, and at times when political alliances waver, Matawalle has continued to speak boldly in defence of the government he serves. For him, loyalty is not an occasional gesture — it is a commitment evidenced through voice, alignment, and sacrifice.

Observers within and outside the ruling party recall numerous occasions where the former Zamfara State Governor took the front line in defending the government’s policies, actions and direction, even when others chose neutrality or silence. His interventions, always direct and clear, reflect not just loyalty to a leader, but faith in the future the President is building, a future anchored on economic reform, security revival, institutional strengthening and renewed national unity.

But Matawalle’s value to the administration does not stop at loyalty. In performance, visibility and active delivery of duty, he stands among the most engaged ministers currently serving in the federal cabinet. His portfolio, centred on defence and security, one of the most sensitive sectors in the country, demands expertise, availability and unbroken presence. Matawalle has not only embraced this responsibility, he has carried it with remarkable energy.

From high-level security meetings within Nigeria to strategic engagements across foreign capitals, Matawalle has represented the nation with clarity and confidence. His participation in defence summits, international cooperation talks, and regional security collaborations has positioned Nigeria as a voice of influence in global security discourse once again. At home, his involvement in military policy evaluation, counter-terrorism discussions and national defence restructuring reflects a minister who understands the urgency of Nigeria’s security needs, and shows up to work daily to address them.

Away from partisan battles, Matawalle has proven to be a bridge — between North and South, civilian leadership and military institutions, Nigeria and the wider world. His presence in government offers a mix of loyalty, performance and deep grounding in national interest, the type of partnership every President needs in turbulent times.

This is why calls, campaigns and whisperings aimed at undermining or isolating him must be resisted. Nigeria cannot afford to discourage its best-performing public servants, nor tighten the atmosphere for those who stand firmly for unity and national progress. The nation must learn to applaud where there is performance, support where there is loyalty, and encourage where there is commitment.

Hon. Bello Matawalle deserves commendation, not suspicion. Support — not sabotage. Encouragement, not exclusion from political strategy or power alignment due to narrow interests.

History does not forget those who stood when it mattered. Matawalle stands today for President Tinubu, for security, for loyalty, for national service. And in that place, he has earned a space not only in the present political equation, but in the future judgment of posterity.

Nigeria needs more leaders like him. And Nigeria must say so openly.

Adebayor Adetunji, PhD
A communication strategist and public commentator
Write from Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria

By Sani Khamees

In 2017, while serving in Kano through the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) scheme in Nigeria, I crossed paths once more with Professor Horace Campbell. An invitation arrived at the department of Political Science, Aminu Kano College of Islamic and Legal Studies, summoning us to hear Campbell speak on his latest book, ‘Global NATO and Catastrophic Failure in Libya: Lessons for Africa in the forging of African unity.’ I shared with my HOD that I had first met Campbell in 2010, during his condolence visit for the late Dr Tajudeen Abdulraheem, my former school director in Funtua. My HOD eagerly accepted, and we prepared for the evening. After introducing myself to Campbell, he handed me his book and asked for a summary. His work reveals how Western powers, under the banner of NATO, used the UN Security Council’s Resolution 1973 and the so-called ‘responsibility to protect’ as a pretext to invade and devastate Libya (Campbell,2013).

The Libyan uprisings emerged from the Arab Spring, which began in Tunisia in 2010 and spread across Egypt, Yemen, Syria, Bahrain, and finally Libya. After Tunisia’s Bin Ali fled and Egypt’s Mubarak was toppled by a tidal wave of revolution, Benghazi erupted in rebellion just days later. But the West soon intervened, transforming a popular movement into an armed struggle. In response, Gaddafi threatened to unleash the full force of the state to crush the discord.

By February 21, 2011, Western media had rewritten the story, claiming that innocent civilians faced imminent massacre by the Libyan army. Headlines like “Gaddafi Warns of ‘Rivers of Blood’ as UN Prepares to Vote” from The Guardian and reports from CNN suggesting the urgent need for intervention due to potential atrocities influenced public perception. The United States, Britain, and France seized the moment, pushing a UN Security Council resolution under the guise of ‘responsibility to protect.’ This cleared their path into Libya, leading to Gaddafi’s death and the takeover of the nation’s political and economic future.

In the aftermath of Libya’s collapse, chaos swept across the Sahel as militias like Boko Haram, Jama’at Nusrat ul-Islam wa al-Muslimin (JIMIM), Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS), Islamic State – West Africa Province (ISWAP), Bandits, and Ansaru surged back into prominence. The collapse led to a vacuum of power and increased availability of weapons when Gaddafi’s vast armory was looted and diffused across the region. These armaments and the instability spurred by Libya’s breakdown facilitated the resurgence and strengthening of militant groups in surrounding areas, including Nigeria. In Nigeria, Boko Haram in the Northeast and Bandits in the Northwest became household names, operating mainly in the country’s northern regions. Boko Haram launched its campaign in Borno State with the rallying cry ‘no to western education’, then spread to Yobe, Gombe, Bauchi, and even Kano, areas with deep Muslim roots. Their reign of terror included bombings of worship centers, hospitals, markets, and busy roads, as well as kidnappings for forced marriage, abuse, and other social vices.

Rivaling Boko Haram in brutality are the armed bandits who first emerged in Zamfara State and quickly spread to Sokoto, Kebbi, Niger, and Katsina, now encroaching on the north-central states of Plateau, Benue, and Kwara. Unlike Boko Haram, these bandits are driven by profit, engaging in kidnappings for ransom, assaults on villages and towns, and the deliberate killing of civilians.

Both Boko Haram and the armed bandits have left a trail of devastation: thousands of civilians killed, worship centers and farmlands destroyed, and entire villages emptied as people flee for safety. Their violence knows no boundaries of religion, tribe, or ethnicity. Boko Haram has bombed mosques, including the Kano city mosque near the Emir’s palace, killing over 120 and injuring around 200. (wikipedia, 2014) Bandits have kidnapped thousands and indiscriminately attacked travelers and villagers. Their latest atrocity saw worshippers in Mantau village, Malumfashi, gunned down during dawn prayers.

It is a fact that most terror attacks in Nigeria occur in the Muslim-majority north. While these groups show no regard for religion or ethnicity, it is the Muslim population that suffers most, simply because they are the majority. However, the narrative of a targeted genocide against Christians fails to hold when we incorporate the experiences of both Muslim and Christian communities in the north. According to a report by the International Crisis Group, the majority of attacks and incidents of violence between 2010 and 2019 occurred in northern regions, with Muslim communities being disproportionately affected. Studies also suggest that around 8 out of 10 victims of Boko Haram’s attacks are Muslims (Group, 2010).  Testimonies from these communities reveal a shared struggle against violence and a mutual rejection of divisive labels imposed from outside. A Muslim community leader from Maiduguri described a neighborhood where Christians and Muslims live side by side, united in their fear and condemnation of extremist violence. Similarly, a Christian resident of Kaduna expressed that they view their Muslim neighbors as partners in resilience rather than adversaries. Such perspectives challenge simplistic genocide narratives and highlight how local identities and solidarities complicate the external binary framing of conflict in Nigeria.

Echoing the tactics used to justify intervention in Libya, a recent claim by American politician Bill Maher alleges that Christians in Nigeria are being targeted for genocide. He asserts that Islamists have killed over 100,000 Christians and destroyed 18,000 churches, painting a picture of a systematic campaign to erase Christianity from Nigeria. These claims are fabrications, designed to set the stage for another ‘responsibility to protect’ intervention. Nigeria’s wealth in natural resources and oil has long made it a target for Western interests.

It is clear that the US seeks to repeat the Libyan scenario in Nigeria. Western media excels at crafting divisive narratives that pave the way for imperial ambitions. This pattern is not new. Samir Amin, in ‘The Liberal Virus: Permanent War and the Americanization of the World,’ describes how Hitler used the Reichstag fire as a ploy for repression, drawing parallels to George Bush’s invasion of Iraq and NATO’s intervention in Libya (Amin, 2004). Now, the same playbook is being opened for Nigeria.

However, it is crucial to recognize the active role Nigerian actors, both in person and groups, play in countering these narratives and steering their own destiny. The Nigerian government has engaged in diplomatic dialogues and sought the support of international bodies to challenge misleading accounts and protect the country’s sovereignty.

Additionally, vibrant civil society organizations in Nigeria work tirelessly to foster inter-communal dialogue and resist attempts to sow discord. Nigerian media outlets, both traditional and digital, have amplified local voices and stories that underline a unified resistance against manipulative foreign interests. These efforts highlight Nigeria’s agency in shaping its future and resisting external exploitation.

Sani Khamees is a community activist and Pan-Africanist from Funtua, Katsina state of Nigeria.
Facebook: SaniKhamees@facebook.com
Twitter (X): @Khamees _sa54571

References
Campbell, H (2013). Global NATO and Catastrophic Failure in Libya: Lessons for Africa in the forging of African unity. New York, Monthly Review Press

Amin, S. (2004). The Liberal Virus: Permanent War and the Americanization of the World. Monthly Review Press. https://nyupress.org/9781583671078/the-liberal-virus/

(2014). 2014 Kano attack. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Kano_attack

Group, I. C. (2010). Northern Nigeria: Background to Conflict. International Crisis Group. https://ciaotest.cc.columbia.edu/wps/icg/0020843/index.html

Amin, S. (2004). The Liberal Virus: Permanent War and the Americanization of the World. Monthly Review Press. https://nyupress.org/9781583671078/the-liberal-virus/

(2020). 90% of Boko Haram’s victims are Muslims — Buhari. https://www.vanguardngr.com/2020/02/90-of-boko-harams-victims-are-muslims-buhari/

Despite the maelstrom of criticism and political backlash that has engulfed Kaduna state’s governance under Governor Uba Sani, the latest indices of easing business by the Nigerian Presidential Council PEBEC have catapulted the state to the pole position, nipping at the heels of Lagos state. This stunning revelation has sent shockwaves across the nation, with many wondering how Kaduna state managed to turn the corner and emerge as a beacon of hope in the region.

The “Ease of Doing Business” report has ranked Kaduna state a respectable second, with an impressive score of 65.1%, trailing only Lagos state, which boasts an enviable 85.6%. The other contenders, Oyo State, Federal Capital Territory (FCT), and Ogun State, have been relegated to third, fourth, and fifth positions, with scores of 62.7%, 61.0%, and 59.9%, respectively. This remarkable turnaround is a testament to the state’s resilience and determination to rise above the challenges that have held it back for so long.

This remarkable turnaround is a blessing in disguise, considering the dark days of insecurity that once shrouded Kaduna state like a pall. The state was previously ravaged by armed banditry and kidnappings, which had sent investors packing and crippled economic activity. However, thanks to the recent community-based peace deal, the frontline local government areas have been able to breathe a sigh of relief, and the state’s economic prospects are looking brighter than ever.

Kaduna state’s journey to this point has not been without its challenges. The state has been mired in political logjam and accusations, with the former administration casting a long shadow over the current government’s efforts. However, the “Ease of Doing Business” report is a vindication of Governor Uba Sani’s tireless efforts to woo foreign investors and create a conducive business environment. The governor’s recent trip to Kuwait, which resulted in a grant of $63 million for out-of-school children, teacher training, and rehabilitation of classrooms, is a case in point.

While some critics have dismissed the governor’s foreign trips as globe-trotting, the positive results are beginning to trickle in, and they are a testament to the governor’s unwavering commitment to improving the lives of Kaduna state residents. The improved security, coupled with the government’s focus on industrialization, economic development, and infrastructure, is expected to have a multiplier effect on the state’s economy, creating jobs, stimulating growth, and enhancing the overall quality of life for citizens.

As Kaduna state continues to navigate the complex web of challenges and opportunities, it is imperative that the government remains focused on consolidating the gains made so far. The state must continue to implore all its arsenal to maintain the fragile peace, ensure free movement, and create an enabling environment for businesses to thrive. If the current trajectory is anything to go by, Kaduna state is poised to become the next big thing in Nigeria’s economic landscape, a shining example of what can be achieved with vision, determination, and a commitment to progress.

(Zubair Abdurrauf Idris is a public affairs analyst, wrote from Birnin-Gwari)