The crises of banditry and kidnapping in Nigeria, particularly in the Northwest and Northcentral geo-political regions, continue to pose unimaginable security challenges in this country. While some advocate for dialogue (sulhu) as a viable path to mitigate the conflict, others question its feasibility, given the criminal nature of the perpetrators and the failures of previous attempts at conversation. However, history has consistently shown that negotiation and dialogue remain powerful tools for conflict resolution, paving the way for reconciliation, healing, and lasting peace among communities. This principle remains relevant even in addressing the scourge of banditry and kidnapping that has destabilised particularly the northwestern part of our beloved nation, Nigeria.
Undoubtedly, an inclusive and well-structured dialogue offers the potential for sustainable peace as it will break the cycle of violence and criminality perpetuated by bandits and kidnappers. However, this renewed push for negotiations or dialogue must be critically examined to determine its scope and whether it represents a genuine pursuit of peace or is merely a tactical manoeuvre by the criminal non-state actors seeking reprieve or another means of siphoning government funds. Therefore, given the experiences, any dialogue initiative must be carefully structured to avoid inadvertently legitimising criminal elements or undermining the military’s ongoing operations that is yielding commendable results. Without a well-defined, enforceable framework, dialogue risks becoming a temporary palliative rather than a lasting solution to the lingering issue.
For over a decade, banditry and kidnapping have ravaged communities across Nigeria, particularly in the Northwest, leaving a trail of devastation and agony. The crisis has not only claimed thousands of lives and displaced countless populations, but it has also crippled economic and social activities, especially among the rural and vulnerable communities. Farming, commerce, education, and social cohesion have suffered immensely, while kidnapping for ransom has become a lucrative enterprise, thus entrenching a flourishing war economy. The humanitarian catastrophe in Kaduna, Katsina, Niger, Sokoto and Zamfara, States is staggering, with precise figures on lives lost, ransoms paid, and displaced persons remaining elusive. However, recent data paints a clearer but grim picture of the crisis’ scope. Between July 2023 and June 2024 alone, Nigerians paid at least N1.048 billion in ransom to kidnappers, according to SBM Intelligence. Their research reveals that 7,568 individuals were abducted in 1,130 incidents during this period, with Kaduna, Katsina and Zamfara States bearing the brunt, recording the highest numbers of both incidents and victims of these atrocities.
Disturbingly, kidnappings have become increasingly lethal, resulting in 1,056 deaths within these reported incidents. This grim reality is further echoed by Beacon Consult and Intelligence Limited, which reports a significant escalation in Nigeria’s security challenges in 2024 compared to 2023. They documented a 38.16% rise in incidents (9,001), a 20.12% increase in fatalities (11,692), and a staggering 138.99% surge in abductions (9,677) nationwide, with the Northwest and North Central regions disproportionately affected.
To further illustrate the scale of the crisis, Daily Trust newspaper on December 14, 2024, citing the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) report titled “The Crime Experienced and Security Perception Survey (CESPS) 2024”, stated that between May 2023 and April 2024, 614,937 Nigerians were killed, while 2,235,954 were kidnapped nationwide. The report further revealed that over N2.2 trillion was paid as ransom, averaging N2.7 million per incident. The Northwest recorded the highest number of deaths (206,030), followed by the Northeast (188,992), while the Southwest had the least (15,693). These combined reports demonstrate the worrying scale and impact of the banditry and kidnapping, demanding urgent and comprehensive solutions.
Despite these ongoing atrocities, calls for dialogue (sulhu) were largely absent until recently when relentless military operations, particularly in Zamfara State, are forcing the criminals onto the defensive. It is, therefore not surprising that this sudden push for negotiations has been met with scepticism, as many perceive it as a desperate move by bandits facing imminent defeat rather than a remorseful and genuine effort toward peace. The deep-seated distrust between affected communities and the government further complicates the process, as many fear that dialogue could be another misguided concession that ultimately benefits the perpetrators of these dastardly acts, rather than their victims.
The federal government and some state governments have already initiated dialogue efforts, with Kaduna State reportedly achieving relative peace in Birnin Gwari, allowing farming and commerce to resume. However, questions remain about the sustainability and scope of these initiatives. Therefore, the scepticism about this move is understandable, given that previous dialogue efforts, such as the amnesty programme championed by former Katsina State Governor Aminu Bello Masari, failed to achieve meaningful disarmament and ultimately allowed the cycle of violence to persist. Studies documented in the Nigerian Army Resource Centre (NARC) Journal and Ibrahim Katsina’s “Katsina in Transition” highlight these shortcomings, reinforcing doubts about the effectiveness of negotiating with criminals.
Moreover, one of the primary challenges of dialogue in the Northwest is the fragmented and fluid nature of these criminal groups. There are over 110 factions of bandits and kidnappers operating across the Northwest and Northcentral regions, with some forming alliances with violent extremist groups such as Boko Haram. Selective engagement by state governments risks exacerbating violence, as excluded groups may escalate attacks to assert relevance. Additionally, unlike insurgencies driven by ideological motivations, banditry and kidnapping are primarily criminal enterprises. Historically, law enforcement, not negotiation, has been the most effective means of addressing such threats. This aligns with Islamic teachings, as Prophet Muhammad (SAW) emphasised the necessity of confronting armed criminals.
Therefore, negotiating from a position of strength is essential. Security forces have recently made significant gains, and initiating dialogue now could undermine their progress and demoralise troops. The Quranic verse (47:35) advising against seeking a truce when holding the upper hand reinforces this strategic concern. Additionally, the transborder operations of these criminal groups complicate the enforceability of any domestic peace agreement if it is not comprehensive enough to cover all the northwest and beyond. Thus, while dialogue remains a valuable tool, its indiscriminate application could do more harm than good. Therefore, the affected states must team up together in conjunction with the federal government in the quest for peace through dialogue. Without a unified and enforceable framework, prioritising military and law enforcement efforts may be the only viable path to restoring security and stability in the northwest.
One other issue is that various segments of society, and particularly some state governors, hold varying positions on the issue. While some governors advocate dialogue, others oppose it. The governors of Kaduna and Niger States have supported negotiation efforts, whereas their counterparts in Katsina and Zamfara have adopted a firmer stance against it. Both perspectives are valid and reflect the complexity of the crisis amidst a genuine desire for peace. However, my stance aligns with that of the Katsina State Governor, who, like many of us, has directly experienced the consequences of these atrocities, lost loved ones and had to pay ransom to secure the release of kidnapped members of their families. Therefore, dialogue can only be meaningful if bandits are genuinely remorseful and voluntarily seek reconciliation and if victims and affected communities are actively involved in shaping the process. Without their trust and participation, any peace initiative risks being superficial and unsustainable.
No one should gloss over or downplay the atrocities being committed by these criminals. Consequently, justice must also be a cornerstone of the canvassed peace process. Certainly, true reconciliation and reintegration cannot occur in an atmosphere of suspicion or mistrust and without accountability for heinous crimes committed. Rwanda’s post-genocide reconciliation efforts, which combined local justice mechanisms (Gacaca courts) with international tribunals, offer valuable lessons. Nigeria must, therefore, learn from such examples by ensuring that the perpetrators of these crimes are held accountable, thus creating pathways for healing and reintegration.
Similarly, addressing the root causes of banditry and kidnapping is equally critical. These crises were mostly caused by and thrive in environments of poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, injustice and inequality. Investing in education, healthcare, infrastructure, the criminal justice system, and economic empowerment is essential to breaking the cycle of violence in the northwest. Additionally, the contentious issue of open grazing and ranching must be resolved to mitigate underlying tensions that trigger some of these conflicts. To ensure a holistic and enduring solution, a comprehensive peace initiative must include all relevant stakeholders, government officials, security agencies, traditional rulers, religious and community leaders, victims, and even the repentant bandits.
While dialogue remains a powerful tool for conflict resolution, its application in the current crisis in the Northwest requires wisdom, caution, and a commitment to justice. Dialogue is not a sign of weakness but a demonstration of our collective determination to end the violence and restore peace, security, and dignity to affected communities. However, past experiences, such as the failed amnesty programme in Katsina and Zamfara States, highlight the risks of negotiating with purely criminal bandits and kidnappers. Furthermore, with security forces making significant strides, initiating dialogue may be premature.
Therefore, a more strategic and comprehensive approach would be to further empower the military and security agencies to decisively dismantle these criminal networks while simultaneously addressing the socio-economic root causes of the crisis. Only when the perpetrators are genuinely weakened and left with no other option but surrender can discussions of dialogue, rehabilitation and reintegration be considered. Anything less risks emboldening the very elements that have terrorised our communities for over a decade. Any path forward, especially one involving dialogue, must prioritise the voices of victims, their families and stakeholders who have suffered the most.
The road to peace through dialogue is undoubtedly challenging but very viable. However, with the right strategies and the active participation of all stakeholders, Nigeria can forge a new path toward reconciliation, peace and sustainable development, especially in the northwest. Anything short of this risks emboldening the very elements that have wreaked havoc on our communities for over a decade.
The writer, Sani Kukkasheka Usman mni fnipr, is a retired senior military officer, and public relations and security consultant dedicated to national unity, peace and security. He actively shares his insights and engages with the public on his Facebook and X platforms via @skusman
