•Say, it emboldens the bandits, demoralises the troops
•We’re tired of crying, burying our children—Katsina women
•If dialogue can stop bloodshed, why not?—Community leaders
By Evelyn Usman
The presence of high-profile bandits at the negotiation table in Faskari Local Government Area of Katsina State, one of the councils worst hit by years of deadly raids, has sparked a heated debate within security and defence circles. Military officers, retired generals, and defence analysts are sharply divided: some argue that the talks represent pragmatic conflict resolution that could save lives,while others insist it amounts to dangerous legitimisation of criminality, sending the wrong signal to troops and the wider public.
Some analysts pointed to Kwashé Garwa’s extensive involvement in raids across Katsina and neighbouring states as evidence that negotiations risk normalising terrorism, while community leaders maintain that dialogue is a necessary step to end the cycle of violence and restore access to farms and markets.
It undermines government authority —Rear Admiral Olisemelogor (Rtd)
Rear Admiral Dickson Olisemelogor (Rtd), said any move to negotiate with men accused of killings and kidnappings would amount to a dangerous compromise that would betray the rule of law. He stated: “It is completely wrong. Negotiating with bandits is not the right approach unless those involved are part of a plan to destabilize the region. The negotiations are not for national interest but for personal interest. Those involved are part of the banditry network. Any governor or official calling for negotiation is indirectly telling Nigerians that they are part of the scheme.” On why security forces have not simply moved to eliminate bandit bases, Olisemelogor said: “The military operates on instruction. We observe rules of engagement and international law to avoid war crimes.
But if the President or Chief of Defence Staff gives a clear directive, like recently, that there should be no negotiation and there must be full action against them, then no military personnel should be negotiating. The instruction has been given. There is no legal barrier. So anyone negotiating now is doing so for personal, not national, interest.”
It means surrendering power – Maj. Gen Akin Yomi
Corroborating Olisemelogor, Maj.-Gen. Akin Yomi said: “Negotiating with terrorists is nothing short of surrendering the state’s authority. Once you sit across the table from men who have killed, raped and abducted, you elevate them to the same level as legitimate actors. What message does that send to our soldiers in the trenches? That their sacrifices are meaningless? The moment the government begins to reward bandits with recognition, others will pick up arms tomorrow, hoping to be called for dialogue and compensation. That is not peace; it is blackmail.”
It emboldens criminals – Brig.-Gen. Danjuma
Brig.-Gen. Dogo Danjuma (Rtd), a seasoned military officer who battled insurgents in Nigeria’s North-East, said: “One thing I know is that violence thrives when the state shows weakness. Today they are asking for markets and free movement. Tomorrow, they will demand political power. These are not aggrieved citizens but hardened criminals on the nation’s wanted list. We cannot build peace by compromising justice. Negotiation only emboldens them and demoralises the troops risking their lives daily to protect innocent Nigerians.”
Negotiating with bandits shows weakness –Major Efoziem (Retd)
For Mr Bone Efoziem, a retired Major, the proposal to negotiate with bandits was unacceptable. He delivered a pointed critique,warning that any engagement risks undermining government authority and legitimizing acts of terror. He said: “Our political leaders should not make Nigeria look like a banana republic.
First and foremost, if Nigeria has become a failed state, the people in authority should let us know that there is no more government. On that note, the populace can go ahead and negotiate with bandits. That is to say, there is no government because it is presumed that the government should have the monopoly for cohesion.
But accepting to negotiate with bandits will make Nigeria appear as coming from a point of weakness to negotiate with the bandits’ strength. But if the people in authority say Nigeria is not a failed state, then we do not have reason to negotiate with bandits.”
He added: “If we understood what democracy means, every Nigerian and every resident of Nigeria surrendered our authority to the political leadership to form a government. And it was agreed on those grounds that they should protect the populace and protect the territorial integrity of Nigeria.
By the time a group of persons come up and begin to fight and kill innocent people, abduct, kidnap, rape, rob these same people, and we say, let us negotiate with them, does it mean that the collective authority of the individuals that was handed over to the people who govern them has been lost? With this said, I will explain that it is not an option to negotiate with the bandits. If I were to throw it to you, who would give the terms of reference for this negotiation? Is it the people, or the bandits, or the government? As it stands now, it means that it is the bandits that will give Nigeria and Nigerians the terms of reference.
I think what it should be is that the federal government should muster every force available to beat bandits to surrender. That is the only acceptable way and approach to dealing with insurgency, banditry, and terrorism. Let them know it. Any move to negotiate with them means that the act of terrorism has become a success in Nigeria. An act is considered terrorism when it is aimed at arm-twisting the government. And now, if they negotiate, it means they have successfully arm-twisted the government.”
A dangerous precedent – Major Saleem
Major Saleem Yaro (Rtd) added: “It is a dangerous precedent. You cannot declare someone wanted for terrorism, then host him at peace talks while he still carries ammunition around his waist. What sort of country does that? The constitution is clear: banditry is a crime. Negotiation undermines the law, weakens morale in the armed forces, and betrays the victims. Let us invest more in intelligence, mobility, and firepower for our security forces. Dialogue with terrorists is not the solution; decisive action is.”
Dialogue could save lives —Katsina Indigenes
On the other hand, some security analysts and community leaders argued that dialogue with bandits could be a pragmatic step towards ending the cycle of violence. Liman Shaheem, a Faskari farmer, said: “Our people are dying every day. If dialogue can stop the bloodshed, then why not? The farmers cannot go to their farms, children cannot go to school.
We have cried to the government for years but the killings continued. We are not saying criminals should be rewarded, but peace must start somewhere. If talking to them will allow us to harvest our crops safely, then it is a step worth taking.” Hajia Memunat Rabi added: “As mothers, we are the ones burying children every week. We are tired of crying. Soldiers come, they fight, and then leave, but we remain with the bandits. If dialogue will make them stop kidnapping our daughters and attacking our markets, we welcome it. Even if the talks are not perfect, at least we can breathe in peace for a while. The lives of our children are more important than pride or politics.”
Another community member, Ibrahim Khalid, said: “The Qur’an encourages reconciliation where possible. These young men may have taken the wrong path, but many of them were driven by injustice and neglect. If we only rely on bullets, the cycle of revenge will never end. Negotiation does not mean weakness, it means wisdom. Let us first end the killings, then the government can implement justice through development, education and opportunities for the Fulani youth who have been marginalized for decades.”
The post Negotiating with bandits undermines Nigeria’s authority —Retired senior military chiefs warn appeared first on Vanguard News.
