Security at crossroads: Has dialogue with criminals empowered kidnappers?

By Osordi Ayomide 

In recent years, the security situation across the Federal Republic of Nigeria has reached a critical point where policy choices are beginning to define the scale and persistence of insecurity. What was once perceived as an isolated rural crime has transitioned into a coordinated pattern of banditry and kidnapping that now stretches across several regions, leaving communities exposed and the state constantly on the defensive.

At the centre of this worsening reality is a difficult but unavoidable question: has the consistent reliance on dialogue and negotiation with armed groups unintentionally strengthened them? While such engagement is often presented as a humane response aimed at securing the release of abducted victims, its long-term effect appears to have created an incentive structure that criminal groups now actively exploit.

Over time, kidnapping has shifted from a desperate act of violence into something resembling an organised system of extraction. Armed groups have observed, and adapted to, a pattern where pressure is often followed by negotiation, and negotiation frequently leads to financial settlement. In that cycle, ransom becomes not an exception but an expectation, and abduction becomes a predictable route to profit.

This development has fundamentally altered the behaviour of these groups. Rather than operating in fear of swift and decisive state action, many now appear to calculate their operations around the assumption that dialogue will eventually occur. This perception has emboldened their activities, contributing to the expansion of attacks on schools, highways, and rural communities that were previously less frequently targeted.

As a result, bandit networks have not only expanded in number but have also grown more structured and confident. In many affected regions, communities now find themselves caught between survival and uncertainty, with limited assurance of immediate protection. The weakening perception of deterrence has, in some areas, created a vacuum that criminal groups are quick to fill, further deepening the cycle of violence and fear.

Nigeria now stands at a defining crossroads. Continuing along the current path risks further entrenching kidnapping as a parallel economy—one sustained by negotiation, ransom flows, and the perception of state flexibility. The longer this persists, the more difficult it becomes to dismantle the networks that have taken root.

At this stage, a recalibration of strategy is no longer optional but necessary. The state must prioritise intelligence-driven operations, rapid response capacity, and sustained disruption of bandit strongholds. Most importantly, it must avoid reinforcing the incentive structure that has allowed kidnapping to thrive. Only through decisive, coordinated, and consistent action can the authority of the state be restored and the cycle of insecurity begin to break.