Indeed, no reasonable adult from the South-East can claim not to be concerned about the pettiness displayed by some political officeholders from the zone in their apparent determination to undermine Peter Obi, the presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress
An off-the-cuff conversation with a colleague from the South-South provided the inspiration for this article. We were discussing the country’s political developments when he asked: “What are you people in the South-East doing about the obsession of some politicians from the zone with Peter Obi’s 2027 presidential ambition?”
I tried to evade the question, but he persisted. Unwilling to be drawn into a lengthy debate, I told him I was not interested in the matter. That, however, was not the truth. I lied, and since I know he reads this column, I offer my sincere apologies.
Indeed, no reasonable adult from the South-East can claim not to be concerned about the pettiness displayed by some political officeholders from the zone in their apparent determination to undermine Peter Obi, the presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC).
Their justification is often that they are working for President Bola Tinubu’s re-election. Ordinarily, there is nothing wrong with that. Politics is a contest of choices, and everyone is entitled to campaign for a preferred candidate.
In the South-East, respect for individual convictions and choices is deeply rooted in the people’s culture. At the traditional village square, where important issues are discussed through consultation, compromise and consensus, democracy finds practical expression. Two brothers may attend the same meeting, disagree on an issue and still return home together without resentment or a sense of betrayal.
This reflects the Igbo republican worldview captured in the expression, “Onye na uche ya”—everyone is entitled to their own convictions. It is therefore unrealistic to expect the entire South-East to support the same political party or candidate, particularly in a multiparty democracy.
People will naturally agree or disagree according to their interests, experiences and convictions. When some All Progressives Congress (APC) chieftains in the region assembled under platforms such as the Forum of Former South-East Governors, which reportedly excluded those outside the party, the objective was clearly to advance President Tinubu’s political interests.
The reported commitment of some serving governors in the region to work for Tinubu also fits into this political calculation. Although Abia State Governor, Dr Alex Otti of the Labour Party, subsequently distanced himself from the reported resolution, his party’s decision not to field a presidential candidate has been interpreted in some quarters as a possible boost for Tinubu.
There is also the City Boy Movement, a loosely organised platform of young entrepreneurs and social media influencers supporting the President. Other groups and individuals have thrown their weight behind Atiku Abubakar, the African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, or Obi of the NDC.
These divergent political choices should be accommodated in the spirit of tolerance and inclusion for which the South-East is widely known.
What is troubling, however, is the manner in which Anambra State Governor, Prof. Charles Soludo, and the Minister of Works, David Umahi, have repeatedly used public appearances to criticise Obi.
Obi left office as Anambra governor on March 17, 2014, more than 12 years ago. Between his departure and Soludo’s assumption of office, Willie Obiano governed the state for eight years. Yet, Soludo’s public criticisms have frequently focused on Obi rather than his immediate predecessor.
There is nothing wrong with a governor scrutinising the record of a predecessor. Where there are credible allegations of wrongdoing or administrative shortcomings, established institutions should be allowed to investigate and determine the facts.
However, when criticism appears to become a recurring feature of a governor’s public engagements, it risks diminishing the dignity of the office and distracting from the responsibilities of governance.
Umahi’s approach is equally troubling. As a former governor of Ebonyi State and the current Minister of Works, he has substantial responsibilities, particularly concerning the country’s road infrastructure. It is therefore disappointing when his political exchanges with Obi appear to overshadow discussions about these pressing national concerns.
His reported comparison of development in his Uburu community with that of Obi’s Agulu community is another example of how political discourse can descend into unnecessary rivalry. Such comparisons may generate headlines, but they do little to advance meaningful discussions about public policy, development or the welfare of citizens.
When political engagement degenerates into personal jabs and juvenile exchanges, its primary purpose—providing leadership and improving the lives of the people—is undermined.
The situation becomes even more disturbing when some South-East politicians publicly boast that they will deliver the region to Tinubu in the 2027 presidential election.
Such declarations are difficult to distinguish from political sycophancy, especially when made months before the election and without a clear indication of the electorate’s preferences.
Perhaps the President should caution some of his supporters in the region. There is nothing wrong with Tinubu seeking to win the South-East fairly, just as any other candidate is entitled to do. The problem lies in the language of political conquest and the apparent assumption that the votes of the people can be guaranteed by their political leaders.
Elections are not won through boasts, declarations or endorsements alone. They depend on the choices of voters, whose interests and expectations should remain central to every political campaign.
The people must be allowed to exercise their constitutional right to choose who governs them. Any attempt by political elites to dictate those choices or impose the agenda of powerful interest groups is likely to provoke resistance.
Igbo history offers important lessons in this regard.
The warrant chief system introduced by British colonial authorities in parts of Eastern Nigeria in the late nineteenth century provides one example. The system, designed partly to facilitate colonial administration and tax collection, gave appointed chiefs powers that did not always reflect traditional structures of authority.
As some warrant chiefs became associated with corruption, exploitation and high-handedness, opposition to the system intensified. These grievances contributed to the Women’s War of 1929, commonly known in some historical accounts as the Aba Women’s Riot. The revolt forced the colonial administration to reconsider aspects of its indirect rule system, and the warrant chief system was subsequently abolished in 1930.
Another powerful historical episode was the 1803 Igbo Landing incident at St. Simons Island, near Savannah, Georgia, in the United States. A group of enslaved Igbo people resisted their captivity in a dramatic act of defiance, with many reportedly choosing death rather than submission to enslavement.
In his insightful article, “The Igbo Landing, and the Courage of a People,” Professor of Political Economy Okey Anueyiagu reflected on the determination of the enslaved people to preserve their dignity and freedom.
Their actions may appear extreme to some, but they remain a powerful reminder of the human desire to resist oppression and defend personal dignity.
The Nigerian Civil War of 1967–1970 also remains a defining episode in Igbo history, shaped by complex questions of security, political exclusion, national unity and the survival of the people. Whatever interpretations individuals place on the conflict, its lessons underscore the dangers of alienation, distrust and the failure of political leadership to accommodate competing interests.
These historical experiences should remind South-East politicians that the electorate cannot simply be treated as an instrument for achieving the ambitions of political leaders.
Those seeking to mobilise the region behind Tinubu in 2027 must understand that winning public support requires more than declarations of loyalty. It requires convincing the people that their interests are being served.
Ultimately, this debate should not be reduced to Peter Obi or the personal ambitions of any politician. It should be about the people and their assessment of the country’s direction under the Tinubu administration.
Are Nigerians better off after three and a half years of his presidency? What progress has been made in addressing poverty, insecurity, unemployment, inflation and the declining purchasing power of citizens? What has been achieved in rebuilding critical infrastructure, strengthening national unity and improving living standards?
These are the issues that should dominate political discourse ahead of 2027.
The electorate is entitled to assess the government’s performance, weigh the alternatives and make informed choices. Political leaders should present their records, explain their programmes and allow the people to decide.
The continuing decline in the value of the naira, the rising cost of living, widespread economic hardship, youth unemployment and persistent security challenges deserve far greater attention than personal attacks on a political opponent.
The same applies to the divisive tendencies within the political system and the urgent need to strengthen the institutions that sustain the country’s corporate existence.
South-East politicians who genuinely wish to support Tinubu should make their case through policies, measurable achievements and persuasive arguments. They should not assume that attacking Obi will automatically improve the President’s electoral prospects.
Indeed, such attacks could distract from the very issues on which the administration should be judged.
Democracy thrives when competing ideas are allowed to flourish, opponents are treated with respect and voters are trusted to make their own decisions. The South-East’s political diversity should be seen as a strength, not a problem to be managed through intimidation, ridicule or partisan pressure.
In the final analysis, the 2027 election should be about the choices Nigerians make at the ballot box, not the promises politicians make on their behalf.
Let the people’s will prevail.
Emeka Alex Duru, Ph.D., is the Editor of TheNiche Online Newspapers, Lagos.