Opinion

Quotarization Of Military

Published

5 years ago

December 7, 2020

The Tide newspaper of Wednesday, November 4, 2020, carried an item: “Periscoping America’s Rescue Operation in Nigeria”, written by one Chidi Enyie.
Barrister Enyie must be congratulated for writing such a thoughtful and insightful material, for there are many issues portrayed in that write-up. That an American citizen was kidnapped in Niger Republic and taken to the kidnappers’ criminal hideout in Northern Nigeria, necessitated the American rescue operation in Nigeria.
That the US military can fly over 7000 kilometres to Nigeria to rescue one American citizen demonstrates both responsible governance and professionalism, borne of patriotism. A long time ago, Israeli forces demonstrated similar act of professionalism in a rescue operation at Entebbe airport in Uganda which lasted for 90 minutes.
Enyie would tell us that “the rescue operation has proven that security in the North-East could be contained or ended if the Federal Government exercises the will and determination to do so”. Then, why not!
Did that swift American rescue operation in Nigeria not expose the weakness of the Nigerian military? Did that operation not require intelligence, commitment and modern technology to make it successful? Were there much noise-making and fury before, during and after the operation, enough to create panic in the operational zone? The Nigerian military should learn from the way the American forces handled the operation.
Whatever that necessitated the kidnapping of the American citizen in Niger Republic before being taken to a hideout in Northern Nigeria, the relevant issue is that there is a coordinated network of terrorism. Could such terrorist act not be associated with the Boko Haram or other sister groups? If American forces could carry out such a swift and successful rescue operation, the Nigerian military can also deal decisively with the Boko Haram terrorists. It would be relevant to ask why the Boko Haram scourge in Northern Nigeria cannot be ended. Why was it necessary for someone to suggest a dialogue with the terrorists?
Apart from the speculation that “the fight against Boko Haram is with kid gloves”, there is also a suspicion that the Boko Haram terrorists serve as “bargaining chip”. Since there are militants in the Niger Delta, IPOB in the South-East, then “why not Boko Haram in the North”, as a countervailing force? Since quota system is a common policy in Nigeria, must it begin and end with employments and sharing of resources alone? Does it matter that Boko Haram is the worst terrorist group in Nigeria?
It is worrisome to hear Enyie say that “a military chief who fought Boko Haram to a standstill was removed for being thorough with his job”. A vital question which many Nigerians have asked is what exactly is the demand of the Boko Haram terrorists, for which they must be engaged in dialogue? Niger Delta militants are asking for resource control while IPOB are demanding for a referendum
Is it a rational demand that Nigeria should do away with Western education and lifestyle? If the grouse of the Boko Haram terrorists is that Western education is unacceptable, then IPOB with a demand for a referendum, provides a rational and violent-free solution. Let us sit down in peace and agree which way each group wants to associate with others, rather than a situation where some groups feel that they are more Nigerian than others. Such glaring arrogance tends to fuel the use of militancy as a “bargaining chip”.
There is a valid suspicion that insurgency in the Northeast is pampered by the present administration “with a handful of high ranking soldiers sabotaging the efforts of the Nigerian military”. With the large number of people killed and displaced and property destroyed as a result of the fight against Boko Haram insurgency, can the Nigerian government earn a pass mark in its responsibility of protecting citizens’ lives and property? If the American government can approve the recent rescue operation in Nigeria because of one American citizen, then why would the lives of Nigerians not matter!
There are very many lessons that the federal government can and should learn from the American rescue operation in Nigeria. One of such lessons is that a citizens’ life is important and if such life can be protected by a government, then patriotism can grow and be sustained. The nation would be better and those who govern can be seen as people-friendly.
It is unfortunate but quite true that a large number of Nigerians feel alienated and unhappy with the attitude of government towards its citizens. It is needful to ask why some people should, by utterances and actions, give the impression that they have a superior citizenship than others. Or, can anyone deny that this is not the posture of some Nigerians? If we take the actions, threats and utterances of some Fulanis as examples, it would become clear why some Southerners feel that Nigeria is a divided country.
Why would any herdsman grazing cattle in my farmland threaten me for asking him to leave my farmland? Such act of impunity has become so common that some people feel that herdsmen are being set up deliberately to push some sections of the country to the wall. Even among military officials, do we not find acts and utterances which give the impression that the nation is being held hostage. Does power lie in gun and money?
A nation divided against itself would hardly stand a long time. Therefore, the demand for a thorough national dialogue is a vital means of reducing the growing tension in the land. But there is a fear that those who benefit from the current system would cleverly sabotage such moves. Like every country, Nigeria has its problems which cannot be addressed by subterfuge and blusters.
Dr. Amirize is a retired lecturer from the Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.

Opinion

Kudos Gov Fubara

Published

3 days ago

January 2, 2026

The Tide

Please permit me to use this medium to appreciate our able governor, Siminalayi Fubara for the inauguration of the 14.2-kilometre Obodhi–Ozochi Road in Ahoada-East Local Government Area. This inauguration marks a significant milestone in the history of our communities and deserves commendation. We, the people of Ozochi, are particularly happy because this project has brought long-awaited relief after years of isolation and hardship.

The expression of our traditional ruler, His Royal Highness, Eze Prince Ike Ehie, JP, during the inauguration captured the joy of our people. He said, “our isolation is over.” That reflects the profound impact of this road on daily life, economic activities, and social integration of the people of Ozochi and other neighbouring communities. The road will no doubt ease transportation, improve access to markets and healthcare, and strengthen links between Ahoada, Omoku, and other parts of Rivers State.

The people of Ahoada, Omoku, and indeed Rivers State as a whole are grateful to our dear governor for this laudable achievement and wish him many more successful years in office. We pray that God endows him with more wisdom and strength to continue to pilot the affairs of the state for the benefit of all. As citizens, we should rally behind the governor and support his development agenda. Our politicians and stakeholders should embrace peace and cooperation, as no meaningful progress can be achieved in an atmosphere of conflict. Sustainable development in the state can only thrive where peace prevails.

Samuel Ebiye

Opinion

… And It Came To Pass

Published

3 days ago

January 2, 2026

The Tide

Quote:“Leadership is not measured by how hard one strikes back, but by how steady one remains under provocation.”

Tell it in Rivers State, publish it in the streets of Port Harcourt, so the daughters of the State could rejoice, and the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph and know that Fubara is not vindictive”. And it came to pass that Rivers State emerged from one of the most delicate chapters in its political journey, the period of emergency rule that spanned from March 18 to September 18, 2025. It was a season that tested institutions, strained loyalties, and exposed the fragile balance between power and principle. During that time, the suspended Governor, Sir Siminalayi Fubara DSSRS, was widely believed to have suffered not only political setbacks but personal betrayal, allegedly from some top civil servants within the state apparatus. These were individuals expected to uphold neutrality and professionalism, yet were accused in public opinion of taking sides against the very government they served.

As the emergency rule ended and Governor Fubara resumed office, expectations were shaped less by policy and more by emotion. Many assumed that revenge would quietly find expression through governance. The loudest suspicion centered on the 2025 Christmas bonus of ?100,000 traditionally paid to each worker. The thinking was simple and cynical: a wounded governor would surely withhold goodwill. Some voices even mocked workers openly hoping that the governor would refuse to pay the bonus. To them, denial of the bonus would serve as proof of political strength and justified retaliation. In reality, such thinking revealed a troubling desire to see governance reduced to personal vendetta. Yet, it came to pass, the governor chose a path that confounded suspicion. Against all expectations, the 2025 Christmas bonus was paid.

That single decision quietly but firmly reframed the narrative. It showed a leader focused on governance rather than grudges, on institutional continuity rather than emotional satisfaction. The payment was not a favor, nor was it a concession; it was a statement that public administration must rise above personal injury. By honoring the bonus, Governor Fubara demonstrated that leadership is not measured by how hard one strikes back, but by how steady one remains under provocation. He made it clear that workers’ welfare would not become collateral damage in political disagreements. This action also served as a moral rebuke to those who celebrated division and hoped for punishment. Governance is not validated by the suffering of workers, nor is leadership strengthened by withholding entitlements. At the same time, the issue of alleged sycophancy and betrayal within the civil service cannot be brushed aside. If proven, such conduct deserves firm, lawful, and institutional correction. Civil servants are bound by duty to the state, not to political conspiracies or shifting loyalties.

However, justice must never be confused with revenge. The strength of governance lies in correcting wrongs without destroying the system itself. Governor Fubara’s restraint suggested an understanding that the future of Rivers State mattered more than settling scores. For workers, this moment carried an important lesson. Celebration should be rooted in good governance, not in the expectation of another’s downfall. Rejoicing in rumors of denial or punishment undermines the very stability that protects workers’ welfare. Public service thrives where professionalism, mutual respect, and accountability are upheld. Pettiness, gossip, and political scheming only weaken institutions and erode trust. History often remembers leaders not for the crises they inherit, but for the character they display in response. In paying the 2025 Christmas bonus, Governor Fubara chose legacy over impulse, maturity over malice.

And so, it came to pass that focus defeated revenge, governance triumphed over bitterness, and Rivers State was reminded that true leadership is proven when restraint is expected least but delivered most. Beyond the symbolism of the Christmas bonus lies a deeper question about the kind of political culture Rivers State intends to cultivate in the years ahead. Periods of emergency rule, anywhere in the world, often leave behind residues of suspicion, fear, and silent realignments. Institutions do not emerge untouched; individuals recalibrate loyalties, some out of conviction, others out of self-preservation. What distinguishes stable democracies from fragile ones is not the absence of such moments, but the discipline with which leadership manages their aftermath. River.

King Onunwor

Opinion

That Withdrawal of Police Orderlies From VIPs

Published

3 days ago

January 2, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”Balancing VIP security with public safety remains a tightrope walk in a country where the majority of citizens are still under-protected.”

The Presidential announcement on the removal of police orderlies from persons in authority and their relations ( Very Important Persons ) last month came as a relief to many Nigerians who felt deprived of one major role of government ; security of lives and property.The higher population of Nigerians missed needed security because the VIPs and the VVIPs kept retinue of Police Officers totalling over 100 ,000 to themselves and their family members as if they are all that matter while some communities under attack of terrorists have no single unit of police station located there in. While many hailed the announcement , some said perhaps the government has just woken up to her major responsibility of securing the lives and property of all citizens while many expressed indifference on the note that it may be one of those pronouncements which come only in words but no action .Many keep their fingers crossed watching how it will play out , how Mr President will go about the implementation of the seemingly dicey policy .

Benjamin Franklin said “well said is better than well done ” It is sufficient today to say that many Nigerians including me are still waiting and watching to see how well and how long this return of the Police service to the ordinary people will go . Wishing hopes will not be crashed , It is note worthy, that the recent complaints by the VIPs of being exposed to attacks may in a way affect the action on implementation. Recently, at Senate plenary , another worrisome angle came up as Senator Abdul Ningi coming through a motion disclosed that he had only one police officer attached to him ( his office ) and that the officer was recalled the week before following Mr President’s directive . Senator Ningi said the withdrawal exposed him to high risks but underscored the angle that while his orderly was recalled , many other politicians , men and women in authority, business concerns foreigners and even children of some VIPs are still enjoying retinue of police protection ( officially attached to them ).

It’s note worthy also that the Deputy Senate President , Distinguished Senator Jibrin Barau, who presided over the session revealed that the leadership of both chambers are already in discussion with President Tinubu on the need to exempt the law makers from the new policy . Senator Ningi may not be wrong . After all he emphasized he is okay provided that the removal of the Police Orderlies be done across board . Senator Barau noted that talks are on over the issue of law makers’ in line with international practice . Further details from the Presidency noted that Presiding officers will retain their police officers , others would have Civil Defense officers ( NSCDC) as orderlies while any other VIP who feels he or she deserves personal police protection should get clearance from his office . In the midst of all issues weighing in on the proper implementation , it becomes necessary to bear in mind that the decision hinges on the realization that Nigeria has peculiar security issues (of kidnappings, banditry, and terrorism.) and that majority of Nigerians are under protected.

More so, that if well implemented, Police officers will focus on core duties; even as 30,000 new police officers are to recruited to enhance security .That implementation must be made in a way that leaves no room.for selective treatment loss of confidence and controversies. Looking at previous attempts of implementation of this policy gives faint hope as several attempts consistently failed . Former IGPs like Tafa Balogun (2003), Ogbonnaya Onovo (2009), and Ibrahim Idris (2018) tried the policy but all failed due to political resistance from various angles. All the failed attempts were tied to lack of political will mostly due to the fact that the directives came from police chiefs, not the president. Selective Enforcement was another killer to the policy as partial implementation met resistance and later reversal . Egbetokun (2023) and Adamu (2020) saw minimal impact.

Further more entrenched corruption in the system saw Politicians and VIPs quietly regain police escorts due to ‘transactional economics”and pressure. Worse still the mindset of the police officers withdrawn didn’t help the policy Underpaid police prioritize VIP duties for extra benefits. Many wish President Tinubu’s move can break this cycle. As at today, he still insists the move is non-negotiable while stressing collaboration with states to upgrade training facilities. As citizens look forward to success of the policy without undue exposure of both sides, balancing VIP security with public safety remains a tightrope walk. Talk fades ; action echoes. How the Presidency implements this policy. has much to tell on the governments stand on national / community security , choice of priority and the ability to stand uncomprised . The known goal is clear: The outcome is not yet certain. Fingers crossed , we await . Definitely , time will tell.

By: Nneka Amaechi-Nnadi.

s State stood at such a crossroads in September 2025. The temptation to rule with a long memory and a heavy hand was real. Yet, the choice made signaled a preference for healing over hardening. Leadership after crisis demands more than administrative competence; it requires moral clarity.

Governor Fubara’s decision reminded the state that authority is not best exercised through silent punishment or selective generosity. Rather, it is strengthened when rules remain rules, irrespective of personal injury. By keeping faith with workers, the government preserved an essential firewall between politics and public service. That firewall, once breached, turns governance into a battlefield where livelihoods become weapons. Rivers State narrowly avoided that descent. In doing so, it affirmed that institutions must outlive tempers, and governance must not mirror the bitterness of political seasons. This moment also invites sober introspection within the civil service itself. Allegations of partisanship, if left unresolved, corrode professionalism and weaken public confidence. A civil service that drifts into political camps loses its moral authority and operational effectiveness.

Therefore, reform, where necessary, should be guided by due process, transparency, and institutional review—not whispers, witch-hunts, or mob verdicts. Accountability strengthens systems when it is fair; it destroys them when it is arbitrary. The restraint shown by the executive places a corresponding burden on administrative leadership to restore discipline, neutrality, and pride in public service. For the wider political class and the commentariat, the episode serves as a caution against normalizing cruelty as strategy. The eagerness with which some anticipated workers’ suffering revealed a dangerous appetite for scorched-earth politics. When governance becomes a spectator sport where pain is cheered and deprivation is weaponized, society inches toward moral exhaustion. Rivers State has seen enough turbulence to know that stability is not sustained by triumphalism, but by restraint.

The lesson is simple yet profound: power is fleeting, but institutions endure; leaders pass, but precedents remain. In the end, the payment of the 2025 Christmas bonus was more than a fiscal act—it was a civic statement. It told workers they were not expendable. It told political actors that revenge would not be policy. And it told the state that maturity in leadership is not weakness, but strength under control. In a climate where many expected fire, restraint prevailed; where bitterness was predicted, balance emerged. Thus, Rivers State was offered a rare reminder that governance, at its best, is an act of discipline, and leadership, at its highest, is the courage to rise above provocation.