ABUJA — A political storm has erupted over the state of the South-East in President Bola Tinubu’s administration, pitting a key opposition figure against a senior cabinet minister in a debate that cuts to the heart of Nigeria’s national unity.
The controversy was sparked when the Minister of Works, Engr. Dave Umahi, declared during a project inspection tour that Igbos are now “well integrated” and “comfortable” under President Tinubu’s inclusive governance. He attributed past separatist agitation to marginalization, suggesting those grievances are being addressed.
That claim has been forcefully rejected by Comrade Adolphus Ude, a major stakeholder in the African Democratic Congress (ADC) in Enugu State and a former deputy chairman of the APC in the state. In a scathing press statement, Ude labeled Umahi’s comments “misleading, selfish, and unwarranted,” asserting that Igbo marginalization has, in fact, “worsened” since May 2023.
The Heart of the Dispute: Projects and Appointments
The clash centers on two main fronts: the allocation of federal infrastructure and political appointments.
Ude launched a direct challenge, questioning the minister’s definition of inclusion. “Which inclusive governance is the minister talking about,” he asked, “when the entire South East was excluded from the two outrageously priced signature road infrastructure projects of the Tinubu administration—the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway and the Sokoto-Badagry Highway?”
He lamented that neither multi-trillion naira project passes through any of the five South-East states, while highlighting a media report that the Federal Executive Council approved projects worth about ₦3.9 trillion for Lagos State alone in two years. “Let him [Umahi] say the monetary worth of the ongoing federal road infrastructure projects in the entire South East,” Ude challenged.
On appointments, Ude pointed to a glaring imbalance: “Ogun State alone has four ministerial positions, one shy of the five ministerial positions given to the entire South-East region.”
The Government’s Defence: Legacy Projects and Integration
Minister Umahi’s perspective, articulated during his tour, presents a different narrative. He has consistently pointed to the administration’s commitment, listing the South-East as a key beneficiary of President Tinubu’s “Four Legacy Projects.”
He highlights ongoing major works, including the access roads to the 2nd Niger Bridge, the rehabilitation of the Enugu-Port Harcourt and Enugu-Onitsha expressways, and the approval of the 9th Mile-Enugu-Makurdi Road. Beyond roads, he cites the ongoing Port Harcourt-Aba railway project and the recent establishment of the South-East Development Commission as evidence of federal attention.
On political inclusion, Umahi has pointed to symbolic corrections of past exclusions, such as the appointment of a South-East officer as the Chief of Naval Staff.
A Deeper Historical Grievance
Beyond the exchange of project lists, Ude’s criticism taps into a deeper historical sentiment. His questions—”What has the Tinubu government done for the Igbos, different from what successive governments did?”—frame the current debate within a long-standing narrative of perceived neglect.
Ude, while stating his group’s belief in “one strong, united and indivisible Nigeria,” warned that “without equity, fairness and justice in the allocation of infrastructure… people would continue to engage in one form of agitation or the other.”
He also cautioned the Works Minister against “making unguarded utterances that could be detrimental to Igbo interest,” asserting that “no wise politician plays politics with the destiny of his own people.”
A Political Battlefield Ahead of 2027
The sharp exchange is widely seen as an early skirmish on the political battlefield ahead of the 2027 general elections. For the ruling administration, winning trust and votes in the South-East is a crucial strategic goal. For opposition figures like Ude, highlighting perceived inequity is a powerful tool to counter the government’s narrative of national inclusivity.
The debate remains unresolved, hinging on a fundamental clash of perspectives: the government’s view of progressive integration versus the opposition’s claim of persistent marginalization. As both sides dig in, the conversation continues to reverberate across the region and the nation.
