British ex-soldier, arms smuggling, and Nigeria’s security crisis

BY ABIODUN OLUWADARE

For over a decade, Nigeria’s security narrative has been mired in anxiety, suspicion, and paralysis. From the brutal incursions of Boko Haram in the north-east to the unrelenting grip of banditry in the northwest and communal strife in the middle belt, the country has staggered under the weight of cascading insecurity. The country has waged an uphill battle against insecurity, terrorism, banditry, secessionist agitation, and deadly communal feuds. Citizens have demanded answers. Leaders have pointed fingers. Analysts have constructed theories. Yet one central question has persisted: Who is truly behind Nigeria’s chronic instability? Analysts have always questioned the insurgents’ sources of funds and weapons, some alluding to external support.

Until recently, much of the blame has fallen squarely on internal factors, corruption in the security sector, inter-agency rivalry, political complicity, or a broken military chain of command. Some have also whispered about foreign interference, but those voices were often dismissed as alarmist. Now, however, the arrest of a British ex-military officer allegedly involved in arms smuggling into Nigeria has dragged the shadows into the sunlight.

The arrest that rocked the narrative

The suspect, whose identity is still shielded by the authorities pending full investigation, was intercepted with a cache of sophisticated weapons believed to have been bound for a hotspot region already teetering on the brink of ethnic violence. According to preliminary security reports, the arms were intended to fuel communal unrest and deepen destabilisation. This is not just another criminal caught in the act. This is a former military man from one of the world’s most respected armies, raising troubling implications about the transnational dimensions of Nigeria’s security woes.

When conjecture meets evidence

For years, many Nigerians have wondered aloud whether some of the insurgencies and conflicts are not just locally grown but externally fertilised. How else do ragtag militias in the forests of Zamfara or the dunes of Borno access high-powered weapons, drones, encrypted radios, and combat-grade intelligence?
This recent arrest lends some credence to these fears. It begins to confirm what was once deemed speculative: that elements outside the country may not only be benefiting from Nigeria’s chaos but actively contributing to it.

Britain’s response: Strategic or complicit?

In diplomacy, silence can be louder than words, and in this case, it is echoing across Nigeria’s political terrain. What has compounded the outrage is the cold and evasive manner of response from the British High Commission, which stated that they cannot disclose any further information about the culprit. Another thing is, why has the British government not issued a statement? Not even a perfunctory expression of concern or commitment to investigate? This leaves Nigerians wondering: Was this rogue adventurism, or something darker, geopolitical meddling in Nigeria’s fragile fault lines? At a time when Nigerian authorities—and indeed, Nigerian citizens—deserve answers, the absence of an official reaction from London appears suspect. Is this silence a sign of caution, embarrassment, or complicity?
Of course, it is premature to declare British state involvement without hard evidence. But when an ex-serviceman, trained by and once loyal to the Crown, is found fanning the flames of ethnic conflict in a sovereign African state, questions must be asked—and answered. Quickly, for that matter.

Is Nigeria paying for its colonial past?

The British colonial legacy in Nigeria has never truly vanished. From arbitrarily drawn borders to uneven development and deep ethnic fissures, Britain laid the foundation for many of Nigeria’s post-independence challenges. But this new episode suggests something even more troubling: that remnants of colonial arrogance or geopolitical manipulation may still be at play. If this is not just a lone wolf, but a symptom of something systemic, Nigeria must confront the uncomfortable possibility that its former colonisers never fully left.

The fingerprints of colonial Britain still linger across Nigeria; issues such as ethnic divisions, economic imbalances, and a governance model built on manipulation are not uncommon. But now, if British-trained agents are found sowing violence in Nigeria, the matter transcends history. It becomes policy. If this arms smuggling incident is not an isolated act of a rogue mercenary but part of a broader pattern, it is time that Nigeria started to reassess its foreign relations posture. This is not just with Britain but with all global powers whose strategic interests intersect with Nigeria’s vulnerabilities.

From victim to vigilant state

This incident must be a wake-up call. Nigeria cannot continue to treat its national security as purely a domestic affair. The porous borders, loose arms markets, and international criminal networks involved in the gun trade demand a foreign policy response that is as robust as its military one. Intelligence sharing, diplomatic pressure, and legal prosecution must extend beyond Nigeria’s borders.

Equally, the Nigerian government must communicate clearly with its international partners. Where allies are complicit, they must be named and shamed. Where they are absent, they must be reminded of their obligations.

The need for a security doctrine with teeth

Nigeria’s national security strategy must now be urgently revised to incorporate a firmer stance on foreign interference. This includes tracking and intercepting foreign agents, tightening ports and airspace regulations, and expanding diplomatic espionage countermeasures. Our ports, borders, and airspace must be shielded from infiltration. Our intelligence services must expand surveillance of foreign-linked activities.

Our laws must prosecute every offender, foreigner or not, with the full weight of the state. Nigeria cannot continue to treat its national security as a purely domestic affair. The battlefront is international, and our strategy must reflect that.

The days of passive engagement are over. If a British ex-soldier can be arrested on Nigerian soil for attempting to incite ethnic bloodshed, then no foreigner, however well-uniformed or well-connected, should be beyond the reach of Nigerian law.

Conclusion: Truth demands courage

Nigeria is approaching a pivotal moment in its struggle for internal stability and external sovereignty. The recent arrest is not just an intelligence victory, it is a moral indictment of a system that has tolerated shadows for too long.

It is time for Nigeria to demand answers from Britain, not in rage, but in the spirit of truth and justice. And it must do so with the resolve of a nation that refuses to be a pawn in global games of chaos. Let the investigation continue. Let diplomacy take its course. This is no longer just about crime—it is about sovereignty.

If the chickens are truly coming home to roost, let them land where they may, but let the world know that Nigeria is watching. This moment could mark a turning point. No longer can we dismiss credible threats as “speculation.” When an ex-British soldier is caught trying to set Nigeria ablaze, the gloves must come off.