ANALYSIS: Why Terrorists Abduct, Kill Top Military Officers in Nigeria
By MUKHTAR Ya’u Madobi
The persistent wave of rural criminality in Nigeria including village raids, cattle rustling, kidnappings, and violent attacks on communities has become one of the country’s most enduring security challenges. These crimes are particularly prevalent in the North-West and North-Central regions, where armed banditry and terrorist activities have continued to threaten lives, livelihoods, and social stability.
While ordinary citizens have borne the brunt of these attacks, an emerging and deeply troubling trend is the increasing targeting of serving and retired senior military officers by terrorists and criminal gangs. The phenomenon underscores the growing audacity, operational sophistication, and psychological warfare tactics employed by non-state armed groups across the country.
Over the past eight years, several senior military officers, both serving and retired, have either been abducted or killed under varying circumstances. One of the earliest high-profile cases was the killing of retired Major General Idris Alkali in Plateau State in September 2018. The most recent incident involved the abduction of retired Major General Rabe Abubakar by armed bandits in Matazu Local Government Area of Katsina State on May 30, 2026.
These incidents are particularly disturbing because they involve individuals who dedicated significant portions of their lives to defending Nigeria’s territorial integrity and protecting citizens from both internal and external threats. Their victimisation raises uncomfortable questions about the evolving nature of insecurity and the capacity of the state to protect not only ordinary citizens but also those who once served at the highest levels of national defence.
If retired and serving senior military officers are increasingly becoming targets of terrorists and criminal gangs, many Nigerians are left wondering: who is truly safe?
What makes the situation even more alarming is that some of these attacks occurred in areas where security presence is relatively strong. In certain cases, the incidents took place in major urban centres and even within the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja.
For instance, retired Air Vice Marshal Muhammad Maisaka and his grandchild were reportedly murdered by gunmen at their residence in Rigasa, Igabi Local Government Area of Kaduna State. Similarly, retired Brigadier General Uwem Harold Udokwere was killed on June 22, 2024, when armed robbers invaded his residence at Sunshine Homes Estate in the Lokogoma area of Abuja.
These attacks demonstrate that insecurity is no longer confined to remote forests, border communities, or rural settlements. Rather, criminal networks have shown an increasing capacity to operate across diverse environments, including heavily populated urban centres.
Why Are Senior Military Officers Being Targeted?
The deliberate targeting of senior military officers is neither accidental nor random. It reflects a strategic calculation by terrorist and criminal groups seeking to achieve multiple objectives simultaneously.
First, senior military officers symbolize the Nigerian state’s coercive and defensive capabilities. Attacking them enables terrorists to project strength while portraying the state as vulnerable. Also, some retired officers often possess considerable social influence, extensive networks, and perceived financial resources, making them attractive targets for kidnapping-for-ransom operations.
Additionally, some retired officers previously commanded military operations against insurgent or bandit groups. In certain cases, attacks against them may be motivated by revenge, retaliation, or symbolic retribution. In the same vein, high-profile victims guarantee widespread media attention. Terrorist groups thrive on publicity because visibility amplifies fear beyond the immediate victims and communities affected.
Why Do Terrorists Succeed Despite Security Details Attached to Senior Officers?
A recurring question among Nigerians is why terrorists and bandits are able to abduct or kill senior military officers despite the security aides, orderlies, and protective measures often attached to them.
Notwithstanding, answer lies in a combination of operational, institutional, and environmental factors.
Firstly, security details attached to retired officers are often limited in number and capability. Most personal security personnel are designed to deter opportunistic attacks rather than withstand coordinated assaults by heavily armed criminal groups.
Read Also:
Secondly, attackers increasingly rely on intelligence gathering and surveillance. Criminal groups often monitor the movements, routines, residences, and travel patterns of their targets for extended periods before striking. Such intelligence enables them to identify vulnerabilities and exploit moments when security coverage is weakest.
Thirdly, resource constraints remain a significant challenge. Security personnel attached to retired officers may lack advanced surveillance equipment, armoured mobility, rapid-response support, or real-time intelligence necessary to counter determined attackers.
Finally, many attacks occur at private residences or during personal movements where military-style protection is difficult to maintain consistently. Unlike active-duty commanders operating within secured military environments, retired officers often live among civilian populations and are therefore exposed to similar vulnerabilities faced by ordinary citizens.
The Strategic and Psychological Implications
The killing or abduction of senior military officers extends beyond the immediate tragedy of the incident. It carries significant strategic and psychological consequences for national security.
One of the primary objectives of terrorism is to create fear disproportionate to the actual scale of violence. By successfully targeting prominent military figures, terrorists seek to send a message that no individual, regardless of rank, status, or experience, is beyond their reach.
Such attacks constitute a form of psychological warfare aimed at undermining public confidence in the state’s ability to provide security. They also seek to create perceptions of government weakness and operational superiority on the part of criminal groups.
If left unchecked, repeated incidents could deepen public anxiety, increase distrust in security institutions, and fuel feelings of helplessness among citizens.
Furthermore, the continued targeting of military personnel—both active and retired, could adversely affect the reputation and public image of the Armed Forces of Nigeria. Although such incidents do not necessarily reflect institutional failure, persistent attacks may create negative public perceptions regarding the effectiveness of existing security frameworks.
The consequences may also extend to troop morale. Frontline personnel engaged in counter-terrorism and counter-banditry operations may become increasingly concerned about their personal safety and that of their families after service. While military professionalism remains strong, prolonged exposure to such realities can create psychological pressures that affect motivation and confidence.
From a broader perspective, declining public trust creates opportunities for terrorists to expand their influence. Terrorist organisations often seek to exploit divisions between citizens and the state, using fear and uncertainty to weaken national cohesion.
A society characterised by fear, distrust, and declining patriotism inadvertently advances the strategic objectives of terrorist groups, whose ultimate aim is to undermine state authority and societal stability.
The Way Forward
Addressing this challenge requires a multidimensional approach. Intelligence-led operations must be strengthened to identify and dismantle kidnapping and terrorist networks before attacks occur. Security risk assessments for retired senior officers should be reviewed periodically, particularly in high-risk states.
Equally important is the sustained prosecution of terrorist financiers, informants, and collaborators who facilitate attacks through intelligence leaks and logistical support.
Ultimately, preventing future attacks will depend not only on kinetic military operations but also on stronger intelligence gathering, community engagement, institutional resilience, and effective governance.
Conclusion
The abduction and killing of senior military officers represent more than isolated criminal incidents; they are strategic attacks on symbols of national security and state authority. By targeting individuals who once led the defence of the nation, terrorists seek to amplify fear, weaken public confidence, and project an image of strength.
Protecting retired and serving military personnel is not merely a matter of safeguarding individuals; it is an important component of preserving national morale, public trust, and the credibility of the state’s security architecture.
Nigeria’s response must therefore be proactive, intelligence-driven, and comprehensive. Failure to do so risks allowing terrorists and criminal groups to win not only on the battlefield but also in the psychological domain where perceptions often shape realities.
MUKHTAR Ya’u Madobi is a Staff Writer at PRNigeria.
