Adedokun Waliyu 
Wole Soyinka, Nobel laureate, says Peter Obi’s visit to him was not a reconciliation meeting.
TheCable had reported that Obi, candidate of the Labour Party (LP) in the 2023 elections, visited Soyinka on Sunday.
Obi had said his visit to Soyinka was intended to erase “the needless misconceptions about the relationship between the great icon and the obidient family”.
The development comes days after Soyinka came under criticism on social media by Obi’s supporters, popularly known as “Obidients”.
Soyinka had, in a statement, said Obidients wear their refusal to “accept constructive criticism as a badge of honour”, while addressing criticism he received from supporters of the LP.
Commenting in a statement on Monday, Soyinka said there was no issue to reconcile between him, Obi and the LP.
He described the word “reconciliation” as “most inappropriate and diversionary invocation”.
“Before it gains traction and embarks on a life of its own, I wish to state clearly that the word ‘Reconciliation’, inserted into some reports of Peter Obi’s visit to me yesterday, Sunday, May 7, is a most inappropriate, and diversionary invocation,” Soyinka said.
“Let me clarify: I know the entity known as Peter Obi, presidential candidate of the Labour Party. I can relate to him. I know and can relate to the Labour Party on whose platform he contested elections.
“There are simply no issues to reconcile between those two entities and myself.
“However, I do not know, and I’m unable to relate to something known as the ‘Obidient’ or ‘Obidient Family’.
“Thus, albeit in a different vein, any notion of reconciliation, or even relations – positive, negative or indifferent – with such a spectral emanation is simply grasping at empty air.
“During that meeting, attended by two other individuals only, the word ‘Reconciliation’ was never bruited, neither in itself nor in any other form. It simply did not arise.
“By contrast, there were expressions of ‘burden of leadership’, ‘responsibility’, ‘apology’, ‘pleading’, ‘formal dissociation from the untenable’, all the way to the ‘tragic ascendancy of ethnic cleavage’, especially under such ironic, untenable circumstances. Discussions were frank, and creative.
“The notion of Reconciliation was clearly N/A – Non Applicable. It was never raised.”
