By Group Captain Sadeeq Garba Shehu (rtd)
INTRODUCTION
During the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari, all the three Services (Army, Navy and Air Force) embarked on a project of establishing “military universities.” For some inexplicable reasons, both the Executive and the Legislative branches accepted, approved and released funds for the establishment of these universities at a time that the military was lacking in basic operational items such weapons and ammunition. Even though the Steve Oronsaye Committee generally avoided reform within the security sector, in its recommendations, it included the merging of some of the military universities with the Nigerian Defence Academy (NDA). This article is written with the aim of contributing to the debate on military universities.
ARE MILITARY UNIVERSITIES A PRIORITY OR NECESSITY FOR THE ARMED FORCES?
- Running universities is a distraction for the Armed Forces already struggling to fulfill their main mandate of providing security.
b. For a country at war, military universities are not, were never a priority, but somehow got approved by both Executive and legislative branches at a time military needed more important things.
c. If properly done, the monies currently being poured into the 3 military universities could be channeled into more equipment and training to improve the capacity of the military.
d. Truth is that the military does not need exclusively military run universities to do its work… 90% of military work doesn’t need Masters or PHD degree holders but rather technicians and tradesmen trained and certified in a variety of skills. All the military needs are well resourced training schools in the mould of the former Nigerian Air Force (NAF) Technical Training Group (TTG) and the Army Engineers School in Makurdi, while the small percentage of military personnel needing Masters and PhDs can apply to the many public universities.
In analyzing this issue of military universities, it is important to note that while the terms “training” and “education” are often used interchangeably, in the military profession especially, there is a difference. While both processes aim to enhance an individual’s knowledge and skills, they differ significantly in their scope, objectives, characteristics, and approaches. Training, which is what a military man needs to accomplish his tasks, and which a military training institution will give, is more focused on developing specific skills and knowledge. Training programs are often tailored to meet an organisation’s, not necessarily individual’s immediate needs. Training is a targeted and specific process to acquire particular skills or knowledge to achieve a defined purpose or goal.
Through Military Training, military personnel undergo rigorous training to acquire combat skills, discipline, and teamwork abilities. This training can include physical fitness, weapon handling, and tactical exercises. Certainly this is not what the existing military universities offer to their majority non-military clients. Thus it is difficult to say that the military universities we now have which is being run with defence resources are serving the Nigerian military especially where some of the military universities offer courses such as Banking and Finance.
Education on the other hand, which is what a university will give, focuses on broad intellectual and personal development. Training is typically shorter-term and more hands-on while education is typically longer-term and more theoretical.
So, removing or stopping military from running universities is a super fine idea professionally, operations and economics wise. Emphasis should be on having well-resourced military training institutions that will give our military men shorter-term and more hands-on military training at a fraction of the costs or running military universities .
WHAT IS THE BEST WAY FORWARD
Having postulated that defence resources are better utilized in projects that increase the operational capacity of our military, having posited that what military need in order to fullfill their mandate are well-resourced military training institutions and not military universities, we must also accept that the siting of universities in Nigeria is invariably also a politically sensitive matter. We must also talk about how not to lose the already sunk costs, the economic and livelihood activities that have been already spawned by the establishment of these universities. What is the best way forward?
FG SOLUTION
FG announced that AFIT (Air Force Institute of Technology also known as the Nigeria Air Force University) in Kaduna and NAUB (Nigerian Army University Biu) Borno State are to be merged with NDA in Kaduna. However, telling NDA (whose business is and should remain officer training) to take over the majority civilian students of AFIT & NAUB is not the solution as that will create or exacerbate an already existing problem, that is, further distract NDA from its major role of producing officers for the military. (I will say the distraction of NDA is already there with NDA into Masters and PhD programmes).
And if you say NAUB and AFIT should become NDA Faculties, will they be Faculty of what? Can a whole purpose-built university become a Faculty? The implementation of such merger as proposed by the FG poses great logistical, administrative and spatial challenges and we may end up not gaining optimally from these universities established at great costs.
ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
In order to avoid any unintended political and economic consequences of weaning the military off from the distraction of establishing and running military universities, I propose the following solutions for the already existing military universities (Army University in Biu, Navy Admiralty University, NAF AFIT):
Option 1: Merge the military universities to the nearest federal university and let them revert to public universities with no military involvement.
Option 2: Hand them over to State governments where they exist (either on cost recovery or land swap or even free).
Option 3: Sell them off to private citizens wanting to invest in tertiary education at reasonable costs with the caveat that they maintain them as universities.
I believe any of the three options will allow the military to concentrate on their core mandate, optimize the use of defence resources, prevent jobs and livelihood losses for the many lecturers and workers already employed. In addition, the potential political problem arising from the host State/community will be avoided.
CONCLUSION
Finally, before someone misreads me and goes off at a tangent read my lips: I didn’t say military men don’t need university education or Masters or PhD degrees (personally I managed to get a Bachelors, and Masters plus several post graduate diplomas from public universities while still in military… There are many like me, some with even PhDs). They do need the education like everyone else. But running exclusively military run universities is not a necessity and provision of tertiary education for the general public is not a mandate of the military.
While general education for degrees is good for overall human development, 90% of military work can be accomplished by personnel who do not have university degrees but have been trained with certification in their trade from military training institutions. If (according to a top Senator) our military personnel are lacking in basic equipment at a time of war, military universities are not a priority.
While we must recognize that military personnel need “intellectual agility” through degree level education along with military skills, it is civilian public education institutions that must share responsibility in educating military men as part of the mandate of the Federal Ministry of Education. This need for university degree level education for interested military personnel (a relatively small percentage) does not require our military services encumbering themselves with establishing, running and managing “their own” universities and diverting defence resources away from more pressing operational needs.
Already, there are existing pathways for military personnel interested in pursuing degree programmes in public universities to apply for what is called “School or Education Release.” Through this pathway, each year, the military Services release a certain number of personnel (as many as Service exigencies would allow) to pursue degrees in courses that are relevant to the military profession and in public universities both at home and abroad. When granted, such requests are either Service-sponsored (Service pays) or self-sponsored (the personnel pays but continues to get his salary and allowances while attending course).
On a final note, it is to be understood what is most important for a professional military person is professional military training to enable him perform his duties as a gunner, APC driver, armament expert or pilot. What the military owes to a personnel is to provide him with such professional military training in specialist military technical training institutions because it is assumed that there is already work to be done and for which that training is required. Along, the military would allow a relatively small number of personnel to attend degree courses in public universities for general education which may either rub on their military job performance or assist in post service life. The military need and should invest in well-resourced military technical training institutions and leave the running of universities to the Federal and States Ministries of Education and the private sector.
Going forward, it is necessary that both the Executive Branch (including Ministry of Defence) and the Legislative Branch put more vigour in oversighting the military budget and ensuring that only projects that have direct bearing with military mission and improving capacity are prioritized.
Group Captain Sadeeq Garba Shehu (rtd) is a Security Sector Reform Consultant
