War Against Terror and the ‘Ndume Factor’
By Chidi Omeje
For Nigerian troops engaged in the protracted war against Boko Haram terrorism in the North-East, the greatest challenge is not merely the touted resilience of the insurgents. Rather, a far more insidious obstacle lies in the entrenched network of local informants operating within the epicentre of the crisis.
The damage inflicted on counter-insurgency operations by these collaborators who routinely leak troop movements and positions, is both profound and incalculable. Closely linked to this threat is what I describe as the “Ndume Factor”, a troubling pattern of public discourse that combines gaslighting with political opportunism. Gaslighting, a manipulative tactic aimed at undermining confidence and distorting reality, becomes especially dangerous in a conflict environment. It weakens morale, amplifies enemy propaganda, and erodes public trust in the armed forces.
The “Ndume Factor,” as used here, captures this tendency to discredit ongoing military efforts while deflecting scrutiny from other pressing issues. Disgruntled political actors, conflict profiteers, and fifth columnists often exploit media platforms to propagate such narratives. In doing so, they contribute to a cycle of misinformation and cynicism that ultimately undermines national security efforts.
At a time when troops are engaged in a difficult war of attrition against Boko Haram and ISWAP elements, such conduct is not only unhelpful but deeply counterproductive. The case of Senator Ali Ndume has, in recent times, attracted considerable public attention.
Having represented his constituency for over two decades – eight years in the House of Representatives and fifteen in the Senate, questions are now being raised within political and civic circles regarding both performance and accountability.
As a long-standing fixture in Nigeria’s legislative oversight of the defence sector, Sen Ndume has spent over a decade occupying influential positions—as Chairman and member of the Senate Committees on Defence and Army—throughout the very years the insurgency has raged. Yet, despite this enduring presence at the heart of oversight, there is little in the way of landmark impact or defining accomplishment to convincingly attest to a legacy of exceptional performance.
Read Also:
Of particular concern are allegations surrounding a Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)-linked road project in Maiduguri, reportedly valued at approximately ₦1.4 billion. Public discourse has raised questions about whether the project may have been executed at a significantly lower cost. While these claims remain subject to verification, they have nonetheless triggered calls for formal investigation by relevant anti-corruption agencies, including the EFCC and ICPC.
At the heart of the matter is the principle of transparency and value for money. Where there are significant discrepancies between allocated funds and execution costs, it becomes imperative to provide clear and credible explanations. Beyond financial accountability, there are also legitimate concerns about quality assurance. In fragile and conflict-affected regions, substandard infrastructure represents a setback to recovery, security stabilisation, and economic resilience.
What has further drawn public scrutiny is the apparent contrast between Senator Ndume’s vocal criticism of government performance, particularly in relation to military resourcing and the absence of equivalent clarity regarding projects linked to his own constituency. Critics argue, with some justification, that accountability must be consistent and not selectively applied.
Meanwhile, on the frontlines, the Nigerian Army continues to bear the brunt of operational setbacks caused by informants. Regular operational updates highlight how compromised troop movements have led to ambushes, loss of personnel, and destruction of equipment. These informant networks are becoming increasingly sophisticated, evolving into organised and, in some cases, lucrative enterprises for those involved.
This growing complexity helps explain the persistence and adaptability of insurgent attacks. It also underscores an urgent reality: dismantling these networks must become a strategic priority. However, this responsibility cannot rest solely on the military.
Political leaders, particularly those representing affected states such as Borno and Yobe, must assume a more proactive role. Beyond rhetoric, there is a need for deliberate community engagement, intelligence support, and firm deterrence measures against collaborators. Public commentary that undermines troop morale for political relevance is no longer tenable in the face of an existential security challenge.
The time has come for a unified and coordinated approach, one that aligns political leadership with military objectives and community responsibility. The war against insurgency cannot be won on the battlefield alone; it must also be fought and won within the civic and political space.
*Chidi Omeje is the publisher, Security Digest and Editor at Zagazola Media Network