Insecurity: Balancing Kinetic and Non-Kinetic Approaches

The insecurity challenges in Nigeria, particularly banditry, have defied simplistic solutions. While the kinetic approach, military and law enforcement operations; has achieved some notable successes, it has not produced the outcome of sustainable peace. Instead, it has often fueled a cycle of violence between state and non-state actors, while local communities continue to suffer. To break this cycle, there is a compelling need to complement kinetic measures with non-kinetic strategies such as dialogue, community engagement, education, intelligence-driven peacebuilding, and socio-economic empowerment.

The kinetic approach is necessary but insufficient. It weakens the operational strength of criminal groups but fails to address the root causes of insecurity, such as poverty, unemployment, social injustice, and weak community trust in government. In some cases, heavy-handed operations or errors in operations create resentment among local populations, inadvertently creating recruits for criminal networks.

The non-kinetic measures are designed to fill the gaps left by military and security forces’ action as well as reducing unnecessary pressures on security forces. These include: building trust through dialogue with traditional rulers, religious leaders, and local influencers, including the actors themselves; creating opportunities for youth through education, vocational training, and employment; rehabilitation and reintegration, including providing pathways for repentant bandits or militants to rejoin society; intelligence gathering and strengthening human intelligence networks within communities to prevent attacks before they occur.

In fighting insecurity, multi-stakeholder engagement is imperative, because national security cannot be achieved by the federal government alone. A sustainable strategy requires the active participation of state governments in tailoring responses to local realities. Support from local governments in intelligence gathering and community mobilization is also essential. Engagement of traditional and religious institutions as custodians of local values and mediators in conflict resolution, as well as collaboration with civil society and development partners to address humanitarian and socio-economic needs, is equally important. The government should also introduce local language media programs through social media and other media which will reach and enlighten the bandits and other insurgents

The current approach of adopting a hybrid security framework that blends military action with non-kinetic approaches to create both deterrence and reconciliation is commendable. This dialogue approach should be institutionalized through community dialogue platforms. Furthermore, establishing regular consultation forums where local leaders and security agencies exchange intelligence and build trust is also important. Investment in youth empowerment and the development of targeted programs for skills acquisition, entrepreneurship, and agricultural employment to undercut the appeal of criminal networks should be built into the non-kinetic approach. Another important element is strengthening data-driven decision-making, basing security strategies on rigorous research, mapping of conflict-prone areas, and historical analysis of community dynamics. Fighting insecurity is a continuous process; any slack will have a negative impact. Therefore, the creation of measurable benchmarks, as well as the development of monitoring frameworks to evaluate the success of both kinetic and non-kinetic interventions over time, will be helpful.

No government can afford to sustain a security approach that fails to deliver positive outcomes. A purely kinetic strategy risks perpetuating violence, while a purely non-kinetic approach may embolden criminal groups. The way forward lies in a carefully balanced model that applies force where necessary, while simultaneously addressing the root causes of insecurity through dialogue, trust-building, and socio-economic development. Only by harmonizing both approaches can Nigeria break the cycle of violence and build a foundation for sustainable peace and security.

–Zayyad I. Muhammad writes from Abuja, [email protected]