When a Commander-in-Chief dismisses his nation’s top military leadership, the country deserves clarity, not cryptic announcements. Yet once again, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has chosen secrecy over statesmanship, opacity over order. In a terse communiqué that offered neither rationale nor reassurance, the President on Friday, October 24 2025, sacked Nigeria’s Service Chiefs – the Chief of Defense Staff, the Chief of Army Staff, the Chief of Air Staff, and the Chief of Naval Staff – replacing them in what the Presidency blandly described as a move “to strengthen the nation’s security architecture.”
It is a familiar refrain, and a hollow one. For a nation besieged by insurgency, banditry, oil theft, and urban crime, this abrupt overhaul at the apex of the Armed Forces should have been a moment of transparent national introspection. Instead, it reeks of political expediency masquerading as reform. The President’s refusal to explain the motive, context, or guiding policy behind these sackings is not merely discourteous to the officers dismissed after decades of service; it is profoundly dangerous for a republic already teetering under the weight of institutional fatigue and public distrust.
At a time when Nigerians are enduring the worst cost-of-living crisis in decades; when the naira is in free fall, when food inflation has soared beyond 40%, and when kidnapping has become an industry; the least the country deserves is a semblance of order within its security command. Instead, what it has received is chaos at the top. General Christopher Musa, the now-former Chief of Defense Staff, was barely 18 months into his tenure. His leadership coincided with several high-level counterterrorism initiatives and joint operations that, while uneven, provided a degree of coordination long absent from Nigeria’s fractured security landscape. His sudden removal, without explanation, is a textbook example of how not to manage a nation at war with itself. Was General Musa dismissed for failure, political disloyalty or disagreement? For uncovering uncomfortable truths about the security budget and its opaque disbursements? Nigerians have been told nothing; and it is this silence that speaks loudest.
The President’s defenders will, as always, invoke “presidential prerogative.” They will argue that the Commander-in-Chief has an absolute right to appoint and dismiss at will. True, but rights do not absolve responsibility. Power, in a constitutional democracy, must answer to reason and accountability. This government, however, has consistently displayed an authoritarian disdain for both. From his secretive cabinet reshuffles to his unilateral decisions on fuel subsidy removal and foreign loans, President Tinubu has cultivated a governance style that thrives on opacity. Each announcement emerges like a royal decree; abrupt, unexplained, and insulated from scrutiny. In this latest episode, the sackings look less like a security strategy and more like a political purge. The quiet retention of Major-General E.A.P. Undiendeye as Chief of Defense Intelligence hints at an inner circle of loyalty that transcends merit. The pattern is clear: the regime prizes obedience over competence, loyalty over law.
Nigeria’s Armed Forces have, for decades, served as the last semblance of national unity amid political dysfunction. When politicians fail, soldiers bleed. When the economy collapses, the military still stands. But even the most disciplined institution cannot thrive under capricious leadership. By treating the Service Chiefs as expendable chess pieces, Tinubu undermines not just their authority but the morale of the entire Armed Forces. No general can lead effectively when tenure depends not on performance but on proximity to power. No institution can uphold discipline when its leadership is reshuffled like a cabinet of politicians. The result is predictable: weakened command structures, divided loyalties, and an emboldened enemy. Bandits, insurgents, and oil thieves – all of whom track the shifting winds of Abuja politics – will see in this disarray an opportunity.
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the President’s decision is the silence surrounding it. No Defense Council consultation. No policy briefing. No parliamentary engagement. Not even a symbolic explanation to the Nigerian people whose taxes fund this endless cycle of appointments and dismissals. This silence betrays more than arrogance – it betrays fear. Fear of transparency. Fear of accountability. Fear of confronting the public with the truth: that Nigeria’s security crisis is not merely the result of inadequate leadership at the top, but of a system corroded by patronage, corruption, and political capture.
Leadership, as history teaches, is not about perpetual motion but purposeful direction. The sackings would be justified if they heralded a coherent new strategy; a radical doctrinal shift in how Nigeria wages war on terror, secures its borders, and protects its people. But there is none. No white paper. No timeline. No mission realignment. Only the recycled rhetoric of “reinvigoration” and “restructuring” – phrases as empty as they are familiar. After 16 months in office, Tinubu still governs by improvisation. The same man who promised to professionalize the security sector has instead personalized it.
Nigeria does not need another round of silent purges; it needs honesty. It does not need ceremonial appointments; it needs vision. Until this administration recognizes that secrecy is not strategy and that power without accountability is tyranny, the country will remain trapped in its tragic cycle of violence, corruption, and despair. The dismissal of the Service Chiefs without explanation is not a show of strength – it is an admission of weakness. It reveals a President who governs by fear, not foresight; who mistakes command for competence; and who, in his silence, betrays the very citizens he swore to protect. In the end, what is at stake is not just the careers of a few generals; it is the soul of a nation that can no longer afford leaders who rule by impulse and decree. The true test of leadership is not the power to dismiss but the courage to explain. On that score, President Tinubu has failed spectacularly.