Armed Miyetti Allah saga raises alarms over Nigeria’s security architecture

Nigeria’s latest security controversy has continued to generate widespread concern following reports of the interception of armed men in Kwara State who were later identified by government sources as members of Miyetti Allah, a Fulani socio-cultural organisation.

Reacting to the development, Mogaji Wole Arisekola, Publisher of The Street Journal Newspapers, said the incident did not occur in isolation but was the outcome of a series of troubling events already reported in the media.

He noted that public anxiety intensified after reports linked the operation to a security arrangement allegedly involving federal coordination from the Office of the National Security Adviser (NSA), as reported by nationaldailyng.com.

According to Arisekola, while Miyetti Allah, Afenifere in the South-West and Ohaneze Ndigbo in the South-East are all recognised as socio-cultural organisations, their histories and public roles are markedly different.

He stressed that unlike Afenifere and Ohaneze, Miyetti Allah has repeatedly appeared in national security discussions associated with herder-farmer clashes, banditry and violent conflicts.

“At no point in Nigeria’s history have Afenifere or Ohaneze been linked to armed operations or the stockpiling of weapons in pursuit of political or economic objectives,” Arisekola said. “That is why the sight of armed Miyetti Allah members under any form of official security framework is deeply troubling.”

The controversy was further heightened by conflicting official narratives. While state officials reportedly confirmed that the intercepted armed men were members of Miyetti Allah, federal authorities swiftly denied claims that the Office of the National Security Adviser supplied weapons to any socio-cultural group.

READ ALSO: Tor Tiv blasts Miyetti Allah over Benue killings: “Deal with your criminal elements”

Despite these denials, reports cited by nationaldailyng.com maintained that Miyetti Allah members were found in possession of arms and that their activities were connected—either directly or indirectly—to a security framework associated with the NSA’s office.

Arisekola argued that the central issue goes beyond whether the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, personally authorised the arming of the group. Instead, he said it reflects a deeper, systemic problem within Nigeria’s security management.

“The real concern is the recurring failure of the Nigerian state to draw a clear and unmistakable line between constitutionally recognised security agencies and politically sensitive or identity-based organisations,” he said.

Security analysts quoted in the reports echoed this view, insisting that when a group as controversial as Miyetti Allah is found carrying weapons under any form of official cover, Nigerians are entitled to ask hard and uncomfortable questions. According to them, such questions cannot be brushed aside with press statements or blanket denials.

Observers also described the optics of the situation as damaging, particularly for communities that have suffered repeated attacks. To many Nigerians, the incident appears less like legitimate security coordination and more like selective empowerment, further deepening distrust in the system.

Media reports highlighted apparent confusion even among authorities, with state officials confirming the identities of the armed men, federal officials denying authorisation, and no comprehensive public explanation outlining who recruited them, who armed them and under what legal framework they were deployed.

In the absence of clear answers, National Daily NG noted that public suspicion has continued to grow, reinforced by Nigeria’s history of opaque security arrangements that later escalated into serious threats the state struggled to contain.

While supporters of the NSA insist there is no evidence that Ribadu armed Miyetti Allah, Arisekola maintained that the lack of transparency surrounding the issue has further eroded public trust.

“National security cannot be treated like political damage control,” he said. “When lives and national stability are at stake, simple denials are not enough. Nigerians deserve to know what happened, who was involved and why.”

According to nationaldailyng.com, the controversy is dangerous not solely because of what has been conclusively proven, but because of what it suggests: a state that appears to blur the line between official security forces and identity-based groups risks worsening insecurity and deepening national distrust.