By Joy Odor Reportcircle News
What began as a standard operational visit by Nigeria’s Chief of Army Staff has now escalated into a sharp public rebuttal, as the Army Headquarters moved swiftly to dismantle what it described as a “misleading and malicious” account of events in the Niger Delta.
At the centre of the controversy is the recent visit of Lieutenant General Waidi Shaibu, Chief of Army Staff (COAS), to the 6 Division of the Nigerian Army in Port Harcourt, a trip that the military insists was wrongly framed as a warning over rising pipeline vandalism.
In a statement released by Colonel Appolonia Anele, the Acting Director, Army Public Relations, the military dismissed a report suggesting that the Army Chief had raised an alarm over worsening oil theft and pipeline sabotage in the region, describing the narrative as a distortion of facts and a futile attempt at blackmail.
According to the Army, no such alarm was raised.
What the Army Chief Actually Said
During an address to officers and soldiers on Friday 9, January 2026, the COAS focused squarely on operational responsibility, welfare, and discipline.
His message, according to official records, was unambiguous: protecting critical national infrastructure remains central to Nigeria’s economic stability, and the troops of 6 Division play a pivotal role in that mission.
He urged personnel to take their duties seriously, stressing discipline, commitment, and professionalism, while offering assurances that troop welfare remained a top command priority.
In a move that underscored this commitment, the Army Chief approved new accommodation projects, renovation of existing quarters, and the completion of stalled infrastructure within the barracks, steps aimed at easing long-standing housing challenges faced by personnel and their families.
Education for soldiers’ children was also highlighted as part of the welfare package under review, with the COAS linking improved living conditions to higher operational effectiveness.
A Routine Visit, Not a Red Alert
When questioned by journalists, Lieutenant General Shaibu framed the Port Harcourt stop as part of a broader pattern of routine operational inspections across Army formations.
His objective, he said, was to interact directly with troops, assess their combat readiness, identify challenges, and resolve them, either immediately or upon return to Abuja.
“I go round Divisions to see officers and men, interact with them and ensure readiness,” he noted, adding that several issues raised during the visit were already addressed on the spot, with others queued for swift resolution.
At no point, the Army insists, did the COAS describe the security situation in the Niger Delta as deteriorating.
Army Headquarters went further, arguing that the misrepresentation ignores measurable progress on the ground.
Security indicators, it said, point to improved containment of oil theft and pipeline vandalism, developments that have helped sustain exploration and production activities in the oil and gas sector, a critical pillar of Nigeria’s economy.
“These efforts are yielding results,” the statement noted, warning against narratives that downplay security gains for adversarial effect.
In a pointed message to sections of the media, the Army urged journalists to verify facts before publication, warning against what it described as a habit of bending narratives to suit predetermined positions.
For the public, the message was equally direct: disregard reports that seek to undermine ongoing security operations, and continue to support security agencies by providing credible intelligence on economic sabotage.
As the dust settles, one thing is clear what the Army intended as a morale-boosting inspection and welfare intervention has become a case study in how security narratives, if unchecked, can shift from operational reality to public controversy.
