The near daily news headlines coming out Benue are grim, wrapped in pain and hopelessness. The insecurity crisis in Benue State occasioning the recent massacre of about 300 citizens and the displacement of over 6,000 did not start yesterday. Government authorities and security apparatus have long been cognisant of this escalating menace, yet they consistently appear unprepared when defenceless civilians fall victim to heavily armed assailants and militant herders wielding sophisticated weaponry.
A critical question demands an answer: What must Benue citizens do to merit the protection that every Nigerian deserves? Citizens of Benue may rightfully ask: Why are we always at the receiving end while those we expect to protect us seem helpless?
Victims of the recent assault on Yelewata, in Benue’s Guma Local Government Area, were mostly women and children shot or burnt to death in their homes as the marauders and armed herders set them ablaze, in what has become known as The Yelewata Massacre. Attacks have been going on for months, and Yelewata highlighted a particular pattern of violence being visited on a people who are usually peaceful agrarians in an area regarded as the breadbasket of Nigeria.
Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu, when he went to Benue, ordered the security apparatus to bring an end to the wave of attacks and killings in the once peaceful state so that everyone would go about their business without fear. They seem to have always failed and the perpetrators have become bolder in their quest to occupy the land, while thousands of landowners and agrarians have been forced to flee their homes and farmlands.
During his visit, President Tinubu told Benue people to try find a way to live together. That is seen as an assumption that the killings are a result of communal disagreement about who owns the land. But is that the true situation in Benue? Are we not making a mistaken diagnosis which will lead to wrong solutions that will not solve the crisis?
The Yelewata Massacre has inflicted severe damage on Nigeria’s international reputation, with global observers expressing horror at the scale and brutality of the violence. The Nigerian Union of Journalists has emphasised that such incidents “erode public confidence in the nation-state, and negatively impact the international image of Nigeria” as “the world has been horrified by the killings” in recent days.
The international condemnation reached the highest levels of global leadership when Pope Leo XIV described the attacks as a “terrible massacre” in which “around 200 people were killed with extreme cruelty,” while offering prayers for Nigeria, which he characterised as “a beloved country so affected by various forms of violence”. The repeated global attention to such tragedies positions Nigeria as a nation unable to fulfil its most basic constitutional obligation to protect its citizens, undermining diplomatic relationships and eroding international confidence in Africa’s most populous democracy.
A crisis that lacks a clear definition and proper diagnosis cannot be effectively resolved. Superficial reconciliation efforts, councils of elders, superficial interfaith dialogues, and imported remedies from foreign contexts that disregard our distinct cultural context offer no sustainable remedy. There is the need to contextualise and tailor solutions to the insecurity challenges in Benue and other parts of Nigeria.
To achieve this, the administration and the elite political class of Benue must take responsibility for the crisis, striving to comprehend and accurately assess its magnitude. The administration must recognise and address the underlying causes of insecurity, which stem from deficiencies in governance and leadership. It should own the crisis and actively work towards reclaiming territories overtaken by occupiers or insurgents. For too long, the administration has acted as an outsider, or a standby observer, as if the crisis belonged to the communities only.
Addressing Benue and Nigeria’s security crisis demands a crisis-specific, and location-specific approach that transcends current theoretical models, with the simplistic attempt at generic solutions. Committees or groups that would be set up must be bipartisan and non-sectarian to be able to identify the true perpetrators and provide informed and actionable strategies.
The crisis must be tackled with a comprehensive strategy involving prominent societal figures, including an intentional engagement of community leaders, women’s organisations, media opinion leaders, civic thought-leaders, legal and law enforcement organisations, private security firms, and intelligence agencies.
There must also be cutting-edge technological interventions, including deployment of surveillance systems such as drones equipped with advanced cameras and thermal imaging technology for real-time monitoring, intelligence gathering, utilisation of data analytics, secure communication networks, mobile applications for citizen reporting, and other advanced technological tools to combat insecurity.
Overhauling the security sector to improve training, equipment, and oversight, ensuring effectiveness and accountability is also a must, while there needs to be reinforcement of governance by upholding the rule of law, enhancing public trust, and addressing socio-economic grievances.
Over and above the need to strengthen the security architecture is the formal introduction and embrace of localised community policing to empower local communities in enhancing security. The adoption of regional policing should be fast-tracked to allow localised policing arrangements, intelligence gathering and enhancement of community involvement in security processes.
The Yelewata Massacre serves as yet another tragic milestone in Nigeria’s ignominious security history. Without fundamental changes in approach — moving beyond hollow presidential directives toward comprehensive, technology-enhanced, community-driven security strategies — Benue State will continue to serve as a testament to leadership failure and institutional inadequacy.
