On my column this week, I bring to you the hottest gist that dominated the nation’s political atmosphere the sudden reshuffling of the military heads in Nigeria, a decision many observers view through two different lenses. To some, it is a tactical move to strengthen national security; to others, it is a calculated step to preserve regime stability. The government itself described it as “a reorganisation of the national security architecture.” Hence, I titled this piece “Regime Stability or National Security? The Dual Logic of Nigeria’s Military Reshuffle”
The announcement came barely a week after rumours of an attempted coup circulated within the defence hierarchy, sending shockwaves through both military and political circles. On 24 October 2025, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu carried out a sweeping change of Nigeria’s military leadership, appointing new service chiefs across the Army, Navy and Air Force, and elevating Major General Olufemi Oluyede as Chief of Defence Staff, replacing General Christopher Musa. To the casual observer, it may appear as a routine administrative adjustment, but to those who follow the currents of regional politics, it carried deeper undertones.
In recent years, the West African sub-region has witnessed an alarming resurgence of military coups, reversing decades of democratic progress. In Mali, soldiers led by Colonel Assimi Goïta ousted President Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta in August 2020 and again staged another coup in May 2021 against the interim leadership. Guinea followed in September 2021, where Colonel Mamady Doumbouya overthrew President Alpha Condé after his unpopular third-term bid. In Burkina Faso, two coups occurred in one year, January and September 2022, as Captain Ibrahim Traoré seized power from another junta leader. Niger Republic fell to a similar fate in July 2023, when General Abdourahamane Tchiani detained President Mohamed Bazoum, citing insecurity and corruption. Gabon joined the list in August 2023 after military officers annulled the re-election of President Ali Bongo.
These successive coups reshaped the political map of Africa and revived memories of the 1970s and 1980s when khaki uniforms replaced ballot boxes as the symbols of power. The reactions were swift. ECOWAS, under the chairmanship of President Tinubu at the time of the Niger coup, condemned these takeovers and imposed heavy sanctions. Nigeria, taking the lead, closed its borders with Niger and even cut electricity supply to Niamey, demonstrating zero tolerance for unconstitutional change of government. Yet, despite the strong rhetoric, the coups persisted, and many analysts began to fear that the contagion of military adventurism could drift towards Nigeria, the region’s most populous democracy.
Nigeria itself is no stranger to coups. From 1966 to 1993, the country experienced several military takeovers that shaped its political history. But since the return to democracy in 1999, Nigeria has enjoyed twenty-five years of uninterrupted civilian rule under five elected presidents. Though there have been isolated rumours of attempted coups during these years, none ever matured into open mutiny. The most recent rumour, however, came with worrying details. In October 2025, Sahara Reporters published that sixteen senior officers were allegedly detained by the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) over a suspected plot to destabilise the government. While the authorities swiftly denied the report, the story raised public anxiety, coming at a time when the country faced worsening insecurity, economic hardship and public disillusionment.
With this background, Tinubu’s decision to overhaul the military leadership suddenly began to make sense to some Nigerians. To others, it confirmed the very rumour the government dismissed. They asked: if insecurity has persisted for years without such urgency, why now, so soon after coup speculations? The timing itself invited suspicion. Yet, others argued that Tinubu has a record of restructuring his team when necessary, having reshuffled ministerial portfolios earlier and dismissed a few cabinet members. To this group, the change in service chiefs was simply another phase of the president’s governance style, direct, decisive and politically calculated.
But let us pause for reflection. Why do we even find citizens, ordinary Nigerians, whispering prayers for military intervention when they know from history that coups never bring lasting peace? It is not because they love the uniform; it is because they feel abandoned. When governance fails to meet the basic needs of the people, when corruption and insecurity multiply, when promises turn to pain, despair begins to sound like a revolution. Many of those who today romanticise the idea of a military takeover are doing so not out of ignorance but out of exhaustion. They are people who once believed in democracy but now feel democracy has stopped believing in them.
That sentiment should worry our leaders more than any coup rumour. When citizens begin to lose faith in civilian institutions, the danger to democracy does not come from the barracks alone; it also comes from the streets. The duty of leadership, therefore, is not only to reshuffle service chiefs but to restore public trust through justice, equity, security and economic relief.
The truth is that no form of government anywhere in the world is better than democracy. Under military rule, fundamental human rights are suspended, institutions are silenced and fear replaces freedom. Those who call for a coup in Nigeria must remember that every time soldiers governed, Nigeria’s progress stood still and its global image sank. To return there would be to drag the nation twenty-six years backward.
Therefore, while we acknowledge the president’s constitutional right to appoint and replace security chiefs, we must also recognise the moral duty that comes with it. Nigerians will judge this reshuffle not by the titles of the new generals but by the safety of their communities, the end of kidnappings, the reduction of banditry and the restoration of hope. If these changes do not translate into real improvement, citizens will continue to feel alienated, and that alienation can breed the very instability the government seeks to prevent.
In the end, we all pray that democracy endures in this country. But prayer alone will not save it. Only good governance, sincerity of purpose and respect for the people’s will can. The reshuffle in the military hierarchy must be followed by a reshuffle in attitude, from the corridors of power to the field where soldiers stand guard. If our leaders fail to act, the people’s patience may expire, and history reminds us that once hope dies, even democracy trembles.
Tags
Opinion