Linus Aleke in Abuja
The Defence Headquarters (DHQ) has clarified that terrorist commanders often adopt similar names and aliases as part of their indoctrination strategy to conceal their true identities, following public confusion over reports surrounding the killing of Abu-Bilal Al-Minuki.
The clarification came after old reports attributed to the DHQ resurfaced online, claiming that Abu-Bilal Al-Minuki had been among terrorist leaders killed along the Kaduna–Birnin Gwari axis in 2024.
The re-circulation of the reports sparked allegations that the Nigerian military was engaging in counter-terrorism propaganda, a claim some security experts warned could undermine troops’ morale and public confidence in military operations.
Responding to the controversy, the Director of Defence Information, Major General Samaila Uba, said in a statement that the military remained committed to providing verified information through official channels.
“The Defence Headquarters (DHQ) wishes to provide clarification following emerging public discourse regarding the recent neutralisation of a high-profile terrorist commander, Abu-Bilal Al-Minuki, during a joint operation with the United States Africa Command on 16 May, 2026.
“Certain media reports referencing a similar operation in 2024 have mentioned the elimination of a terrorist commander bearing the same name. This has understandably generated questions about the identity of the individual recently neutralised.
“It is important to state that within the North East region and across the Lake Chad Basin, the use of similar or identical names, aliases and nom de guerres is common among ISWAP and Boko Haram terrorists. This is essentially part of their indoctrination programme which is aimed at deliberately obscuring identities.
This fact has been established over the years in the course of counter-terrorism operations in the Northeast of Nigeria.
“The Abu-Bilal Al-Minuki eliminated on 16 May, 2026 has been positively identified through human intelligence and technical surveillance as a senior global operative within the Islamic State network, with direct links to international terrorist coordination, funding and operations across the Sahel. There is therefore no ambiguity in his identity.
“The strike is a significant milestone in our counter-terrorism efforts. The Armed Forces of Nigeria, in partnership with the United States, remain committed to dismantling terrorist networks and will continue to provide verified information through official channels.”
General Uba urged the media and members of the public to rely on official sources for accurate information in order to avoid confusion arising from similarities in the names adopted by terrorist commanders.
Reacting to the controversy, former DSS Director, Mike Ejiofor, said terrorist organisations do not operate under a single command structure, but through multiple leaders spread across different cells.
According to him, although there were claims that the terrorist leader had been killed in 2024, it was possible that the earlier reports referred to another individual bearing a similar name.
Ejiofor recalled that former Boko Haram leader, Shekau, had reportedly been declared dead several times in the past, adding, however, that the latest operation appeared more credible because it was announced by the President of the United States.
He described the operation as a successful targeted mission and expressed hope for increased international cooperation in precision counter-terrorism operations.
He, however, warned that the elimination of a leader would not automatically end terrorist activities, stressing that followers could still launch reprisal attacks.
He therefore called for proactive measures to forestall possible retaliatory attacks and urged Nigerians to support the armed forces instead of accusing the military of propaganda.
According to him, such allegations were demoralising to troops who had sacrificed their lives in defence of the country.
He noted that many soldiers, including brigadier generals, had been killed in the anti-terror campaign, insisting that it was unfair to suggest the military was misleading the public.
Also speaking on the matter, former spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Ogbole Amedu-Ode, said the 2024 report on the killing of a top ISIS commander by the Nigerian military could have resulted from a communication gap, mistaken identity or misinformation.
On his part, Chairman of the Guild of Public Affairs Analysts of Nigeria, Enugu State Chapter, Dr. Ambrose Igboke, said propaganda was often associated with warfare, as parties involved usually sought to project themselves as gaining the upper hand.
He explained that while non-state actors relied heavily on propaganda to spread fear and uncertainty, governments had a constitutional obligation to provide accurate and truthful information to citizens.
Igboke therefore described as troubling the recurrence of reports from the Defence Headquarters that appeared similar to information earlier circulated in 2024, noting that such inconsistencies could raise doubts among citizens about official military communications.
He warned that if public trust in military information was eroded, it could negatively affect national counter-terrorism efforts, stressing that public confidence and psychological support remained vital in the fight against insurgency.