By Headlinenews.news Security & National Interest Desk
A recent disclosure that a Katsina State lawmaker engaged in negotiations with armed bandits has reignited deep concerns about Nigeria’s counterterrorism strategy, particularly at a time when the Federal Government has publicly signaled a tougher stance with the appointment of a new Minister of Defence and renewed security cooperation with international partners, including the United States.
The incident exposes a troubling lack of strategic unity within Nigeria’s security architecture. While federal counterterrorism leaders warn against engagement with terrorists, some political actors at sub-national levels appear to pursue parallel approaches that directly contradict global counterterrorism doctrine.
Security experts warn that mixed messaging emboldens violent groups, undermines military operations, and weakens Nigeria’s credibility with allies.
National Patriots strongly condemns any engagement that portrays terrorists as “honorable” or legitimate community actors. Such actions undermine national security and embolden criminal networks. Counterterrorism requires a single, unified doctrine—one voice, one strategy—led by professionals trained in modern warfare and intelligence. From the National Security Adviser to the Ministers of Defense, Nigeria’s security architecture must be aligned, disciplined, and uncompromising. Negotiating with armed abductors is not peacebuilding; it is surrender. Public officials, especially democratically elected lawmakers who deviate from established counterterrorism policy,[as contained in this Video] weaken the state and betray victims. Nigeria must act decisively now and restore professionalism, unity, and zero tolerance for terror in line with global standards if we expect foreign investment and acceptability in the Comite of Nations for sustainable development.
The National Patriots.
For full detailed reports and global analysis on this video negotiation, visit : www.headlinenews.news
Global Standard: No Negotiation with Terrorists
Internationally, the position is clear and consistent: states do not negotiate with terrorists.
The United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy (2006)—to which Nigeria is a signatory—urges member states to:
“Deny terrorists the means to carry out attacks and to reject any actions that legitimize or reward terrorism.”
Similarly, the United States’ counterterrorism policy, often summarized as “no concessions to terrorists,” is rooted in decades of experience showing that negotiations:
Incentivize kidnappings and violence,
Create an economy of terror,
And turn criminal groups into political actors.
This doctrine is shared by the EU, NATO, and the African Union’s 2014 Protocol on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism, which discourages engagement that confers legitimacy on armed non-state actors.
Nigeria cannot credibly seek joint operations, intelligence sharing, or advanced military support while tolerating local negotiations that contradict these principles.
Nigeria’s Legal Position: Terrorism Is a Crime, Not a Community Dispute
Nigeria’s laws are explicit.
Under the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, terrorism includes:
> “Any act deliberately done with the intention of seriously intimidating a population, compelling a government, or destabilizing fundamental political, economic or social structures.”
The Act criminalizes:
Financing terrorism,
Supporting terrorist groups,
And any act that aids, abets, or legitimizes terrorist activities.
Negotiating with armed groups that:
Carry illegal weapons,
Abduct citizens for ransom,
Kill, rape, and displace communities,
raises serious legal questions. Public officials who engage such groups outside lawful security frameworks risk violating national law.
Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, Section 14(2)(b), states:
> “The security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.”
That duty cannot be fulfilled by bargaining with criminals who profit from violence.
From Dialogue to an Industry of Terror
Over the past decade, Nigeria has oscillated between military action and “dialogue” with violent groups—particularly in the North-West.
The results are sobering:
Kidnappings have increased, not declined.
Ransom payments have become normalized.
Armed groups now operate openly, grant interviews, host gatherings, and dictate terms.
What began as ad-hoc conflict management has evolved into a profitable criminal industry, with terror groups functioning like cartels.
Comparative experience is instructive:
Colombia reduced kidnappings only after ending ransom culture and restoring state monopoly on force.
Sri Lanka defeated the LTTE by eliminating parallel negotiations and unifying command.
Algeria curtailed insurgency by centralizing counterterrorism under experienced military leadership.
The lesson is consistent: fragmented strategies prolong conflict.
The Strategic Problem: Disunity Within Nigeria’s Security Architecture
The Katsina incident highlights a deeper structural flaw: Nigeria’s counterterrorism effort lacks a single, enforced doctrine.
When:
Federal leaders say “no negotiations,”
State actors negotiate,
Lawmakers intervene independently,
terrorists receive a clear signal: the state is divided.
Security analysts stress that effective counterterrorism requires:
Unified command and control,
Clear rules of engagement,
And strict civilian oversight aligned with military doctrine.
Anything less invites exploitation.
Why an Overhaul Is Now Urgent
Nigeria’s security environment has changed. Terrorist groups now use:
Encrypted communications,
Drones and surveillance,
Sophisticated financing networks.
Responding effectively requires experienced military leadership with:
Proven counterterrorism credentials,
Joint-operations expertise,
Modern technology integration.
An overhaul of the security architecture—placing professionally trained counterterrorism commanders at the center—is no longer optional.
This is also what international partners expect. The United States, in particular, conditions deep security cooperation on:
Professionalized command structures,
Clear rules against negotiating with terrorists,
And accountability for collaborators.
The Legal and Moral Imperative: No Legitimacy for Terrorists
Perhaps the most damaging consequence of negotiation is legitimization.
When terrorists are treated as community stakeholders:
Their crimes are normalized,
Victims are silenced,
And the state’s moral authority collapses.
It is untenable to call armed abductors “community members” while they:
Carry illegal weapons,
Enslave schoolchildren,
Extort entire regions.
This contradiction erodes public trust and fuels cynicism.
What Must Be Done—Immediately
Security and legal experts recommend urgent steps:
1. Declare all unauthorized negotiations with terrorists illegal, with clear penalties.
2. Prosecute public officials who engage armed groups outside lawful mandates.
3. Unify counterterrorism doctrine across federal and state levels.
4. Restructure security leadership around experienced counterterrorism professionals.
5. End ransom culture through enforcement and victim support mechanisms.
6. Reassert state monopoly on force decisively and lawfully.
Conclusion: Unity of Strategy or Perpetual Insecurity
Nigeria stands at a crossroads.
The appointment of a new Defence Minister and renewed engagement with international partners signal intent. But intent must be matched by discipline, unity, and enforcement.
You cannot fight terrorism with divided strategies.
You cannot defeat criminals by rewarding them.
And you cannot win global support while sending conflicting signals at home.
If Nigeria is serious about ending insecurity, negotiation with terrorists must end—completely, legally, and immediately. The state must speak with one voice, act with one doctrine, and enforce the law without exception.
Anything less will only deepen the crisis.
The National Patriots strongly condemns any engagement that portrays terrorists as “honourable” or legitimate community actors. Such actions undermine national security and embolden criminal networks. Counterterrorism requires a single, unified doctrine—one voice, one strategy—led by professionals trained in modern warfare and intelligence. From the National Security Adviser to the Ministers of Defence, Nigeria’s security architecture must be aligned, disciplined, and uncompromising. Negotiating with armed abductors is not peacebuilding; it is surrender. Public officials who deviate from established counterterrorism policy weaken the state and betray victims. Nigeria must act decisively now and restore professionalism, unity, and zero tolerance for terror.
Headlinenews.news Special Investigative Report.
