The recent revelation by Katsina State Governor, Dikko Radda, that he sanctioned community-led negotiations with bandits presents a troubling shift in Nigeria’s counter-terrorism narrative.
While the Governor reports that these pacts have brought over a year of respite to participating villages, the long-term implications of this strategy suggest a pyrrhic victory. By allowing local communities to broker their own peace with outlaws, the state is effectively outsourcing its primary responsibility, the monopoly on the use of force and setting a precedent that could turn kidnapping and terror into a formalized, lucrative trade.
The fundamental contract between a government and its citizens is the provision of security. When a governor admits that communities approached him because they were not getting the protection they need, it is am admission of state failure. However, the solution, allowing those same vulnerable citizens to sit across the table from their tormentors is not a display of respecting the people’s mandate. Rather, it is a dangerous abdication of duty.
When the government steps aside, it validates the bandits as legitimate political and social actors rather than criminals. This creates a shadow government where the rule of law is replaced by the whims of warlords. If peace is contingent on a local agreement rather than the strength of national security, that peace is only as durable as the bandits’ next demand.
Governor Radda’s observation that perpetrators usually come from other regions to attack these peaceful pockets highlights the most immediate danger: displacement. Security is a zero-sum game in a region infested with bandits. When one community buys its peace, the bandits do not simply retire; they redirect their violence toward neighboring communities that either refuse to negotiate or lack the resources to offer an attractive bargain.
This not in my backyard approach to security destroys the collective front needed to defeat insurgency. It encourages a fragmented landscape where every village is for itself, making it easier for terrorists to isolate and pick off targets.
Perhaps the greatest threat is the economic precedent this sets. Bandits are not ideological rebels; they are criminal entrepreneurs. By allowing negotiations, the government is inadvertently signaling that kidnapping and mass murder are viable paths to a seat at the table.
If these pacts involve any form of protection money or resource concessions as is common in such underground deals, it provides the capital for bandits to purchase more sophisticated weaponry, expand their recruitment of disenfranchised youth and strengthen their intelligence networks against security forces.
Instead of being suppressed, the trade of terror is being incentivized. The message to other criminal groups is clear, if you cause enough mayhem, the state will eventually allow you to dictate the terms of your own existence.
The peace currently enjoyed in parts of Katsina is fragile and deceptive. For true security to take hold, the government must move beyond sanctioned surrender. The Nigeria Customs Service’s recent successes in intercepting illicit goods in Kwara show that intelligence-driven operations are possible, that same vigor must be applied to the Northwest.
The state must regain its territory and its dignity. Security cannot be a private arrangement between a victim and a predator. If the government continues to allow communities to negotiate away their sovereignty, it won’t be long before the bandits move from negotiating with villages to demanding a seat at the highest levels of governance.