I have received messages from several Facebook followers asking me to comment on the reported altercation between a minister and a military officer. Let me begin with an important caveat: I write from far-away Zagreb, Croatia, and rely only on information currently available in the public domain. I was not present at the scene and do not claim insider knowledge. I will also not go into the debate over whether the disputed land in question has valid documents or not, as there appear to be two competing versions of that story. My reflections are therefore analytical — based on professional experience in civil–military relations and what has been publicly reported.

The recent standoff between a minister and a junior military officer reveals how fragile civil–military etiquette becomes when emotion replaces protocol. On learning that a junior officer and his armed men had reportedly chased away some of his staff, the minister ought not to have personally gone there; the appropriate and dignified course of action was to place a call to the Chief of Naval Staff (CNS), the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), or even his colleague, the Minister of Defence, for clarification and intervention. By rushing to the scene with his own armed escorts, to confront armed military men led by a young officer, the minister set up a volatile and explosive situation. By directly confronting a subaltern and calling the Chief of Defence Staff mid-exchange, the minister short-circuited the normal chain of command and drew the highest military authority into what should have been a routine administrative matter.

What makes the incident particularly telling is the restraint displayed by Navy Lieutenant Yerima, who, despite being publicly addressed with words reportedly as harsh as “stupid fool, shut up”, remained calm, professional, and in control of his armed subordinates. It could have taken just one rash moment, one misread gesture, or one angry command for the situation to deteriorate disastrously. While we do not know what the CDS told the minister and the young officer, the fact that the minister eventually withdrew speaks volumes. Most probably, the CDS, after hearing both sides, wisely advised the minister to withdraw.

In any democracy, civilian authority must be exercised with civility, and military discipline with decorum. When either is lost, the state risks confusion where clarity should reign. True professionalism lies not in asserting rank or office, but in knowing when to pause, listen, and let institutions — not tempers — speak.

My Professional Reading of the Incident 

1. The minister erred procedurally and symbolically.

Ministers (even governors, LG Chairmen), do not exercise direct operational command over military personnel even if they operate within jurisdiction. Their authority is political and administrative. By personally confronting a junior officer and calling the CDS mid-incident, the minister effectively created an institutional short circuit, pulling the top of the military into what should have been handled through normal service channels. That initial misstep of rushing to confront the junior officer, undermines both civil oversight and the military’s internal command integrity.

2. The officer’s response, though possibly uncomfortable to watch, was not necessarily insubordination. It is not insubordination because there is no Commander- Subordinate nexus between Minister and the Officer, but there could be mutual respect.

A junior officer unexpectedly handed the phone by a minister to the CDS is under enormous pressure. Explaining his side calmly to his professional superior is not defiance; it may even be the most disciplined thing he could have done in that moment. The fact that the minister “retreated” afterward suggests that the CDS, after hearing both sides, likely advised restraint or closure.

3. The Deeper Lesson 

This was less a clash of personalities and more a failure of protocol literacy — a civilian authority (the Minister) unfamiliar with the etiquette of dealing with uniformed officers, and a junior officer caught between deference to political authority and duty to defend institutional dignity and carry out orders given by his superior officer.

Concluding Advice to Civilian Leaders 

Senior civilian officials must understand that in the military ecosystem, subalterns —ie lieutenants to captains — are the sharp end of the spear. They are trained to be decisive, unyielding, and aggressive when duty demands. That temperament is not arrogance; it is a necessary conditioning — forged for battle situations, not bureaucracy. Their firmness and aggressiveness is what steadies men under fire and keep units alive when chaos reigns.

In the Nigerian Armed Forces, we even have a name for them — “Fire Eaters.” Ask any seasoned soldier or non-commissioned officer and you’ll hear it with a knowing smile: “Better to offend a General than to offend a subaltern — a General might forgive you, but a subaltern will not.” A new commander may be posted to a unit and it might take a few weeks before soldiers know him. On his first day on reporting every soldier will know a new Lt or Captain has arrived….from the gate hes likely to catch a soldier who didnt salute properly.

And rightly so. It is designed to be so. We dont need , we dont want our subalterns to be “soft”. Their fierce sense of duty and intolerance for disorder are precisely what make them effective tools at the sharp end of the military machine. They read orders literally and carry them out diligently until the order is canceled or mission accomplished. They may err in their aggressiveness, and we will correct them . But we cannot afford to defang them or remove their zeal and fighting spirit, because if we do so, we may find that those qualities are not there when we need them.

Seen in that light, the conduct of Navy Lieutenant Yerima during the recent encounter deserves perspective. For a young officer of his rank — commanding armed subordinates in the field — he displayed remarkable composure and restraint even in the face of insult and provocation. It could easily have gone worse had he lost control or allowed the situation to escalate. That he did not is a credit to his training and professionalism.

So, to every minister, governor, commissioner, or director or senior citizen who might one day find themselves crossing paths with a “Fire Eater,” take this advice: do not cross swords with him. Withdraw tactically, maintain your dignity, and call his superior. In the militart chain of command lies order; in restraint lies wisdom. Even as a retired military officer , when I happen upon a scene and I see a Lt or Captain barking orders “You either move, or I move you !!”, I caution my driver Suleman to take it easy (Suleman likes assuming that he is driving a retired senior military officer)…..I was a subaltern once (and the things we did under orders? Prince Ben Omoyugbo in Kano during fuel crisis back then you remember) .That simple discipline preserves both civilian authority and military honour — and spares the nation needless crises born of misunderstanding.