In this analysis, Jide Courage explains why Soludo loses in disputes with Peter Obi – proven leadership record consistently outshines unfulfilled promises.
The intermittent clash between former Anambra State Governor Peter Obi and his successor, Professor Charles Chukwuma Soludo, has again flared. This time, Soludo took issues with Obi’s recent pledge to serve only one term if elected President in 2027. At a political rally in Anambra South, Soludo denounced such commitments as irrational and insulting to voters. “How can anybody with a functioning brain… you come before people and declare, ‘I will only serve one term.’ Any politician who says that must be sent to a psychiatric home because there must be something wrong with the person.” Soludo framed his critique around the constitutional provision allowing two terms and accused one-term pledges of being deceitful or indicative of mental imbalance.
Very strong words.
Soludo missed something. While politicians generally viewed Obi’s proposal as a tactic, many Nigerians interpreted it as yet another example of Obi’s pragmatic, no-nonsense approach to leadership. Because he once again misread the public mood, Soludo’s critique fell flat for many,. It also reignited a familiar public debate between the two that often ends with the public siding with Obi as the better manager and visionary.
Obi’s win against Soludo is not based on misplaced public emotion and sentiment. It is backed by his solid record in governance. The rift between the two men is not merely personal—it reflects deep, competing views about governance. But while Soludo, an accomplished economist and academic, tends to rely on theoretical constructs and ambitious blueprints, Obi’s reputation is built on real-world results.
During his tenure as Anambra State Governor (2006–2014), Obi recorded landmark achievements that are difficult to dismiss. In education, he led a transformation that lifted the state from 27th position in national exam rankings to first—a turnaround accomplished through strategic partnerships with missionary schools, investment in infrastructure, and consistent teacher support. His success became a model for other states.
Infrastructure-wise, Obi’s approach was equally pragmatic. He ensured that most communities in Anambra were connected by paved roads, effectively linking economic and social activities across rural and urban zones. In healthcare, he delivered an award-winning network of primary health centres, as well as specialist tertiary institutions support, some of which became reference points in the country. His administration left no debt, saved billions in state reserves, and still delivered tangible projects. These are not emotional assessments — they are verifiable and measurable gains.
This backdrop sets the tone for understanding why Obi often appears to have the upper hand in public disagreements with Soludo. The former CBN governor, who came into office with a flurry of ambitious plans and grand visions, has not yet delivered comparable results after more than three years in office. His flagship “Fun City” project in Awka, for instance, is billed as a leisure and tourism hub, but its impact remains largely aspirational. In contrast, Obi’s much-discussed investment in the Onitsha-based brewery—criticized by Soludo—continues to be one of the biggest single contributors to Anambra’s internally generated revenue (IGR) and a major employer of youth.
This comparison underlines a growing public sentiment: Obi is the more practical and hands-on leader, while Soludo is tall on plans and speeches but yet to prove his mettle in execution. In a country where leadership is often gauged not just by lofty intentions but by track records, Obi’s methodical, frugal, and performance-driven style is gaining renewed appreciation, especially among younger and more politically engaged Nigerians.
Their most recent clash over Obi’s one-term presidency proposal has again shown this contrast in approach. While Soludo’s camp viewed it as political posturing, Obi’s supporters and many neutrals interpreted it as a challenge rooted in urgency and accountability—hallmarks of his tenure in Anambra. It positions Obi, once again, as a leader willing to commit himself to timelines and benchmarks, something sorely lacking in the Nigerian political landscape.
What’s more, Obi wins because he rarely engages in direct rebuttals. His preference for staying above the fray, coupled with a calm demeanor and clear recall of figures and timelines, often strengthens the impression of credibility. Soludo, despite his brilliance, finds himself on the defensive—often appearing reactive rather than visionary.
This isn’t to say that Soludo lacks competence or ambition. His early moves as governor indicated a desire to reform revenue systems, reorganize urban planning, and expand infrastructure. But over time, enthusiasm has been dampened by unfulfilled promises and slow progress. Key policy initiatives remain either under-executed or bogged down in bureaucratic inertia. His speeches, while often dazzling in economic theory, lack the grounded realism that characterized Obi’s governance.
Public perception, especially in a media-savvy, socially connected Obidient generation, is heavily influenced by demonstrable outcomes. While Soludo may believe that long-term plans will vindicate him, the electorate is increasingly looking for leaders who can both dream and deliver. Obi’s supporters argue, with evidence, that he did both—and within a much tighter fiscal environment. The brewery debate is a perfect example. Obi’s defenders point out that the investment wasn’t simply about profit margins; it was a strategic move to support local industry, drive youth employment, and grow the IGR base. These are key pillars of sustainable development. Soludo’s criticism—centered on immediate financial returns—missed the broader vision. More importantly, it overlooked the fact that the brewery remains one of the few indigenous enterprises making a significant contribution to the state’s economy.
In the final analysis, the Obi-Soludo divide isn’t just a clash of personalities; it has become in public consciousness a contest between grounded managerial competence and abstract policy ambition. The evidence suggests that Obi is not merely winning the perception war—he has also won on the metrics that matter: education, infrastructure, healthcare, fiscal responsibility, and practical governance.
Until Soludo can point to a comparable body of work, Obi will likely continue to command the respect—and trust—of those who care less about plans and more about performance.