The Unending Political Feud Between Obasanjo and Osoba

The relationship between former President Olusegun Obasanjo and ex-Ogun State Governor, Olusegun Osoba remains one of the most consequential variables in the Gateway State’s political equation. Will their political preferences converge or diverge? Jonathan Eze asks.

In the history of Nigerian politics, few rivalries have been as enduring, complex and consequential as that between former President Olusegun Obasanjo and former Ogun State Governor Olusegun Osoba.

Unlike political feuds driven by personal insults or ideological extremism, the Obasanjo-Osoba rivalry has always been rooted in competing visions of political leadership, influence, and power within Ogun State and the wider Yoruba political establishment. It is a rivalry that has survived military rule, the return of democracy, shifting party loyalties, and changing national political alignments.

Even today, decades after both men occupied the highest offices available to them, the echoes of their political contest continue to shape Ogun politics.

Two Different Political Schools

Although both men are proud Egba sons from Ogun State, their political upbringing could hardly have been more different.

Obasanjo emerged from the military establishment. His political authority has always rested on executive power, national stature and his reputation as a strategic political operator. Whether as military Head of State (1976–1979) or civilian President (1999–2007), Obasanjo projected himself as a national leader who often placed national considerations above regional political sentiments.

Osoba, by contrast, built his influence through journalism before entering politics. Having risen to become one of Nigeria’s most respected investigative journalists, he entered partisan politics through the progressive tradition of Chief Obafemi Awolowo. His political identity became closely associated with the Alliance for Democracy (AD), Afenifere and the Yoruba progressive movement.

This divergence created the first philosophical fault line. Where Obasanjo believed in a strong central authority, Osoba remained committed to regional consensus, party loyalty and progressive federalism.

1999: Allies by Circumstance, Rivals by Design

When democracy returned in 1999, both men emerged victorious. Obasanjo became President on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party. Osoba became Governor of Ogun State under the Alliance for Democracy.

At first glance, the emergence of two influential Ogun sons should have strengthened the state’s political relevance.

Instead, it produced one of Nigeria’s most fascinating political rivalries.

While many expected Obasanjo to protect the political interests of the Southwest despite belonging to another party, he increasingly sought to expand the PDP into territories controlled by the AD.

For Osoba and many Afenifere leaders, this was viewed as an attempt to dismantle the political structure inherited from Awolowo.

For Obasanjo, however, it represented political integration rather than regional exclusivity. That difference in interpretation has remained unresolved.

The 2003 Earthquake

No single event defined their rivalry more than the 2003 general election. Ahead of that election, negotiations reportedly took place between Obasanjo and several South West governors over possible political cooperation.

Many AD leaders believed there was an understanding that Obasanjo would receive their presidential support while their governorship structures would remain intact.

Instead, the election produced one of the biggest political upsets in Nigeria’s democratic history. Five of the six AD governors lost their seats. Only Lagos survived. Osoba was among the casualties.

To Osoba and several Afenifere leaders, the outcome amounted to a profound political betrayal. Obasanjo has consistently rejected that interpretation, insisting there was no deception and that electoral outcomes reflected political realities rather than any secret agreement. The disagreement resurfaced publicly in 2026 after Osoba revisited the episode in his memoir and Obasanjo issued a detailed rebuttal, demonstrating that the wounds of 2003 remain politically alive.

Politics of Influence

Perhaps the greatest difference between both men lies in how they exercise political influence.

Obasanjo’s politics revolves around institutions and national coalitions.

Even after leaving office, successive presidents, governors and presidential aspirants have sought his endorsement or at least his neutrality. He remains arguably Nigeria’s most influential ex-Head of State.

Osoba’s influence is more organisational.

He has built political structures, mentored generations of politicians and maintained enormous goodwill within the Southwest’s progressive movement. His authority is less presidential than institutional.

Where Obasanjo prefers direct intervention in national affairs, Osoba has often acted as the elder strategist behind party negotiations.

Battle for Ogun’s Political Soul

Beyond personalities, their rivalry represents two competing ideas about Ogun politics.

One school believes Ogun’s political future should remain deeply connected to the Yoruba progressive tradition.

The other argues that Ogun’s strategic importance requires broader national alliances beyond regional political identities.

This ideological distinction explains why they have frequently found themselves in opposite sides of major political realignments.

Ironically, despite their disagreements, both have helped produce many of the state’s political leaders.

Mutual Respect Amid Persistent Differences

One remarkable feature of their relationship is that it has rarely descended into sustained personal abuse. Their exchanges have generally focused on historical interpretation, political decisions and questions of leadership rather than private attacks.

Even the renewed disagreement in 2026 centred on conflicting accounts of the 2003 political negotiations, with each defending his version of history rather than questioning the other’s achievements.

That restraint reflects the political maturity of two statesmen who understand that history, not public rhetoric will ultimately judge them.

How History May Judge Both Men

History is unlikely to produce a unanimous verdict on either man.

Obasanjo’s supporters credit him with stabilising Nigeria’s Fourth Republic, overseeing economic reforms, securing debt relief and maintaining lasting national relevance. His critics point to accusations of excessive centralisation, his tense relationships with political allies and opponents, and controversies surrounding elections and constitutional politics.

Osoba is widely respected as one of Nigeria’s finest journalists turned politicians. Admirers see him as principled, accessible and deeply committed to the progressive ideals associated with the Southwest. Critics argue that his influence has sometimes been constrained by loyalty to party structures in a political environment increasingly driven by broad national alliances.

Final Analysis

The Obasanjo-Osoba rivalry is not simply a clash between two political heavyweights. It is a contest between two enduring philosophies of power.

Obasanjo believes history is shaped by bold executive action and national coalition-building.

Osoba believes lasting political legitimacy grows from party institutions, consensus and ideological continuity.

Neither philosophy has fully prevailed.

Instead, Ogun politics has evolved through the interaction of both.

As long as Nigeria continues to debate federalism, regional identity, party loyalty and national leadership, the political relationship between Olusegun Obasanjo and Olusegun Osoba will remain one of the country’s most instructive case studies.

Their rivalry has never merely been about who led Ogun better. It has always been about two different ideas of how political power should be acquired, exercised and remembered.

As Ogun State inches towards the 2027 general elections, the relationship between Obasanjo and Osoba remains one of the most consequential variables in the state’s political equation. None of them occupies elective office today, yet both retain the capacity to influence political alignments, shape elite consensus and confer legitimacy on emerging leaders.

Unlike in previous electoral cycles, however, the dynamics have become more nuanced. The political landscape is now dominated by the All Progressives Congress (APC), where many of the structures historically associated with Osoba have found expression, while Obasanjo has continued to wield influence more through moral authority, personal networks and strategic interventions than through formal party leadership.

Recent political developments have added another layer to the equation. The senatorial ambition of Obasanjo’s daughter, Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello, under the platform of the PDP has inevitably drawn attention to the former President’s political calculations, even though she has repeatedly maintained that her aspiration is independent of her father’s direct involvement

The critical question, therefore, is not whether Obasanjo and Osoba will openly confront each other in 2027, but whether their political preferences will converge or diverge.

Should both elder statesmen quietly align behind the same political tendency, such a convergence could significantly strengthen elite cohesion within Ogun politics, reduce intra-party tensions and provide a stabilising influence on the succession process.

Given their combined stature, such an understanding would send a powerful signal across the state’s political class.

Conversely, if they back opposing interests or rival tendencies, the familiar fault lines that have characterised Ogun politics for over two decades could re-emerge. Their respective loyalists, many of whom still occupy influential positions across party structures, business circles and traditional institutions, could interpret such divergence as a cue for renewed political contestation.

Yet there is another possibility. Age, experience and the weight of history may have transformed both men from political combatants into custodians of stability. Rather than seeking to determine electoral outcomes directly, they may choose to act as statesmen whose principal concern is ensuring that Ogun experiences a peaceful transition anchored on competence, inclusion and political maturity.

Whatever unfolds in 2027, one conclusion appears difficult to dispute: no serious analysis of Ogun politics can ignore either Obasanjo or Osoba. Their influence now extends beyond electoral contests. It resides in their ability to shape political narratives, mentor successive generations of leaders and define the standards by which leadership in Ogun State is measured.

In the final analysis, the Obasanjo-Osoba relationship is no longer merely a story of rivalry. It has evolved into a barometer of Ogun’s political direction. Whether they stand together, remain apart or simply watch events unfold from the sidelines, their actions, and sometimes even their silence, will continue to resonate far beyond 2027.