Since January 2024 when I served as a Rapporteur at a 5-day National Security Course on Psychological Operations and Strategic Communication, I have been fascinated with open and secret efforts of Intelligence services to ensure peace and security of Nigeria. Organised by the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), the programme was well attended.
The Chief of Defence Staff, General Christopher Musa was the keynote speaker. Minister of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, Bosun Tijani, Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris Malagi, security personnel, scholars, journalists, traditional leaders and political office holders were also present.
The contributions by the facilitators and participants from the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA), Department of State Services (DSS), and military and intelligence sectors gave delicate perspectives on the interaction between the open media and secret intelligence which has mostly been based on conflict and cooperation.
An inherent conflict exists between the media that wish to publish security-related information as part of its responsibility to the people. On the other hand, intelligence services work on the basis of secrecy and often attempt to prevent the publication of their activities and sources. The media and intelligence services require information for their functions and must understand that cooperation can provide important knowledge without harming security interests.
A number of responsible media operators are mindful of the fact that intelligence agencies are inherently secretive. Also, reliable sources within the intelligence service occasionally provide credible information to the media to enhance operational efficiency. The two parties share a common interest in information even though the former accumulates legally permitted civil intelligence, while the latter targets non-accessible, classified and illegal data.
Unfortunately, some citizens and commentators, at times out of ignorance or mischief, dish out misleading information about intelligence services. For context, a recent report alleged nepotism at the DIA. The petitioner claimed that the Chief of Defence Intelligence (CDI), Major General Emmanuel Parker Undiandeye appointed his kinsman as a Director; that both are from the same local government area and are not from the same branch of the military.
The CDI, an Army Officer, was appointed by President Bola Tinubu. Other senior military officers in the agency are representatives of various services whose postings are at the prerogative of their respective chiefs. The Deputy Chief of Defence Intelligence, Air Vice Marshall Samuel Chinda, is from the Nigerian Air Force (NAF).
Other senior directors were posted to the DIA by their services and, to a large extent, the federal character principle was reflected. The Director of Operation, an Army Officer, is from the Southwest; the Director of Technical Services, an Air Force Officer, is from the North-Central, while the Director of Finance, a Naval Officer, is from the South-South.
Apart from the Director of Pension who is from the Northeast, there are respected female directors too in the agency. One is a Christian from the South-East and another a Muslim from the North-West; the duo are in charge of the Department of Psychological Operation, and the Department of Research and Development, respectively.
There are no risks in reporting intelligence services’ activities; the risk lies in disclosing sensitive information that could compromise operations or national security, not to talk of misleading conjecture that is fake news. Though there are legal and ethical considerations in publishing reports about privacy rights, civil liberties or international norms, there are also serious repercussions on their misuse to manipulate public opinion.
Disclosures of names, positions and appointments of personnel in intelligence services mean much more than what they seem to be on the surface. Even ordinary military exercises have coded operational names in vernacular for strategic importance beyond what they mean. Therefore, revealing names, positions, sources, methods or targets of an intelligence service are risk factors which can lead to countermeasures in delicate situations.
It is quite worrisome that security and intelligence-related matters are now being garbed in the realm of politics and partisanship. Experience has shown that disgruntled elements, especially those indicted or found wanting for corruption, gross misconduct and other illegal acts, are frequently behind negative media campaigns.
It is gratifying to note that Defence Ministers, Badaru Abubakar and Bello Matawalle, read between the lines on the motives of fake news promoters. Public discourse, particularly on national security, should be guided by a sense of patriotism, responsibility and a commitment to accuracy. Inflammatory pronouncements that seek to malign individuals based on conjecture can only lead to detrimental consequences.
Mukhtar Madobi, a NDA research student, authored “National Security Strategies: A Young Writer’s Perspective”. ymukhtar944@gmail.com
