Time To Rethink Our Border Security

The Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), General Christopher Musa, recently called for the fencing of Nigeria’s borders to bolster national security. His call could not have come at a more urgent moment, as the country struggles with persistent security challenges in the northwest and other regions.

General Musa, in his remarks, pointed out that several countries have resorted to fencing their borders due to escalating insecurity. He cited Pakistan and Saudi Arabia as examples—Pakistan fencing its border with Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia fortifying its boundary with Iraq—to stem militant infiltration and safeguard their territories.

This newspaper aligns with the CDS’s position. The need for robust border security, particularly in the northwest, cannot be overstated. The region, marked by vast ungoverned spaces, has become a natural sanctuary for insurgent groups operating out of the Sahel, such as Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS). Experts have long warned that much of the insecurity plaguing Nigeria originates from across its porous borders, with militants, weapons, and extremist ideologies seeping in from Niger, Chad, and Mali.

Consider the Lakurawa militant group, which has terrorised communities in northwestern Nigeria and along the Nigerien border. Reports show that Lakurawa, linked to jihadist factions in the Sahel, has entrenched itself by settling in local communities, marrying local women, and recruiting Nigerian youths. A former Defence spokesperson, Major General Edward Buba, traced the group’s rise directly to political instability in Mali and Niger.

For these reasons, fencing our borders carries obvious benefits. As General Musa rightly noted, it is critical for Nigeria’s survival and sovereignty. Admittedly, fencing would be capital-intensive. But the long-term payoff—reduced infiltration, fewer attacks, and stronger territorial control—far outweighs the costs.

RELATED

Badenoch’s False Claim About Nigerian Citizenship

18 hours ago

Let Female Journalists Work In Peace

3 days ago

The urgency becomes clearer when we look at the wider Sahel. The region is a powder keg of armed conflict, food insecurity, and political upheaval. A June 2025 United Nations Children Fund(UNICEF) report warned that violence is spreading across the Central Sahel and spilling into neighboring countries, fueling displacement, economic hardship, and pressure on limited resources. For Nigeria, whose borders are notoriously porous, this is a ticking time bomb.

It defies logic for the country to wait for insurgents and traffickers to cross over before engaging them in battle. A proactive strategy is needed—and that begins with controlling entry. Fencing our borders will not eradicate militancy or trafficking overnight, but it would create a buffer, buying security agencies time to respond and equipping them with surveillance tools that trigger alerts when breaches occur.

Nigeria’s land borders span over 4,000 kilometers. Yet beyond the few official entry points manned by customs and immigration, there is no cohesive strategy to stem the unauthorised influx of foreigners. This laissez-faire approach has left Nigeria vulnerable, effectively turning it into a dumping ground for dissident groups displaced from the Sahel’s unrest.

There are models to learn from. Pakistan has nearly completed fencing its 2,611-kilometre border with Afghanistan—98% of the project is done—and reports indicate a sharp drop in militant crossings and smuggling. Saudi Arabia’s fence along its 900-kilometre border with Iraq has likewise curbed infiltrators, smugglers, and terrorist threats. These examples prove that border fencing, coupled with technology and coordinated enforcement, can deliver tangible security dividends.

Of course, fencing alone will not solve Nigeria’s security crisis. It must be seen as a foundation upon which other strategies—enhanced intelligence gathering, cross-border diplomacy, and socio-economic reforms—will be built. But without that foundation, we will remain reactive, perpetually scrambling to contain threats that should never have entered in the first place.

We must also acknowledge a hard truth: some of the insecurity ravaging Nigeria is not homegrown. The patterns of violence lend credence to what many conspiracy theorists have long suggested—that external actors and destabilising forces are feeding our crises.

The strategic importance of rethinking border security cannot be overstated. Yes, fencing will be costly. But the cost of doing nothing—of leaving our borders open to militants, traffickers, and smugglers—is far greater.

This newspaper firmly supports General Musa’s call. Nigeria cannot afford to delay. Border fencing will not be the final word in securing the nation, but it must be the first line.

This is our stand.