The effectiveness of the Nigerian military in addressing internal security threats like terrorism, particularly Boko Haram and its offshoot ISWAP, as well as widespread banditry, is a complex issue with mixed results.

While the military has achieved notable successes at times, persistent challenges significantly hinder its overall effectiveness.

Areas of Effectiveness and Successes:

1. Degrading Terrorist Capabilities (Boko Haram): In the early years of the Boko Haram insurgency, the group controlled significant swathes of territory in the Northeast. The military, often in collaboration with the Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF), has largely succeeded in dislodging them from these strongholds, reclaiming territory, and reducing their capacity for large-scale conventional attacks. The MNJTF, for instance, has been assessed as "to a degree, effectively attaining its mandate priorities," contributing to a decline in attacks and fatalities in the region.

2. Maintaining National Unity: Despite numerous threats that could have fractured the nation, the military has generally managed to keep the country together as a corporate entity, intervening in various conflicts to prevent complete state collapse in affected areas.

3. Non-Kinetic Approaches: The military has increasingly recognized and integrated non-kinetic strategies, such as psychological operations (PSYOPS) and civil-military cooperation. These approaches aim to influence target audiences, counter extremist narratives, build trust with local communities, and enhance intelligence gathering, which are crucial for long-term counter-insurgency success.

4. Technological Advancements: The military has sought to enhance its technological capabilities, employing surveillance drones, satellite imagery, and advanced communication systems to improve situational awareness and operational efficiency, although these advancements face challenges in full deployment and utilization.

Significant Challenges and Areas of Ineffectiveness:

1. Persistent and Evolving Threats: While Boko Haram's conventional capabilities have been degraded, ISWAP has emerged as a more sophisticated and resilient threat. Additionally, banditry, kidnapping, and farmer-herder conflicts have proliferated across various regions (North West, North Central, parts of the South), stretching the military thin across multiple fronts. These groups employ asymmetric tactics, blending with local populations, making conventional military operations difficult.

2. Corruption within the Defense Sector: This is arguably the most debilitating factor.

   • Under-Equipped Troops: Billions of dollars allocated for defense have been siphoned off through corrupt procurement practices, leading to soldiers being ill-equipped with modern weapons, insufficient ammunition, and lack of essential logistical support.

   • Low Morale: Corruption affects troop welfare, salaries, and allowances, leading to low morale, desertion, and a lack of motivation to fight.

   • Sabotage and Complicity: There have been allegations of some corrupt officials or even military personnel colluding with insurgents or bandits for personal gain, perpetuating the conflict.

   • Opaque Funding: The opaque nature of "security votes" and defense budgets makes it difficult to track funds and ensure accountability, creating opportunities for corruption.

3. Human Rights Abuses and Lack of Trust:

   • Excessive Force: The Nigerian military has faced numerous credible allegations from international human rights organizations (e.g., Amnesty International, Reuters) of extrajudicial killings, torture, arbitrary arrests, and other abuses against civilians during internal security operations.

   • Erosion of Trust: These abuses alienate local communities, who then become unwilling to provide crucial intelligence or support to the military. This lack of trust is a major hindrance to effective counter-insurgency, as intelligence is paramount.

   • Impunity: A persistent lack of accountability for human rights violations by military personnel further erodes public trust and makes the military less effective in securing the population.

4. Logistical and Operational Deficiencies:

   • Rugged Terrain and Lack of Infrastructure: The difficult terrain in conflict zones (e.g., Sambisa Forest) and poor infrastructure complicate military operations, making supply lines vulnerable and troop deployment challenging.

   • Porous Borders: Nigeria's extensive and porous borders facilitate the movement of arms and fighters, making it difficult to contain threats.

   • Coordination Challenges: While joint task forces exist, effective coordination and intelligence sharing among different security agencies (military, police, intelligence services) can sometimes be challenging due to inter-agency rivalries or lack of clear command structures.

5. Overstretch and Mission Creep:

   • The military is increasingly deployed for tasks traditionally meant for the police (internal security, policing duties), leading to overstretch, blurring of roles, and a diversion from their primary defense mandate. This also impacts their specialized training and professionalism.

6. Socio-Economic Root Causes:

   • The military response alone cannot solve threats rooted in socio-economic disparities, political marginalization, poor governance, and youth unemployment, which often serve as drivers for recruitment into extremist or bandit groups. A purely kinetic approach is insufficient.

In conclusion, while the Nigerian military possesses capacity and has achieved tactical successes, its overall effectiveness in addressing internal security threats like terrorism and banditry is significantly hampered by systemic corruption, human rights abuses that erode public trust, logistical challenges, and the sheer proliferation and evolving nature of the threats. A truly effective solution requires a multi-faceted approach that combines military action with robust anti-corruption measures, improved human rights compliance, significant investment in socio-economic development, and strengthening of civilian law enforcement agencies.