This Isn’t Just A Coincidence - Actor Prince Eke Says Insecurity In Benue Is Possibly An Agenda To Push For GMOs In Nigeria

 

Nigerian actor Prince Eke has sparked conversation across social media with his recent remarks linking persistent insecurity in Benue and other agrarian states to an alleged agenda to introduce Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) into Nigeria’s farming systems. Known for his work in the Nigerian film industry, Eke took to his platform not to promote a movie but to raise a pressing concern that intertwines agriculture, security, and global corporate influence.

The actor, writing in a strongly worded post, suggested that the continuous attacks on farmers and the widespread disruption of farming activities in states like Benue may not be entirely random or isolated. Rather, he believes they could form part of a deliberate attempt to weaken traditional farming systems and open the door for foreign entities to introduce genetically modified crops as a solution to dwindling food production.

Benue State, often referred to as Nigeria’s “food basket,” is one of the country’s most fertile regions, largely dependent on smallholder farmers who rely on traditional seed varieties and organic farming methods passed down through generations. Over the past several years, the region has seen a sharp increase in violent attacks, mostly attributed to conflicts involving herdsmen, kidnappings, and territorial disputes that have displaced thousands of rural dwellers.

Prince Eke, reflecting on the pattern of events, argued that these disturbances are doing more than just destabilizing communities. He wrote, “Over the past decade, Nigeria's agricultural regions, especially Benue, have faced growing insecurity, mainly targeting farmers. This isn't just a mere coincidence. It points to a larger agenda possibly linked to the global push for GMOs in Africa.”

He went further to explain that the systematic targeting of indigenous farmers paves the way for external intervention. As local food production declines due to insecurity and displacement, multinational biotech companies present themselves as saviors, offering high-yield GMO seeds and farming packages as solutions. These seeds are usually patented, meaning farmers must buy them afresh each planting season, rather than saving seeds as they would with traditional crops.

This shift, Eke warned, threatens the core of Nigeria’s agricultural identity and food sovereignty. “With traditional farming under threat, local food systems collapse, and dependence on imported, patented seeds grows,” he added.

His post raises critical questions about who benefits from the insecurity ravaging Nigeria’s rural areas. As traditional agriculture becomes more difficult and less profitable, foreign investment and technological alternatives appear more attractive. This situation, according to Eke, is not just an economic shift but a potential takeover of the nation’s food production system by global powers with little regard for indigenous cultures and practices.

Though Eke admitted he might be reading too much into the pattern, his question “Am I overthinking?” implies a desire to spark deeper national reflection rather than offer conclusive evidence. Still, his message echoes concerns voiced by civil society groups and environmental advocates who have long warned that Nigeria's agricultural future could be compromised by hasty adoption of GMOs without full understanding of their long-term implications.

Several stakeholders have expressed similar concerns in the past. Organizations such as the Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF) and the Nigerian branch of Friends of the Earth have consistently resisted the introduction of GMOs into the country. They argue that the promotion of genetically engineered crops often comes under the guise of development aid or food security programs but ends up placing control of seeds and agricultural knowledge in the hands of a few powerful multinational corporations.

Eke’s commentary sheds light on a broader issue that transcends farming. It is about land ownership, community survival, national food security, and the battle between tradition and modernization in African agriculture. By connecting the dots between violence in farming communities and the rise of GMO interests, he has given Nigerians a lens through which to re-examine what may appear to be unconnected developments.

Although he is not an agricultural expert or security analyst, Eke’s intervention underscores the importance of public figures using their influence to ignite discussions on matters of national concern. His post may not have all the answers, but it asks a question that more people are beginning to consider: is the chaos in Nigeria’s agricultural heartlands part of a broader design to replace indigenous systems with foreign-controlled alternatives?

Whether Nigerians agree with Eke’s perspective or not, one thing is clear. The future of farming in Nigeria must be carefully safeguarded, especially at a time when global economic pressures and internal instability are converging in the countryside.