Valentine Obienyem, media aide to former Anambra State governor Peter Obi, has rejected the description of the growing political exchanges between Governor Charles Soludo and his principal as a “war between brothers,” arguing that the confrontation has largely been one-sided.
Obienyem was reacting to a recent intervention by Dr Uche Nworah titled “Brothers at War Because of Politics,” in which Nworah expressed concern over the increasingly hostile relationship between the two prominent Anambra figures and warned that the situation could have wider consequences for the state.
In his response, amplified by the Good Governance Group (GGG), Obienyem argued that Obi had not sought a political confrontation with Soludo and had generally refrained from responding to what he described as repeated attacks from the governor and his associates.
According to Obienyem, Obi has deliberately avoided situations that could create the impression of a direct political confrontation with Soludo. He cited an incident at an Anglican gathering in Amichi, where he said Obi reportedly remained inside his vehicle until Soludo left, despite having a flight to catch.
Obienyem said Obi’s decision was motivated by a desire to avoid any situation in which his arrival could generate a reaction that might be interpreted as an attempt to compete with or overshadow the governor.
He further alleged that Soludo’s aides have devoted considerable attention to attacking Obi, while claiming that Obi has repeatedly instructed his supporters to leave the governor alone.
Obienyem also made the unverified claim that about 230 media operatives had recently been inaugurated with a mandate to counter Obi. That particular allegation could not be independently established from the sources reviewed for this report and should therefore be treated as a claim by Obienyem rather than an established fact.
The former governor’s aide maintained that Obi could respond more aggressively if he chose to, but has deliberately avoided turning the political disagreement into a sustained personal confrontation.
“A fight requires two willing combatants,” Obienyem argued, insisting that Obi had not made Soludo the subject of his public speeches or mobilised his supporters to attack the governor.
He said Obi’s supporters sometimes respond independently when they consider criticisms of their principal unjustified, but maintained that such reactions should not be interpreted as evidence that Obi himself is seeking a confrontation with Soludo.
Obienyem also used the opportunity to raise broader questions about governance in Anambra, challenging the Soludo administration to focus on its record rather than what he described as persistent attacks on its predecessor.
Among the issues he said could become subjects of public debate are road projects, state revenues, education infrastructure and the financial position inherited by the present administration.
He specifically questioned claims concerning the payment of arrears and gratuities, demanding details of the periods covered and calling for documentary evidence to support competing accounts of the state’s financial position at the transition between administrations.
The comments come against the background of a relationship between Obi and Soludo that has periodically generated sharp political exchanges. Their differences have previously extended to debates over Obi’s record as governor, state investments, governance and the political direction of Anambra. Earlier documented exchanges included Soludo’s criticism of some investments made during Obi’s administration and Obi’s subsequent public response.
Obedience latest intervention seeks to draw a distinction between political disagreement and an organised personal confrontation, arguing that Obi’s preference has been to allow the incumbent administration to govern and ultimately be judged by its record.
His position, however, represents the Obi camp’s account of the dispute, while Soludo and his representatives have previously offered different interpretations of their disagreements. The competing claims therefore remain part of an increasingly significant political debate in Anambra as Nigeria approaches the 2027 elections.
Obienyem concluded by insisting that Anambra belongs to all its citizens and that the overriding concern should be the performance of the state government rather than a sustained political battle between two former and current leaders.
The central question now is whether the increasingly public exchanges between the two camps will remain a political disagreement or develop into a broader confrontation capable of shaping the 2027 political contest in Anambra and beyond.
