Politics is often described as a game of interests. Friends become opponents. Allies become critics. Yesterday’s political partners become today’s rivals. But even within the rough and tumble of politics, there are unwritten rules of decency, restraint, and collective interest.
One of such rules is that when a son of your soil rises to national prominence, you do not become the loudest voice pulling him down.
This is why the recurring public confrontations between Anambra State Governor, Professor Charles Chukwuma Soludo, and former Governor Peter Obi continue to generate debate across Nigeria.
The latest controversy over debts allegedly incurred during Obi’s administration is only the newest chapter in a relationship that has steadily deteriorated in the public space. The dispute may be about figures, records, loans, savings, or interpretations of government accounts. Those issues can be settled with documents, audits, and verifiable facts.
What many people find troubling is not the disagreement itself. Democracy thrives on disagreement.
The concern is the appearance of a relentless determination to challenge, confront, and discredit a fellow Anambra son who currently occupies a significant place in Nigeria’s political landscape.
No one is suggesting that Soludo should abandon facts in favour of ethnic sentiment. Neither should anyone expect him to become Peter Obi’s campaign director. That would be unreasonable.
You may also like;
- When the Pepper Reaches the Pepper Seller’s Eye: The Lessons Nigeria Keeps Refusing to Learn
- Imole Shines On: Ademola Adeleke Wins Osun 2026 Governorship Election With 511,067 Votes to Beat APC’s Oyebamiji
- 2027 Election: INEC Releases Final List of 18 Presidential Candidates — See Full List
- The Deadly Pursuit of Perfection: From Stella Obasanjo to Igho Ubiribo
But there is a wide gulf between refusing to support someone and becoming his most visible internal critic.
History offers numerous examples of political rivals who still understood the importance of protecting the collective image of their people.
The Yoruba political class, despite their differences, often close ranks when national interests affecting their region arise. Northern politicians frequently disagree among themselves, yet they rarely become the chief public antagonists of fellow northerners seeking national office. The South-South has also demonstrated similar tendencies at various moments.
The Igbo political class, unfortunately, has often struggled with this. The story is almost predictable. One prominent Igbo politician rises nationally. Another prominent Igbo politician emerges as his strongest critic. Then outsiders watch the family quarrel and conclude that perhaps the man is not worthy of support after all. The irony is that while political opponents are expected to attack, it is often the attacks from within that inflict the deepest wounds.
Professor Soludo is not an ordinary commentator. He is one of Nigeria’s most respected economists. He served as Governor of the Central Bank. His words carry enormous weight.
When such a man repeatedly criticises Peter Obi, the criticism naturally receives national attention. Whether intended or not, it provides ammunition for Obi’s political adversaries. It strengthens narratives that Obi’s own people do not trust him. It raises questions among undecided observers who wonder why a successor appears unwilling to acknowledge any positive legacy left by a predecessor. This is where statesmanship becomes important.
Leadership is not merely about being factually correct. Leadership is also about understanding timing, consequences, and the broader implications of public conduct. Nelson Mandela understood this. Olusegun Obasanjo understood it when he resisted certain temptations to escalate regional divisions. Nnamdi Azikiwe understood it. Great leaders know when to criticise and when to rise above personal disagreements.
Anambra State has produced remarkable personalities. From Nnamdi Azikiwe to Chinua Achebe. From Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu to Dora Akunyili. From Emeka Anyaoku to Peter Obi and Charles Soludo. These are names that project excellence. One would expect that two men who belong to this distinguished tradition would find common ground on matters affecting the image and aspirations of their people. Unfortunately, what Nigerians often witness is public sparring.
It is difficult to understand why a governor would appear more interested in revisiting the record of a predecessor who left office over a decade ago than focusing attention on his own achievements.
The average Anambra citizen wants better roads, jobs, security, healthcare, education, and economic opportunities. Citizens judge current leaders primarily by present performance, not endless historical arguments.
If Soludo believes Obi’s record has inaccuracies, he has every right to present facts. But facts should not become weapons in a seemingly perpetual political war. There is a difference between correcting a record and pursuing a rivalry. Many Nigerians can no longer distinguish where one ends and the other begins.
The reality is that Peter Obi has become a national political figure. Whether one supports him or not, he commands significant attention across the country. His presidential ambition is no longer an Anambra project. It is a national political movement involving millions of Nigerians.
At this stage, Soludo’s repeated public confrontations do not merely affect Obi. They also shape perceptions about Anambra itself. Observers may begin to wonder why two accomplished sons of the state appear incapable of coexisting politically.
Must every difference become a headline? Must every disagreement become a public battle? Must every political divergence become a fresh opportunity for mutual suspicion? The answer should be no.
There is room for mature disagreement. There is room for political neutrality. There is room for dignified silence. In fact, silence is sometimes more powerful than criticism. If Soludo genuinely believes Obi is not the best person for Nigeria’s presidency, he is entitled to that private opinion.
Nigeria remains a democracy. But being entitled to an opinion does not require becoming a constant obstacle. No law compels Soludo to support Peter Obi. Likewise, no law compels him to become his political adversary. Between support and hostility lies a broad middle ground called statesmanship.
That middle ground is where many expect Soludo to stand. After all, political offices are temporary. Governors come and go. Presidents come and go. But relationships among brothers, communities, and generations endure far longer. Years from now, political ambitions would have been settled one way or another.
The question history may ask is simple: When a fellow son of Anambra sought the highest office in the land, what role did Charles Soludo play? Did he act as a bridge? Did he remain neutral? Or did he become a stumbling block? Every leader ultimately writes his own answer.
For the sake of unity, maturity, and the larger image of Anambra State, many would prefer that the answer is not the last one.
