“Buratai Introduced Deliberate Reforms” — Defence Minister Musa

The praise for former Chief of Army Staff, Lt Gen Tukur Buratai, has reopened a much bigger question about the Nigerian Army between 2015 and 2021: what actually changed, what remained unresolved, and what lessons should the military carry forward?

At the presentation of Military Transformational Leadership in Action: The Buratai Era in Abuja on Wednesday, Defence Minister Christopher Musa described Buratai’s tenure as a period of deliberate institutional reform covering training, equipment, welfare and professionalism.

The book itself examines those areas alongside the security challenges of the period. Musa also described himself as a beneficiary of Buratai’s leadership legacy.

That praise deserves to be placed alongside the record of the period, rather than treated as the whole story.

What Buratai actually tried to change

Buratai became Chief of Army Staff in July 2015, when Boko Haram remained a major national security threat and the Army faced serious infrastructure and welfare problems.

Contemporary accounts documented efforts to improve barracks, accommodation, troop welfare, electronic payment systems, medical support and the kitting of soldiers.

Buratai himself said welfare was central to troop morale and pointed to improvements in accommodation, allowances, uniforms and casualty evacuation.

There were also attempts to improve operational capability and reorganise the Army around the realities of counter-insurgency.

Those reforms matter because an army fighting a prolonged war cannot depend only on bravery. It requires equipment, logistics, medical support, training, accommodation and a functioning system of pay and allowances.

But the existence of reforms does not mean every problem disappeared.

The soldiers who complained

ADVERTISEMENT

During the same period, there were public complaints about equipment, allowances and conditions of service. In 2018, reports emerged of soldiers in the North-East complaining about inadequate kits and protective equipment.

There were also reports of a protest by soldiers in Maiduguri over redeployment to Marte, a major Boko Haram battleground. The Army investigated the incident and said soldiers found culpable would face military justice.

There was also a wider human-rights accountability problem. The Army’s Human Rights Desk said in 2019 that it had received 350 complaints of alleged violations involving personnel over a three-year period.

These facts do not erase the reforms, just as the reforms do not erase the complaints.

That is the more complicated history.

Then and now

Musa himself knows the welfare argument from the inside. As Chief of Defence Staff in 2024, he repeatedly spoke about improving salaries, allowances, operational support and capacity development for military personnel.

His message was clear: soldiers who risk their lives should not be neglected.He is now in a different position.

As Defence Minister, Musa sits at the level responsible for strategic defence policy and oversight. The Ministry of Defence identifies his current priorities as troop welfare, pensions, medical care, housing, allowances, indigenous defence production, joint operations, accountability and reform.

That means the next chapter should be measured not only by speeches about welfare but by measurable outcomes.

Are soldiers being paid correctly and on time? Are troops adequately equipped? Are procurement processes transparent? Is indigenous production increasing? Are casualties receiving proper medical and family support? Are human-rights complaints investigated effectively?

These are questions that sit beyond personalities.

The real test of the Buratai legacy

Buratai’s admirers can point to infrastructure, welfare measures, institutional changes and operational reforms. Critics can point to the difficult security environment, allegations of human-rights violations and continuing complaints from troops.

Both parts of the record deserve examination.For Musa, however, the more important question is no longer simply what Buratai did.

It is what the current Defence Ministry will build on, correct and improve.

A military legacy becomes meaningful when its useful reforms survive its architect and its weaknesses are not repeated.

For Nigeria, the ultimate measure remains simple: better-equipped soldiers, better-treated personnel, stronger institutions and greater security for citizens.

That is the standard by which every military era should eventually be judged, ValidViewNetwork reports.