As Famadewa Takes Centre Stage, What Next for Ribadu?

By Al-Amin Ciroma

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s latest move to strengthen Nigeria’s national security coordination has opened a new conversation about the changing balance of responsibility within the country’s security architecture, particularly the position and influence of National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu.

The debate was triggered by the President’s decision to appoint Major General Adeyinka Famadewa as Special Adviser on Homeland Security and subsequently assign him a central coordinating role in the preparation of a new National Threat Assessment and a five-year Strategic Defence Operations Plan.

On the surface, the development does not amount to the removal of Ribadu from office. The National Security Adviser remains a member of the 11-man committee constituted by the President, alongside the Defence Minister, service chiefs and heads of key intelligence agencies. But the decision to place Famadewa at the centre of the committee responsible for developing the country’s strategic defence plan has inevitably raised questions about how responsibilities are now being distributed at the top of the security establishment.

The significance of the change lies in its potential to reshape how security decisions are coordinated. Rather than relying solely on existing structures, the Tinubu administration is creating an additional layer intended to bring together intelligence, military planning and broader homeland security concerns.

Famadewa’s new assignment is particularly significant because the President has directed him to coordinate the committee and provide secretariat support for the preparation of the strategic defence plan. The document is expected to identify the major threats confronting Nigeria, establish operational priorities, determine capability gaps and provide a framework for future defence spending and procurement.

THE NATIONAL LENS reports that this responsibility places Famadewa in a prominent position within a security structure in which Ribadu remains a central figure. It therefore becomes difficult to ignore the question of whether the new arrangement represents a deliberate redistribution of influence or simply an attempt by the Presidency to improve coordination among institutions that have often operated within overlapping areas of responsibility.

The distinction matters. There has been no official declaration from the Presidency that Ribadu has been demoted. Indeed, the official directive continues to recognise him as a member of the committee alongside the nation’s principal security and defence chiefs. What has changed is the emergence of another senior security figure with a clearly defined coordinating responsibility.

The development comes against the background of persistent security challenges facing the country and growing pressure on the government to achieve better coordination between military, intelligence and other security institutions.

Ribadu has remained deeply involved in the administration’s security diplomacy. In May, he led Nigeria’s delegation to the United States for high-level discussions with American officials, including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, on counterterrorism, defence cooperation, intelligence sharing and regional security.

That international role suggests that Ribadu continues to occupy an important place in the administration’s national security strategy. At the same time, the creation of the Homeland Security position indicates that Tinubu may be seeking a more specialised division of responsibilities as the security challenges confronting Nigeria become increasingly complex.

The real issue, therefore, may not be whether Ribadu has been demoted, but whether the President is gradually redesigning the way national security is managed.

If the new arrangement succeeds in eliminating overlapping responsibilities and producing a clearer chain of coordination, it could strengthen the administration’s response to insecurity. But if the roles of the National Security Adviser and the Homeland Security Adviser are not clearly separated, the new structure could create another layer of institutional competition.

For now, the evidence points more strongly to a restructuring of responsibilities than an outright demotion of Ribadu.

What happens next, however, will depend on how much authority Famadewa eventually exercises, how his role interacts with the Office of the National Security Adviser and whether the new security framework produces measurable improvements on the ground.

That is where the real test of Tinubu’s latest security reform will lie, not in the titles attached to the officials, but in who ultimately coordinates the response and whether the new structure delivers a safer Nigeria.