In the complex and often tumultuous landscape of national security, clear and accurate communication isn’t just important—it’s paramount. This becomes especially critical when dealing with sensitive and tragic issues, such as the horrific killings that recently unfolded in Benue State.

Disturbingly, the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), General Christopher Musa, found his words on these incidents distorted and misrepresented across various media outlets. This unsettling development prompted the Defence Headquarters (DHQ) to issue a swift clarification, shining a spotlight on a concerning and increasingly prevalent trend: the weaponisation of quotes taken entirely out of context.

The DHQ’s statement, delivered by Brigadier-General Tukur Gusau, left no room for ambiguity. It unequivocally clarified that General Musa never blamed the victims of the Benue killings. Rather, his remarks were thoughtfully intended to highlight the intricate realities of conflict zones and underscore the vital need for communities to be both vigilant and cooperative with security agencies.

This official clarification directly refutes the misleading narrative pushed by certain media reports and, as the DHQ rightly pointed out, by advocacy groups who seemingly “twisted the narrative and attempted to politicise an issue as sensitive as national security.”

This incident serves as a stark and sobering reminder of the potent danger inherent in misrepresenting statements. As the DHQ’s communication rightly asserts, stripping quotes of their context can completely alter their original meaning, leading to a cascade of negative and far-reaching consequences. Such deceptive tactics are frequently employed to spread misinformation, incite unrest, or even provide fabricated “evidence” to fuel baseless conspiracy theories. The damage caused by such irresponsible reporting can be immense, eroding public trust and exacerbating already tense situations.

Consider the classic literary device of irony: a statement meant sarcastically can be completely misunderstood when it’s divorced from its accompanying tone, facial expression, or the broader context of the conversation. Similarly, a nuanced comment about the importance of community vigilance against criminal elements can be cunningly twisted into a callous accusation of victim-blaming. This appears to be precisely what happened with General Musa’s remarks. His true intention was to foster greater cooperation between citizens and security forces, and to shed light on the immense challenges faced by those tasked with maintaining peace—not to absolve perpetrators or cast any form of blame on the innocent who have suffered.

It is deeply regrettable that in an era where public trust in institutions is already fragile, certain entities would resort to such manipulative practices. The DHQ’s forceful emphasis on General Musa’s consistent and unwavering commitment to protecting all Nigerians, regardless of their ethnicity, religion, or gender, further underscores the malicious intent behind these misrepresentations. His extensive track record of promoting robust civil-military cooperation and consistently upholding the values of professionalism, compassion, and integrity in military operations stands as a testament to his dedication and leadership.

The Defence Headquarters’ urgent call for restraint, meticulous fact-verification, and constructive engagement from all stakeholders is not merely a suggestion, but a crucial imperative. In highly volatile and emotionally charged security situations, the dissemination of inflammatory statements based on misinterpretations can only serve to exacerbate existing tensions and further erode the already delicate public trust in vital national institutions.

Instead of dwelling on divisive and misleading narratives, it’s far more productive and beneficial to acknowledge the proactive and tangible measures being implemented by the Defence Headquarters under General Musa’s decisive leadership. Initiatives such as the intellectual policy-driven administrative framework, which prioritises appointing skilled individuals to key defence staff positions, and the meritorious approach to assigned tasks, underscore a commitment to excellence.

The invigorated inter-service operations, fostered through enhanced synergies, and the improved working relationships with the Presidency, which have notably led to the resumption of the long-stalled Defence HQ Complex construction (stopped in 1999!), along with the construction of a Defence Medical Services Hospital in Abuja, all vividly demonstrate a profound commitment to strengthening Nigeria’s national security infrastructure.

Furthermore, the military’s ongoing support to civil police and authorities in tackling local security challenges—often beyond their traditional remit—and the significant uplifting of facilities in joint military training institutions, collectively highlight a dedication to a more comprehensive and holistic security approach across the nation.

Ultimately, this incident serves as a powerful and timely lesson for both media outlets and the general public. In an age characterised by information overload and rapid dissemination, the crucial responsibility to critically assess information and diligently understand its context falls squarely on all of us. When it comes to issues of national security and the very lives of citizens, the truth, unvarnished and unmanipulated, is not just preferred—it is the only acceptable currency. Are we, as a society, prepared to demand and uphold this standard of truth?
Awodi wrote from North Carolina, USA. He can be reached via: [email protected]