Seventeen soldiers have been confirmed dead and at least ten others injured following coordinated attacks by armed terrorists on multiple military bases in northern Nigeria, marking one of the deadliest assaults on the country’s armed forces in recent times.

The attacks occurred on Tuesday in Niger and Kaduna States, targeting forward operating bases in Kwanar Dutse Mariga and Boka areas of Niger State, and another base in neighbouring Kaduna. Security sources described the assault as an ambush carried out with heavy ammunition by hundreds of armed fighters.

According to military and local sources, the fiercest attack took place at the Kwanar Dutse Mariga base, where all 17 fatalities were recorded. A local official, Abbas Kasuwar Garba, who chairs the Mariga district, confirmed that the soldiers were caught off-guard. “They came from nowhere and used heavy weapons to launch the attack,” said a Niger-based army officer.

The Nigerian Army has since broken its silence on the incident, offering more detail about the scale and nature of the assault. Lieutenant Colonel Appolonia Anele, the Army spokesperson, confirmed that over 300 terrorists attempted to infiltrate Bangi community in Mariga Local Government Area before being engaged in a joint ground and air operation by the Nigerian Army and Air Force.

“The operation, which was based on credible intelligence, led to troops engaging about 300 armed bandits in Kwanar Dutse Forest,” said Anele. “The firefight lasted over three hours, after which the Nigerian Air Force conducted precision airstrikes on their withdrawal routes, delivering accurate bombardments on identified terrorist positions.”

Though the exact number of terrorist casualties remains unconfirmed, the military reported multiple blood trails along the escape paths, suggesting substantial losses among the attackers.

Anele also confirmed that ten soldiers were injured and are currently receiving treatment at a military medical facility. “They are in stable condition,” she said.

Northern Nigeria, particularly Niger State, has become a hotspot of overlapping security crises, with both bandit groups and Islamist militants such as Boko Haram and Islamic State affiliates operating in the region. The attackers in this latest incident were reportedly fleeing intensified military bombardment in Zamfara State and seeking new safe havens when they clashed with the troops.

The Army has called on the public to support ongoing counter-terrorism operations by providing timely and actionable information.

The Northern Elders Forum (NEF) has issued a grave warning to the Federal Government, declaring that Northern Nigeria is “bleeding” under the weight of unrelenting violence and that continued inaction amounts to “criminal negligence.”

The statement follows a horrific attack on June 20, in which over a dozen people were killed when a mob set fire to a bus carrying wedding guests traveling from Zaria, Kaduna State, to Quan Pan Local Government Area in Plateau State. Many of the victims suffered severe burns and injuries in what NEF described as a “brutal massacre.”

In a strongly worded statement released Tuesday by the forum’s spokesperson, Abubakar Jiddere, NEF condemned the attack as a reflection of Nigeria’s deepening security crisis and a collapse of leadership at the highest levels.

“This country is bleeding, and it is bleeding from the North,” the forum declared. “The obligation to protect life and restore order is not a favour the government grants — it is a constitutional imperative. Failure to act now is not just negligence. It is complicity.”

NEF described the targeted attack on innocent travellers as a “premeditated atrocity” and a “crime against humanity,” accusing the Nigerian state of failing its most basic duty: safeguarding human life.

The group painted a bleak picture of security across the region, highlighting widespread suffering:

• North-West: Villages are deserted, and communities are ravaged by mass abductions and killings.

• North-East: Terrorist attacks persist, with no end in sight.

• North-Central: Daily life is haunted by random killings and routine kidnappings.

“What was once sporadic unrest has now mutated into systemic terror,” the statement continued. “This terror thrives under the shadow of impunity and government inertia.”

NEF urged the federal government to act decisively and immediately, warning that failure to address the spiraling violence could lead to deeper instability and further erode citizens’ trust in governance.

“The cost of delay is paid in blood. The time to act is now,” the forum concluded.

Former presidential candidate Peter Obi has condemned what he described as a brazen act of lawlessness following the demolition of a property belonging to his youngest brother in Ikeja, Lagos, without any known demolition order, permit, or valid court judgement.

In a statement personally issued by Obi on Wednesday, he narrated how his brother, who had just returned from Port Harcourt, was barred from entering his company’s premises by security personnel who informed him that demolition had already begun. The property, which Obi said had been owned by his brother’s company for over a decade, was being torn down by unidentified agents who failed to present any legal backing for the action.

“When I arrived at the site from Abuja, security men tried to stop me from entering the property,” Obi said. “They claimed there was a court judgement, but when I demanded to see it, I discovered it was issued against ‘an unknown person’ and squatters — not my brother’s company.”

Obi said no name was listed on the supposed court order, no one was served, and no demolition permit was presented. When he questioned the contractors carrying out the demolition, they claimed they did not know who had engaged them and could not produce any documentation authorizing their actions.

“I stood there from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., waiting for a call from whoever sent them, but no one reached out. Two men later suggested we go to a police station, yet they had no demolition order to show,” Obi said. “It was clearly a coordinated act of impunity.”

The former Anambra State governor used the incident to highlight broader concerns about deteriorating human rights, institutional failure, and the rule of law in Nigeria. Drawing from his own experiences since contesting the 2023 presidential election, Obi lamented that even as a prominent citizen, he has faced abuse of his rights — raising serious questions about the safety and dignity of ordinary Nigerians.

“If this can happen to someone with a registered company and legitimate claims, what hope does the ordinary Nigerian have?” he asked.

Obi said the incident underscores why many investors avoid Nigeria. He recounted a recent conversation with a businessman who operates in Ghana, Senegal, and Benin Republic but refuses to invest in Nigeria due to what he called the country’s lawlessness and lack of legal protection.

“Our country has become lawless,” Obi warned. “What kind of nation are we building if the rights, properties, and voices of citizens are so easily trampled upon?”

He called for urgent reforms and reaffirmed his commitment to building a Nigeria anchored on the rule of law, protection of life and property, human rights, social justice, and equal opportunity for all.

Seven Israeli soldiers killed in Gaza, pressure on Netanyahu for ceasefire

The Israeli military said seven soldiers were killed in a single attack in southern Gaza on Tuesday, the military's deadliest day in the territory since it broke a ceasefire with Hamas in March.

A lieutenant, three staff sergeants and three sergeants, members of a combat engineering battalion, were killed when a explosive device planted on the armoured vehicle they were travelling in ignited a fire, the military said on Wednesday.

The latest deaths are likely to increase public pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to reach a permanent ceasefire in Gaza and end the nearly two-year-long war, a move strongly opposed by hardline members of his right-wing ruling coalition.

Public support for Netanyahu collapsed after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on southern Israel from Gaza, which exposed Israel to its deadliest security failure.

But his standing has been boosted by his surprise decision to strike Iran — a campaign widely viewed as dealing a significant blow to Israel's longtime adversary.

Attention has shifted back to Gaza following U.S. President Donald Trump's announcement of a truce between Israel and Iran that came into effect on Tuesday and continues to hold.

Moshe Gafne, a lawmaker from an ultra-Orthodox party within Netanyahu’s coalition government, on Wednesday publicly questioned why Israel was still locked in the war in Gaza.

"This is a very sad day, with seven soldiers killed in Gaza ... I still don’t understand why we are fighting there. To what end?" he told a parliamentary committee.

Hamas' military wing confirmed that it had carried out the deadly attack in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, on Tuesday. It said its fighters had also fired an anti-tank missile at another vehicle that came to help.

The war in Gaza has isolated Israel from many of its international partners critical of the military campaign. During the 12 days Israel was fighting Iran, more than 800 Palestinians were killed in Gaza by the Israeli military, including at least 30, among them a journalist, on Wednesday, according to local health officials.

The deadliest day for the Israeli military since the war started was in January 2024, when 24 soldiers were killed, 20 of them in a single explosion.

HOSTAGES

The Gaza war has persisted despite mounting domestic and international calls for a permanent ceasefire and to secure the release of the remaining hostages, as coalition members Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich have pressed to keep fighting.

Netanyahu's right-wing coalition of secular and religious parties holds a narrow parliamentary majority, meaning the prime minister can ill afford dissent.

The Hostages and Missing Families Forum, which represents the relatives of some captives, this week called on the United States to push for a comprehensive deal that would secure the release of the hostages.

Twenty hostages remain in captivity in Gaza, while Hamas is also holding the bodies of 30 who have died.

Netanyahu has demanded that Hamas, which has ruled Gaza for nearly two decades, release the hostages, relinquish any future role in Gaza and lay down its weapons in order to end the war.

Hamas has said it would release the hostages if Israel agrees to a permanent ceasefire and withdraws from Gaza. It has refused to discuss disarmament.

The war in Gaza was triggered when Hamas-led militants attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, killing close to 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies.

Most of the hostages released so far have been freed through indirect negotiations between Hamas and Israel.

Israel's retaliatory war in Gaza has so far killed 56,000 Palestinians, according to local health authorities, most of them civilians, and destroyed much of the coastal strip.

Reuters

As economic hardship bites and the state fails to curtail the problem of insecurity, people rue their decision to vote for Bola Tinubu as president in 2023. This angst seems to be coming from every corner of the country; people frequently denounce this administration’s failure to provide relief from the years of deprivation. From the politicians who either lost out in the power game of the 2023 general election or were sidelined in the sharing of the spoils of office to Yoruba Nollywood, where actors such as Ebun Oloyede (aka Olaiya Igwe), Ibironke Ojo-Anthony (aka Ronke Oshodi Oke), Bukky Raji (Aminatu Papapa), and Ganiu Nafiu (Alapini) had publicly apologised for campaigning for Tinubu last elections, there seems to be a lot of regret being circulated.

The case of the Nollywood actors joining the lamentation chorus is interesting, as it is curious. For these Yoruba actors to publicly apologise for supporting a Yoruba politician without fear of pushback from fellow Yorubas who will expectedly be protective of their own, it must mean their lamentations resonate with a section of the populace. Was it not just a mere couple of years ago that anyone who was not seen supporting Tinubu’s presidential ambition was labelled with indecorous names? The hand of hardship must have descended on so many people that the tribal sentiment that drove the censure has given way to collective frustration and rage.

Yet, apart from satisfying the schadenfreude of folks (like me) who warned that Tinubu would be a monumental disaster if elected, does any good ever come out of people’s electoral regrets? The political coalition seeking to unseat Tinubu come 2027 alludes to voter regret as a factor that would drive their electoral success, but is it even worth capitalising on?  Unfortunately, without serious polling and sensible statistical analysis, one cannot really determine the extent to which these supposed announcements of voter regret matter. Do voters regret their choices enough to defect from him, or are they merely expressing a momentary feeling that will dissipate in the face of other calculations?

While we do not have the figures to divine the true nature of the feelings, there is enough precedent to assert this: in Nigeria, no president ever wins or loses because of their administrative competence and performance quality. You win in spite of—never because of—what you do. Muhammadu Buhari, for instance, was booed and stoned at various times during his presidency, but that did not stop his party from winning those same states. The politics of religion and ethnicity, the driving ideologies of our democracy, are far too strong for the incompetence of a mediocre to matter.

Hardly anyone ever admits they overlook leadership performance in making their electoral choices. Yet, to borrow the insight of famous anthropologist Margaret Mead, “What people say, what people do, and what they say they do are entirely different things.” So, yes, while we make so much of leadership acumen in Nigeria, is it ever the primary driving motivation for our electoral decisions? People frequently allude to previous performance milestones in publicising their voting choices (and we saw much of that last election), but do they also not abjure all evidence that contradicts the ideal image they hold in their minds about their candidate? The truth is that a lot of people make their decisions based on the identity politics of religion and ethnicity; the supposed fact of performance merely provides a sturdy rational ground to justify their voting choices.

To admit that one’s electoral decisions are based on consideration of religion and ethnicity is to give oneself away as sentimental and even irrational. When such people put forward performance as a factor in their voting decisions, it is a logical and moral shield and not necessarily a deal breaker.

That, of course, brings me to the crux of the issue: the problem of little to no expectations from our politicians. To a great extent, we do not select leaders based on the expectation that our lives will be transformed. We choose to select mostly because—and in a perennially divided polity such as ours—we want to beat down the other guys competing with us for symbolic resources. Those who voted for Tinubu in 2023 because of his religion did not do so because they expected that their lives as Muslims would be any more transformed, but to keep Christians out of power (and vice versa). The same goes for those who voted because of ethnicity—they did not (and still do not) expect their Yoruba lives to be improved, but are at least satisfied that the tribe they dislike is not near power. I know some people presently anguished by Tinubu’s presidency but will vote for him again for no other reason than one-up on his main nemesis, Peter Obi (and his followers, of course). Some might find it amusing (or even distressing) that civic participation could be animated by sheer dislike for the other side rather than an objective improvement of one’s life, but that is how politics unfold when people have lost sight of how else they can live.

Our politics reflect our cynicism. At the back of the mind of everyone who wants their tribe or religion to be vindicated through electoral victory is the hopelessness that the country can ever be better. No matter who wins, much will remain the same and we might as well settle for defeating the other team as our dividend of democracy. There is no time that we do not shout the same agonising cries of “water! light! food! house! yeparipa o!” When Olusegun Obasanjo was president, it was hard. When Umaru Yar’Adua took over from him, hardship was still prevalent. When Goodluck Jonathan came to power, it seemed we would be squeezed to death. Then Buhari came and turned the face of the country to the midnight sun. He could not even muster enough willpower to be a basic decent human. Those who thought he was at the peak of disaster have realised that with Tinubu, there is always a “next level” incompetence and ineffectiveness with our leaders.

With each cycle of failed leadership, hopes are dashed, and the bar of expectations is lowered six feet into the ground. What options remain for people who want to lash out and redeem some meaning from a process that has become an essentially meaningless pseudo-democratic arrangement, other than claiming symbolic victories?

We can already hazard a guess at how the game will be played next election. Muslims will be mobilised to prevent Christians from getting to power, and Christians will be asked to push back vigorously to assert their strength. Yorubas will be driven to the polls when they are wound up to fight against entitled “Hausa-Fulani” who want to collect their hard-won Aso Rock from their hands; other ethnicities will be driven to fight against the “awa lokan” spirit that has accrued so much power in the hands of Yoruba elites (so they can transfer it to their own elites). Same politics, different seasons.

That is why regretful voter choices can make the news but hardly matter in the calculations that translate to voting choices. The fact that people regret their choices does not mean they will not repeat them. Voter regret gets attention but is hardly bankable. Those who have something to offer in 2027 had better not be surprised that the hardship induced by the present administration did not sway minds.

Punch

Sophie Caldwell

You only have about 90 seconds to make a strong first impression in a job interview, says Columbia Business School professor Michael Chad Hoeppner. 

To engage and impress the interviewer quickly, think about the way you speak, Hoeppner wrote in his recent book, “Don’t Say Um: How to Communicate Effectively to Live a Better Life.” 

There are three easy ways to get a recruiter or hiring manager’s attention, he says. 

1. Start off strong. Your first question is often the most important, because the interviewer’s attention span will fade, Hoeppner says. To keep them listening, start your responses with a strong, visual anecdote. 
2. Focus on delivery. If you try to make your voice sound more professional and measured, you risk coming off robotic, he says. Instead, relax your posture, use body language like hand gestures when it feels natural to you, and speak as clearly and confidently as possible. 
3. Practice. The only way to become a more natural-sounding, confident speaker, is to practice, Hoeppner says. He recommends a method he calls “loud drafting.” Give yourself an open-ended prompt and answer it out loud. “The first time you do it, it will be bad,” he says. “That’s fine. Do it again, do it again, do it again.” 

The point of this exercise is to practice answering questions in a natural way, he says. Some job candidates prepare for interviews by jotting down prepared statements, but they frequently sound stiff and unnatural when said out loud.

“The way in which we speak is different than how we write,” he says. “Often, people open their mouths in interviews and a bunch of polysyllabic pablum comes pouring out of their mouth.”

In general, Hoeppner recommends “flexing your talking muscles” by chatting casually with people you meet and switching your phone calls to FaceTime.

According to Hoeppner, in-person communication skills will become increasingly important with the rise of AI technology. With almost-limitless access to information, Hoeppner asks, “what determines whose ideas get paid more attention?

His answer: “Very likely how you say them.”

CNBC