society
Sambisa Bloodletting: When Boko Haram Turned Its Guns on ISWAP
Sambisa Bloodletting: When Boko Haram Turned Its Guns on ISWAP.
By George Omagbemi Sylvester | Published by SaharaWeeklyNG.com
“The Deadly Turf War That Shakes the Lake Chad Basin.”
A new and grisly chapter has opened in Nigeria’s long-running insurgency; once bitter rivals in name only, Boko Haram and the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) have for months been fighting not merely for recruits or haulage routes, but for outright territorial control. The latest and most savage manifestation of that internecine war erupted in and around Sambisa and the islands of the Lake Chad corridor, a cascade of assaults that left scores dead, dozens of boats seized and whole communities re-traumatised. Initial field accounts and media investigations put the toll at roughly two hundred militants killed in clashes over the weekend, with Boko Haram reported to have overrun several ISWAP camps and seized key naval assets.
That figure (horrific even in a conflict long accustomed to horror) must be read in context. The Lake Chad Basin has been a theatre of not only cross-border criminality and smuggling, but also of militant adaptation: riverine skirmishes, sudden amphibious raids and the seasonal ebb and flow of civilians and fighters. For years ISWAP and what remains of Boko Haram’s Shekau-loyal factions have alternated between cooperation, coexistence and murderous rivalry. The latest operations, however, were not mere hit-and-run attacks; they were coordinated attempts to seize island strongholds that generate revenue (through fishing taxes and illicit trade) and provide safe havens from military strikes.
Why this flare-up now matters (and why it should alarm us) boils down to three brutal facts. First, when jihadi factions fight each other, civilians pay the price: reprisals, forced displacements and collective punishments typically follow. Second, the victor in a factional fight can absorb weapons, boats and fighters; materially strengthening itself for renewed attacks on towns, garrisons and humanitarian convoys. Third, infighting makes conflict dynamics less predictable and therefore harder for security forces and relief agencies to plan for or to counter. For communities around Sambisa and the Lake Chad islands, the immediate consequence is the collapse of whatever fragile protection existed and a fresh round of displacement and hunger.
UNIDIR → Building a more secure world.
On the ground, the fighting reportedly featured dozens of motorised canoes and heavily armed gunmen which is a reminder that the Lake Chad is no backwater but a strategic corridor. Reports say Boko Haram fighters swept across several ISWAP-held islands, capturing boats and weaponry and inflicting heavy casualties on ISWAP personnel. Local vigilante sources and intelligence leaks described scenes of charred camps and the frantic flight of surviving fighters toward mainland villages. If confirmed, the seizure of riverine assets is strategically significant: control of boats equals control of movement, supplies, taxation points and crucially, escape routes.
Scholars and analysts who have followed the jihadist evolution in north-east Nigeria warn that this is not a mere squabble among thugs; it is the latest phase of a long adaptive conflict. Vincent Foucher, a leading researcher on the Lake Chad jihadist landscape, captures the larger truth: “jihad in the Lake Chad Basin is here to stay.” The line is blunt, but the point is stark; these factions are resilient, they learn from one another and they exploit gaps in state capacity to regenerate. That resilience helps explain why gains against one group are often temporary and why civilian recovery remains painfully fragile.
A tactical victory for Boko Haram in Sambisa (if sustained) raises grave long-term risks. Where one faction consolidates, it does not merely defend borders: it governs, taxes and recruits. It also acquires the spoils of war, captured materiel and the bargaining chips of prisoners and local informants. ISWAP, by contrast, has built an internationalised technical edge in recent years, claiming sophisticated propaganda, reportedly better coordination with transnational ISIS networks and more disciplined battlefield practices. The competition between a predatory, territorially assertive Boko Haram and a bureaucratised, outward-looking ISWAP is not abstract: it shapes attack profiles, civilian targeting and the geography of violence.
What should the Nigerian state and regional partners do? First, stabilisation requires not only kinetic pressure but also rapid civilian protection and humanitarian access. Too often, military wins are undone by the absence of safe returns, reconstruction and meaningful local security arrangements. Second, the region needs sharper, coordinated intelligence (maritime and riverine surveillance in particular) to prevent future seizures of boats and to protect displaced fishing communities. Third, long-term deradicalisation and socio-economic investment in affected communities remain essential; without economic alternatives and credible local governance, the vacuum will be filled again. These are not novel prescriptions, but the Sambisa incidents make them urgent once more.
There is a cautionary counterpoint, too: factional fighting does not automatically benefit the state. When insurgents bleed each other, they can also become more ruthless or more opportunistic; consolidating areas where they can operate freely, or launching terror attacks to signal continued potency. The 2016 schism that birthed ISWAP taught analysts that fragmentation can produce new, more adaptive organisations rather than a longed-for weakening. That lesson is especially important for policymakers tempted to celebrate intra-militant carnage as a win.
For the ordinary people of Sambisa and the Lake Chad littoral, the technical arguments about strategy are cold comfort. Families who returned to their farms after government assurances now find themselves running again; fishermen who paid protection to one group discover their boats confiscated by another. Humanitarian agencies warn that renewed violence will reverse months of fragile progress: food stocks will run low, clinics will close and education (already the first casualty of this insurgency) will be postponed indefinitely. The indirect death toll from hunger, disease and interrupted health care will be the slow, shameful shadow of this weekend’s headlines.
Finally, the Sambisa clashes are a reminder that Nigeria’s security challenge is not merely military but political. Long-term peace will not be won by force alone. It requires the restoration of state legitimacy, accountable local governance, economic opportunity and regional cooperation across Nigeria, Chad, Niger and Cameroon. Until those building blocks are in place, the islands of Lake Chad will remain prize and prey in equal measure and Sambisa will keep teaching the same brutal lesson: in a failed security market, violence simply repackages itself. As Vincent Foucher warns, the jihadist presence here is unlikely to vanish quietly; the only question is whether a savage contest for spoils will give way to yet another calibrated threat to civilians and statehood.
—
Reported and written by George Omagbemi Sylvester for SaharaWeeklyNG.com
ThisDay Publisher, Nduka Obaigbena, To Unveil Leekeeleekee January 2026
Nduka Obaigbena, the media guru and successful entrepreneur has just announced the forthcoming launch of Lekeelekee. This initiative is already gathering applause from various media stakeholders across the country.
Lekeelekee is a new media platform set for January, 2026.
Obaigbena has also made a Clarion call for massive support for reforms to sustain economic growth in Nigeria.
The platform is designed to challenge the dominance of US and Chinese companies in global content distribution and give Nigeria a stronger voice in the global media space.
The announcement was made during Nduka Obaigbena’s speech at the 21st All Nigeria Editors Conference (ANEC) 2025, held at the Presidential Villa in Abuja today.
REJOINDER: THE ARROGANCE OF POWER AND THE DIGNITY OF THE UNIFORM: A RESPONSE TO ANNGU ORNGU
The treatise by Mr. Anngu Orngu, while cloaked in the elegant language of constitutionalism, is a dangerous apologia for executive impunity and a gross misrepresentation of the relationship between civil authority and military professionalism. By attempting to justify Minister Nyesom Wike’s public humiliation of a serving military officer, Orngu not only misses the point but actively undermines the very constitutional order he claims to defend. It is a profound irony that a man who presents himself as a defender of the law demonstrates such a flawed understanding of its spirit and letter.
Let us be clear: the issue is not the Minister’s constitutional authority to supervise projects within his portfolio. The issue is the manner in which he chose to exercise that authority—a manner that was abusive, unconstitutional, and corrosive to national discipline.
1. The Fatal Flaw: Confusing Authority with Absolutism
Mr. Orngu, whom one can only assume is a pocket constitutional lawyer serving a narrow agenda, correctly cites Sections 5 and 148 of the Constitution. However, he commits a grave error by interpreting this as a grant of absolute, unaccountable power. Nowhere in the Constitution is a Minister granted the power to:
· Use insulting and abusive language against any citizen, let alone a commissioned officer of the Armed Forces.
· Threaten the use of violence against a state official.
· Publicly humiliate and demoralise an officer who was, by all accounts, performing his lawful duty.
The Minister’s power is derived from the Constitution and must be exercised within its bounds and in accordance with public service rules and decorum. Orngu’s argument, taken to its logical conclusion, would mean that a Minister could engage in any manner of misconduct, and it must be tolerated because he acts as an “extension of the President.” This is a recipe for tyranny, not democratic governance.
2. The Commissioned Officer: A Bearer of Sovereign Authority
Mr. Orngu’s most profound ignorance is exposed in his failure to understand the constitutional and legal status of a Presidential Commissioned Officer.
A commissioned officer does not receive his commission from a Minister. He receives it from the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, symbolised by the handover of the Nigerian Flag. His oaths of Allegiance and Office are sworn to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Nigeria, not to the ego of a Minister.
The officer at the scene was not a personal employee of Mr. Wike; he was a representative of the state’s coercive authority, performing a duty as assigned by the military chain of command. To reduce this sacred sovereign trust to a mere subservience to ministerial whim is an insult to the institution of the Nigerian Armed Forces. The officer’s duty is to obey lawful orders, not to endure public degradation. Even I, Pastor Musa Mai-Anguwa, a man of the cloth, understand this fundamental distinction between lawful authority and sheer impunity—a distinction that seems to elude a purported legal mind like Mr. Orngu.
3. The Established Protocol: The Path Mr. Wike Chose to Ignore
A true respect for constitutional order involves respecting the established institutions and channels of authority. If Minister Wike had a grievance with the officer’s conduct, the constitutional and professional path was clear and unambiguous:
1. He could have noted the officer’s name and unit.
2. He could have immediately contacted the Chief of Defence Staff or the relevant Service Chief.
3. He could have lodged a formal complaint through the Ministry of Defence to the military high command.
The military, governed by the stringent Armed Forces Act, has its own robust disciplinary procedures to address insubordination or misconduct. By bypassing this entire structure in favour of a public spectacle, Minister Wike did not assert constitutional authority; he displayed sheer arrogance and a blatant disregard for institutional protocols. He chose to be a bully instead of a leader.
4. The Real Threat to National Security
Orngu accuses Lt. Gen. Buratai of being “dangerously uninformed,” but the true danger lies in his own justification of impunity. The real threat to national security is not a junior officer standing his ground, but a Minister who:
· Demoralizes the armed forces by publicly stripping an officer of his dignity.
· Creates a climate of fear where officers may hesitate in their duties, uncertain whether professional decisions will lead to public shaming by a political appointee.
· Erodes the morale and esprit de corps that are the bedrock of an effective military.
An army that is taught to silently endure abuse from civil authorities is not a professional army; it is a servile one, and a servile army is a danger to democracy itself.
Conclusion: Defending the Constitution Means Defending Decorum
Mr. Orngu’s essay is a classic case of using the law as a shield for misconduct. He defends the source of power while ignoring the abuse of that power. The Constitution was designed to prevent the concentration and abuse of power, not to facilitate it.
It is a sad commentary that a Pastor like myself, whose duty is to preach righteousness and justice, must school a self-styled constitutionalist on the basic principles of decency and lawful conduct embedded in our national charter. Minister Wike’s actions were a disgraceful display of arrogance that would be unacceptable in any mature democracy. To support it, as Mr. Orngu does, is to endorse a culture of impunity that weakens our institutions, demoralizes our armed forces, and ultimately, undermines the Nigerian state.
The officer in question deserves commendation for his restraint, not condemnation. And those who, like Orngu, preach a blind obedience to abusive power should be reminded that the Constitution is a charter for decent governance, not a license for tyranny.
Signed,
Pastor Musa Mai-Anguwa
Abuja, Nigeria.
*600 CSOs back General Buratai’s call for action, demand sack of Wike
Over 600 civil society organizations (CSOs) have thrown their full weight behind former Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai (retd.) and taken a step further to demand the immediate sack of Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister Nyesom Wike over his public insult of a naval officer.
The CSOs described Wike’s conduct as “unacceptable, reckless, and dangerous to national unity.”
They endorsed General Buratai’s call for decisive action and insisted that nothing short of Wike’s removal from office would restore public trust and military morale.
The coalition, under the auspices of Good Governance Network (GGN), said Wike’s behaviour was not just personal misconduct but a direct attack on the integrity of the Nigerian Armed Forces and an affront to the office of the Commander-in-Chief.
They made this known in a joint communiqué signed by Centre for Transparency and Accountability in Governance, Nigerian Integrity Movement, Citizens Watch Forum, Anti-Corruption Vanguard Network, Democratic Rights Alliance, Youth for Ethical Leadership Initiative, Women Against Impunity Coalition, Rule of Law Advocates Nigeria, Patriotism and Development Forum, the National Accountability Platform among others.
Signed by Comrade Usman Danladi, the CSOs stated: “We, the undersigned 600 civil society organizations, stand in full and uncompromising solidarity with Lt. Gen. Tukur Yusufu Buratai (retd.), former Chief of Army Staff, in his courageous and timely call for decisive action against the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Barr. Nyesom Wike, following his disgraceful and highly provocative verbal assault on a serving naval officer on Tuesday, November 11, 2025.
“What the nation witnessed was not a mere exchange of words. It was a deliberate, public humiliation of a commissioned officer of the Nigerian Navy—an officer who swore an oath to defend this country with his life.
“For a sitting minister to shout ‘Shut up your mouth!’ and call a uniformed officer ‘a big fool’ in the presence of his subordinates and the public is an act of gross indiscipline, arrogance, and contempt for the institution that holds our national security together.
“This is not leadership. This is not governance. This is the conduct of a man who believes his political office places him above the law, above decency, and above the very armed forces that protect our democracy.
“No minister, no matter how powerful, has the right to insult, demean, or undermine the Nigerian military in the discharge of its lawful duties.
“We note with deep concern that Wike has made a habit of using intimidation, threats, and abusive language against citizens, officials, and now, uniformed personnel. His pattern of behavior—marked by aggressive demolitions, disregard for due process, and now open disrespect for the military—poses a clear and present danger to public peace, institutional harmony, and democratic stability.
“We therefore demand the immediate sack of Barr. Nyesom Wike from office. Anything less would be a betrayal of the Nigerian people and the armed forces. In addition, we demand an immediate public apology—Barr. Nyesom Wike must, within 48 hours, issue a formal, public, and unqualified apology to the President and Commander-in-Chief, His Excellency Bola Ahmed Tinubu; the Chief of Defence Staff and the leadership of the Nigerian Armed Forces; the Nigerian Navy; the specific naval officer who was insulted; and the Nigerian people.
“We also demand an official investigation: The Federal Government must set up an independent panel to investigate the incident, examine the minister’s conduct, and determine whether it constitutes a breach of the oath of office and public service rules.
“Additionally, we call for disciplinary action: If found guilty of misconduct, the minister must face appropriate sanctions, which may include suspension from office pending full inquiry.
“Furthermore, we urge training on civil-military relations: All political office holders must undergo mandatory training on respect for the armed forces and the importance of civil-military harmony.
“Finally, we demand protection of military dignity: The government must issue a clear policy directive that no public official, regardless of rank, may insult, harass, or obstruct members of the armed forces while on duty.
“We commend General Buratai for speaking truth to power. His statement was not just a defense of one officer—it was a defense of the entire military institution, the chain of command, and the dignity of service. His voice reminds us that the strength of Nigeria lies not in the loudness of politicians, but in the quiet courage and discipline of those who wear the uniform.
“We warn that if this matter is swept under the carpet, it will send a dangerous message: that political power can be used to trample on the honor of those who defend us. It will weaken morale in the barracks. It will embolden impunity. And it will further erode public trust in government.
“If an insult to us as a nation, to the armed forces of our nation and that of the Commander in Chief hereby go unpunished, the tendency that every Labour that has been put in place to build this nation on a solid foundation will be eroded. When that happens, the enemies of the country within and outside will thereafter congregate and the result can be foretold from the beginning.
“This is not about politics. This is about principle. This is about respect. This is about the kind of Nigeria we want—one where leaders serve with humility, where the military is honored, not humiliated, and where no one is above the law.
“We call on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to act swiftly and firmly by removing Wike from office. The eyes of the nation are watching. The integrity of his administration is at stake.
“Let it be known: we will not be silent. We will monitor. We will follow up. We will mobilize. Until justice is done.”
-
Politics5 months agoNigeria Is Not His Estate: Wike’s 2,000‑Hectare Scandal Must Shake Us Awake
-
society6 months agoOGUN INVESTS OVER ₦2.25 BILLION TO BOOST AQUACULTURE
-
celebrity radar - gossips6 months agoFrom ₦200 to ₦2 Million: Davido’s Barber Reveals Jaw-Dropping Haircut Fee
-
society5 months agoJUSTICE DENIED: HOW JESAM MICHAEL’S KINDNESS WAS TURNED AGAINST HIM