Maiduguri must not bleed again

Nearly a decade has passed since residents of Maiduguri began to experience a fragile return to normal life after years of devastating attacks by the insurgent group Boko Haram. Markets reopened, businesses slowly recovered, and families dared to hope that the worst days of violence were finally behind them.  Sadly, the recent bomb blasts, at […]

Nearly a decade has passed since residents of Maiduguri began to experience a fragile return to normal life after years of devastating attacks by the insurgent group Boko Haram. Markets reopened, businesses slowly recovered, and families dared to hope that the worst days of violence were finally behind them.

 Sadly, the recent bomb blasts, at the bustling Monday Market and other locations,  have shattered that fragile sense of security and reminded the nation that the threat of terrorism has not completely disappeared.

The incident is not only tragic because of the loss of innocent lives and the injuries sustained by many; it is also deeply symbolic.

For years, Monday Market has represented the resilience of Maiduguri’s people—a place where commerce and community thrived despite the scars of conflict.

An attack in such a location strikes not only at individuals but at the collective spirit of a city that has already endured so much.

While investigations will determine the exact circumstances surrounding this latest attack, many observers have long warned that the danger of resurgence remains real.

One of the most debated aspects of Nigeria’s counter-insurgency strategy has been the rehabilitation and reintegration of former militants through programmes such as Operation Safe Corridor. The intention behind such initiatives—to deradicalise and reintegrate repentant fighters into society—is understandable and in line with international approaches to post-conflict reconciliation.

However, the policy raises difficult questions that cannot be ignored. When individuals, who once carried out acts of terror are declared repentant and returned to the same communities they once attacked, many victims and survivors feel that justice has not been fully served.

For those who lost loved ones, homes, and livelihoods, the reintegration process can appear less like reconciliation and more like impunity. Critics argue that prematurely pardoning or reintegrating former militants may send an unintended message—that grave crimes can be forgiven without sufficient accountability.

Reports and security concerns suggesting that some rehabilitated individuals may have returned to militant groups only intensify public anxiety.

Whether these claims are isolated cases or broader systemic failures, they highlight the need for greater transparency, stricter monitoring, and a more balanced approach between rehabilitation and justice. The victims of insurgency must remain at the centre of any policy discussion. Thousands of families across northeastern Nigeria continue to live with the trauma of the insurgency. Their suffering cannot be overshadowed by policies that appear to prioritise the reintegration of perpetrators without adequately addressing the needs of those harmed.

This moment calls for sober reflection rather than political defensiveness.

Nigeria’s fight against terrorism requires a comprehensive strategy—one that combines strong security measures, effective intelligence gathering, community engagement, and carefully managed deradicalisation programmes. Rehabilitation should never come at the expense of justice, and reintegration must be accompanied by rigorous assessment, monitoring, and community consultation. Above all, the government must reassure citizens that their safety remains paramount. The people of Maiduguri have endured years of violence and hardship with remarkable resilience. They deserve lasting peace, not the haunting fear that their city may once again become abattle field. Maiduguri has bled enough. The nation must ensure that it does not bleed again.

 

Mansur Nayashi can be reached via [email protected]