By Chris Usman
In November 2025, 21 member states were elected to the Executive Council of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) for the 2026-2028 term. The election was conducted during the 30th Session of the Conference of the States Parties (CSP-30). Nigeria, South Africa, Algeria, and Ghana won the African seats.
The Conference of the States Parties (CSP) is the principal plenary organ of the OPCW, composed of the OPCW’s 193 Member States. The CSP overseas the implementation of the United Nations Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), promotes the Convention’s objectives and reviews compliance with the treaty.
As the implementing body for the Chemical Weapons Convention, the OPCW, with its 193 Member States, overseas the global endeavor to permanently eliminate chemical weapons. Since the Convention’s entry into force in 1997, it has proved to be the most successful disarmament treaty, eliminating an entire class of weapons of mass destruction.
In 2023, the OPCW certified that all chemical weapons stockpiles declared by the 193 States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention since 1997 – totaling 72,304 metric tons of chemical agents – have been irreversibly destroyed under the OPCW’s strict verification regime. For its extensive efforts in eliminating chemical weapons, the OPCW received the 2013 Nobel Peace Prize.
The Executive Council consists of 41 OPCW Member States that are elected by the conference of the States Parties and rotate every two years. The Council supervises activities of the Technical Secretariat and is responsible for promoting the effective implementation of and compliance with the Convention.
However, accusations of bias and politicization regarding the recent election to the Executive Council and other decision-making bodies of the OPCW have surfaced. Analysts attribute this bias to the unprecedented political pressure from the United States, Britain, France and their allies. These nations have been reportedly campaigning against countries they dislike to ensure they are not elected to the Council.
The OPCW is now a hot-bed of serious disagreements between member states on basic facts, incomplete information, ethos of decision-making, and preventing the States Parties from arriving at definitive conclusions on the proliferation of chemical weapons.
Observers say Western countries are using political pressure to turn the technical body into a political tool by exerting pressure on participating states, organizing individual and collective demarches, visiting diplomatic missions and foreign policy departments, all to ‘’convince and sometimes force’’ some states’ to vote for their chosen candidates (the Czech Republic and Northern Macedonia in 2023, Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine in 2024).
Reports indicate that U.S. and its allies have created a ‘’lobby of countries subordinate to the military and political interests of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union,’’ in order to oust undesirable countries from the OPCW council. Earlier, in 2019, Venezuela sadly was ‘’squeezed out’’ of the Executive Council in a similar way, and in 2020, Syria lost the right to be elected to the governing and working bodies of the OPCW for political goals.
Experts point to financial and economic blackmail and threats against nations that could support states unsuitable to the West. Officials from the African Group at the OPCW called the result of the recent vote an ‘’electoral execution,’’ and stressed that it was the result of ‘’endless attacks by the West with unsubstantiated claims against third world countries over alleged violations of the Chemical Weapons Convention.
The African Group has consistently expressed strong concerns regarding recent voting practices at the Conference of the States Parties, politicization, which they argue ‘’undermine the States Parties’ exercise of the right to free choice, and the erosion of consensus within the organization.
The Group affirms that they would work with their allies and like-minded people to restore the authority of the organization and preserve the neutrality and integrity of the OPCW. The initiative of African countries to change the voting formula in the OPCW in order to weaken the influence of the West is gaining grounds among Member States Parties.
And they believe that the accusation of voting bias in the OPCW Executive Committee concerns not just the specific result of the vote, but also the broader practice of applying political pressure on international organizations.
Usman writes from Lokoja.
Democracy in the age of suspicion
By Abdulsamad Danji
The international community has also continued to observe Nigeria closely, given its strategic importance in Africa. Any political instability in the country would have serious regional implications, particularly at a time when democracy is under pressure in parts of West Africa. This reality places an even greater responsibility on Nigerian leaders and institutions to uphold constitutional governance.
In recent months, rumours of a possible coup in Nigeria have attracted widespread attention across social media platforms, online news outlets, and political discussions. These reports, though unverified, stirred anxiety among citizens and rekindled memories of the country’s long history of military intervention in politics. However, despite the tension generated by these claims, there is no confirmed military takeover currently taking place in Nigeria.
The controversy began in late 2025 when reports emerged that some military officers had been detained over an alleged plot to overthrow President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. The story spread quickly, triggering fear and speculation among the public. Given the recent wave of coups in several West African countries, many Nigerians were understandably worried that their nation might be facing a similar fate.
In response to the growing concern, the Defence Headquarters issued official statements denying that any coup was underway. Military authorities described the reports as misleading and emphasized that the Nigerian Armed Forces remain loyal to the constitution and the democratically elected government. According to them, the detained officers were undergoing internal investigations related to disciplinary matters rather than involvement in a plot to seize political power.
The Federal Government also moved to calm public fears by assuring Nigerians that the nation’s democratic institutions were stable and functioning effectively. Officials stressed that there was no breakdown in the chain of command within the military and no sign of unrest capable of threatening constitutional order. These reassurances were meant to restore confidence in the country’s security architecture and democratic process.
Despite these official denials, the rumours exposed deeper challenges within Nigeria’s political environment. Economic hardship, insecurity, unemployment, and rising public dissatisfaction have created a climate in which misinformation can easily flourish. In such circumstances, even minor incidents can be magnified into national emergencies, especially when amplified by social media.
Nigeria’s history further explains why the rumours generated intense reactions. Between 1966 and 1999, the country experienced several military coups that disrupted democratic governance and imposed authoritarian rule. The return to civilian government in 1999 marked a turning point, and since then, Nigeria has invested heavily in strengthening democratic institutions and redefining the role of the armed forces as a professional, non-political body.
Political analysts and civil society groups have therefore urged Nigerians to approach sensitive security information with caution. They warn that spreading unverified reports can create panic, undermine national unity, and weaken trust in democratic institutions. Responsible journalism and credible information remain essential tools for preserving peace and stability in a fragile political environment.
The international community has also continued to observe Nigeria closely, given its strategic importance in Africa. Any political instability in the country would have serious regional implications, particularly at a time when democracy is under pressure in parts of West Africa. This reality places an even greater responsibility on Nigerian leaders and institutions to uphold constitutional governance.
While rumours of a coup plot created anxiety across the nation, there is no evidence of an actual or ongoing military takeover in Nigeria. Both the Defence Headquarters and the Federal Government have firmly denied such claims, reaffirming their commitment to democratic rule. The episode serves as a reminder of the need for vigilance, transparency, and responsible communication in safeguarding Nigeria’s democracy.
Abdulsamad Danji is a Public Affairs Analyst.
Primordial sentiment, blind followership fueling Nigeria’s governance crisis
By Isaac Asabor
Instead of critically assessing claims, many followers amplify them. Dissenting voices are labeled unpatriotic, disloyal, or “agents” of opposition interests. A culture of blind defense emerges, insulating leaders from accountability and normalizing poor governance. Over time, even rational critique is drowned out by the noise of sentiment-driven loyalty.
Nigeria’s governance problem is often framed as a leadership crisis. Politicians fail to deliver on promises, public funds are mismanaged, infrastructure decays, and insecurity festers. The focus, usually, is on the leaders themselves. Yet this analysis is incomplete. The uncomfortable truth that many Nigerians avoid is that bad leaders do not rise and thrive in isolation. They are enabled, sustained, defended, and repeatedly recycled, by followers whose loyalty is rooted in sentiment rather than substance.
In a functioning democracy, the relationship between leaders and followers should be dynamic and accountability-driven. Citizens evaluate performance, demand transparency, and exercise the ultimate power of the vote responsibly. In Nigeria, however, a significant proportion of followers support politicians for reasons that have little to do with competence or governance. They prioritize identity, patronage, or short-term gain, all while remaining vocal critics of the consequences they themselves helped to create.
The cycle is familiar. Election campaigns erupt with promises of prosperity, security, and national development. Supporters enthusiastically endorse politicians, often suspending scrutiny or rational evaluation. Rallies become festivals of loyalty, social media platforms amplify partisan defenses, and critics are attacked for questioning the competence or integrity of leaders.
Once elections are over and reality sets in, roads remain bad, public wages unpaid, insecurity escalates, the same followers begin to lament governance failures. The paradox is striking: the complaints come from the very people who, through repeated support, allowed leaders with poor records of accomplishment or questionable integrity to assume power.
This is blind followership in its rawest form: loyalty without accountability, sentiment without evidence, and identity over competence.
One of the most powerful enablers of poor governance in Nigeria is political patronage. In a system where access to contracts, jobs, and necessities is often mediated by political connections, followers sometimes support leaders not out of conviction, but to secure material benefits.
Election campaigns become marketplaces. Cash handouts, food items, and other inducements influence votes, particularly in communities grappling with poverty. While the immediate reward might be tempting, the long-term cost is high. Leaders who invest heavily in winning votes through patronage often treat public resources as personal assets. Corruption becomes rationalized, and governance suffers. Yet, when the consequences emerge, followers frequently express outrage without acknowledging their complicity in enabling the very system that fuels mismanagement.
Beyond patronage, identity politics remains the most destructive form of followership in Nigeria. Ethnic, religious, and regional affiliations often determine political allegiance, displacing merit, competence, and vision. Many voters elevate candidates simply because they “belong to the group” or are seen as “one of us.”
This dynamic has predictable results. Leaders, confident that loyalty is guaranteed by identity rather than performance, feel little pressure to deliver. Failure is reframed as persecution; criticism is interpreted as an attack on the group rather than a demand for accountability. Citizens continue to defend poor governance under the guise of group solidarity, while national interests suffer.
The danger is clear: when primordial sentiment drives political choice, governance becomes secondary, and systemic failures persist unchecked. Hunger, insecurity, poor healthcare, and failing education systems do not respect ethnicity or religion, yet allegiance to identity often blinds citizens to these realities.
Poverty intensifies the problem. In economically disadvantaged communities, followers may prioritize immediate survival over long-term national interests. Political actors exploit this vulnerability by offering small, short-term incentives that sway voting behavior.
The consequences extend far beyond individual elections. When political offices are secured through vote-buying or transactional loyalty, governance becomes a secondary consideration. Leaders feel entitled to extract wealth from public resources to recoup political investment. Followers who sought temporary relief or reward are left paying the price in persistent infrastructural decay, inflation, and social instability.
Nigeria’s information ecosystem compounds the issue. Followers often receive information filtered through partisan media, social networks, or politically motivated narratives. Misinformation, propaganda, and selective framing shape perceptions of leaders and their performance.
Instead of critically assessing claims, many followers amplify them. Dissenting voices are labeled unpatriotic, disloyal, or “agents” of opposition interests. A culture of blind defense emerges, insulating leaders from accountability and normalizing poor governance. Over time, even rational critique is drowned out by the noise of sentiment-driven loyalty.
Perhaps the most corrosive effect of blind followership is the normalization of mediocrity. Corruption, mismanagement, and lack of accountability become expected rather than exceptional. Phrases like “they are all the same” or “at least they tried” reflect low expectations that benefit no one but failing leaders.
This cycle erodes the social contract between leaders and followers. Citizens begin to tolerate what they should resist. Leaders no longer fear electoral consequences for failure, and governance standards decline. In essence, followers become enablers, and democracy, instead of being a tool of accountability, becomes a ritualistic exercise with predictable outcomes.
The solution begins with followers. This is as democracy grants them the ultimate power, which is invariably the power and privilege to vote. Nevertheless, wielding it responsibly requires discipline, information, and moral courage.
In terms of prioritizing competence over Identity, followers must evaluate candidates based on vision, integrity, and capacity to govern rather than ethnic, religious, or regional affiliation.
Most importantly, voters must learn to reject patronage Politics. This is as short-term financial incentives should never dictate political choices. In fact, long-term national interest must outweigh temporary personal gain.
Also, is the area of demanding accountability. Therefore, voters should hold leaders to their campaign promises and public responsibilities, using both electoral and civic tools to enforce standards.
In a similar vein, followers should always resist manipulation. This is as critical consumption of information is essential. Therefore, followers must scrutinize narratives, question propaganda, and reject emotionally driven loyalty that blinds them to reality.
Engage Beyond Elections: Democracy does not end at the ballot box. Civic participation, community advocacy, and public discourse are vital to reinforcing accountability between elections.
Looking at democracy in this context as a shared responsibility, it is not out of place to opine that governance is a two-way street: leaders mirror the priorities, values, and compromises of those they serve. Not just inept leadership fuels Nigeria’s persistent governance crisis, but also by blind followership and loyalty to identity over competence. Until voters demand ability over sentiment, substance over spectacle, and accountability over patronage, the cycle will endure. Bad leaders do not rise alone; they are sustained by followers who tolerate, excuse, and rationalize failure. True democratic renewal will not come from politicians alone; it will come when citizens exercise their power deliberately, resist sentimental loyalties, and insist that public office is a platform for service, not survival. Until that shift occurs, complaints about corruption, inefficiency, and insecurity will remain loud, persistent, and fundamentally hollow. Followers, as much as leaders, must change.
Isaac Asabor is a Public Policy Analyst.
The belly of the beast
By Tony Osakpamwan Agbons
For Nigeria, the whirlwind can be curtailed. It has to be pragmatic – a sensible, realistic, and practical approach to solving problems based on current, real-world conditions rather than on theory or dogma. It entails choosing a workable solution over a perfect, unachievable one. At all levels of governance, leaders must cut down on their unbridled display of opulence and grandeur. Flaunting of extravagant lifestyles by the political class sends a wrong message to other members of society, especially young people, more so when such wealth has been accumulated not from legitimate work or industry.
As the year 2026 gathers pace, it is instructive to note that several resolutions, set goals, and objectives are already being put to the litmus test at individual, organisational, national and international levels. The end of a calendar year and the start of a new one offer a fresh opportunity for introspection and reflection. A new year is a moment to pick a new brush and paint on hand to design a fresh canvas. It is incontrovertible. For many, the time-tested formula of what went well, what can be improved comes to the fore. Within my stratosphere as a writer and media analyst, one of the frequent and tough questions from readers, viewers, friends, and associates is: “When and how do you write articles and publications that churn out all year round. It is often with a quite humble mien that the response, “To God be the Glory for the gift of writing”, comes out. So many who have got that response are often bemused as it is probably not the answer expected.
In the last twelve months, some enthralling articles were published, which expectedly drew myriads of engagements from across the world. They include (and in no particular order) – Molecular Valency, Attention with Intention, The Tangent of Culture and Strategy, Moral Barometer, Full Chest, Shoulder and Clavicle, The Ordeal in the Abyss: Facing the Shadow of Self, The First Moment of Truth, The Currency of Moral Plexus, amongst others. Writing is a gift. It, however, has to be nurtured – reading of literature is key for any aspiring writer. Active listening to audio and visual resources is also a prerequisite.
Looking back, virtually the entire catalogue of the famed African Writers Series was devoured as a teenager. Things Fall Apart, No Longer at Ease, Arrow of God, Anthills of the Savannah, and A Man of the People, all by Chinua Achebe, went down. Nguigui Wa Thiong’o’s books – Weep not Child, A Grain of Wheat, Petals of Blood, and The River Between got digested. Others were The Burning Grass, People of the City, Jagua Nana by Cyprian Ekwensi was brushed. Abraham Peter’s Mine Boy was absorbed along with The Beautiful Ones Are Not Yet Born by Amah Ayi Kwei, while Kenneth Kaunda’s Zambia Shall Be Free followed. Also, Wole Soyinka’s – The Lion and the Jewel, The Trial of Brother Jero, and The Man Died, fell in line. Much later, as an adult, The Protestant Ethic and Spirit of Capitalism by Max Weber, Why Politics Needs Religion by Brendan Sweetman and God`s Name in Vain by Stephen Carter were read. The James Hadley Chase series all went down except those unable to pass around with schoolmates. Then came the Pacesetters series and, of course, the romantic fantasy series of Mills and Boon. Best sellers like George Orwell’s 1984, Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte, and King Solomon’s Mines by Rider Haggard also joined the queue. Weekly publications like Newswatch, TELL, and Insider Weekly were not spared. The list goes on. The impact of these and other literary works on my young, impressionable mind was huge.
Within the sphere of cognitive psychology, character development from childhood to adulthood is in the minute details. Several factors – home training, peer influence, and environmental impact determines outcomes. Like the human mind, societal development is also in little ‘atomic’ details. Nations develop over time based on certain principles anchored on responsible leadership, proactive followership, working systems, institutions and of course the rule of law. In climes where the aforementioned are present, the result is transformation, a sense of belonging, love for country, accountability, reward for good, punishment for wrongdoing, happiness for the majority (and not a few), fairness, equity and justice.
Towards the tail end of the year, 2025, Nigeria was in the global news. It was designated as a Country of Particular Concern by the United States of America. The debate over Christian Genocide in the North and Middle Belt of the country went a stretch. The bombing of the terrorists’ hideout in Sokoto state, Northwest Nigeria, by American forces followed on Christmas Day. Both protagonists and antagonists on the issue have been on each other’s throats following the proclamation by POTUS Donald Trump of Christian Genocide in Nigeria. Going back to how Nigeria arrived at this point in this article amounts to `preaching to the choir`. The overriding interest by well-meaning Nigerians is that the incessant killings in Nigeria MUST stop. Be it a Christian, Muslim, or African Traditional Religion practitioner, no Nigerian life should be snuffed out by another. How is human life no longer regarded and valued? A cursory analysis of the arguments for and against the debate on Christian Genocide in Nigeria shows a misplaced ‘subtle acceptance’ of wanton loss of human lives, be it by terrorists, unknown gunmen, bandits, kidnappers, Islamist groups or whatever they are. The moral fabric of society is/has broken down. People now want to benefit from the pains and trauma of fellow citizens. They do it without any conscience or feelings for fellow human beings. Sad! The gift of life is divine, and no other human has the right to take it away. There is no justification for any Nigerian to abduct or kidnap another for ransom or monetary gain. What happened to our humanity? Reasons may be legion, but none suffice.
In the animal kingdom, where diverse beasts of prey reign supreme in territories, there are boundaries set by nature. Animal scientists posit that there is a semblance of orderliness within the domains of the jungle. Animal species protect their own/type. It is therefore sickening to see the low level with which some human beings now take the life of fellow humans in Nigeria. The wealthy elites look after each other. They are less than 2% of the population and work together to maintain their interests. Wealth distribution remains lopsided, and, as in George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm,’ it has become a case of the survival of the fittest. The high levels of desperation have reached astronomical heights. Many are quick to maim and kill for money. Things fall apart, and the centre cannot hold; mere anarchy is loosed upon the land. Classic words from the opening of W.B. Yeats’s 1919 poem “The Second Coming,” written in the aftermath of World War 1. The lines describe a state of societal collapse, profound chaos, and the loss of traditional order or “centre”. Yeats highlights a situation where stability has vanished, and anarchy is unleashed. It was from those evergreen words that the legendary Chinua Achebe penned the title of his globally acclaimed book, Things Fall Apart.
The belly of the beast is being in the middle of a dangerous, challenging, hostile or daunting situation. It signifies intense vulnerability and confrontation with a major threat. It mirrors the experience of the biblical character, Jonah, and implies navigating a high-risk environment with a difficult escape. For Nigeria, the whirlwind can be curtailed. It has to be pragmatic – a sensible, realistic, and practical approach to solving problems based on current, real-world conditions rather than on theory or dogma. It entails choosing a workable solution over a perfect, unachievable one. At all levels of governance, leaders must cut down on their unbridled display of opulence and grandeur. Flaunting of extravagant lifestyles by the political class sends a wrong message to other members of society, especially young people, more so when such wealth has been accumulated not from legitimate work or industry. The leaders must ensure that opportunities are created for all and not just for a select few. Policies and programs should be for the happiness of the majority and not for a few.
On the flip side, followers must understand that the country’s destiny lies in their hands and in their actionable moves. Yes, it is rational to complain, but that alone will not cut it. How many are interested and directly involved in political parties? Therein is the powerhouse. Good men and women for elective offices can only emerge from political parties. These are the candidates who are voted for on election day. Let`s not be under any illusion, politics holds the ace. The mantra is unassailable: Seek ye first the kingdom of politics and all other things shall be added, for a better nation. Let everyone be guided, just like the Biblical Jonah, who spent three days and nights in the belly of a fish, eventually got to Nineveh, and accomplished divine mission. Nigeria must achieve its purpose – become a society where all can thrive seamlessly ipso facto.
Tony Agbons, blogs @Twin2.org
