The Congress has called a meeting of the Central Committee after ten months. Although the Congress has made a calendar to meet every two months, the Central Committee meeting is starting from Monday after a long gap. Last year, the Congress had broadcast live the meeting that started in July and ended in August. As a result, public interest in the meeting increased. This time there is not that level of attraction in the general public. However, how about a meeting in political circles? What message? There is an interest.

The Congress meeting is taking place at a time when the Congressmen are facing opposition to the coalition government led by UML President KP Sharma Oli. The ruling Congress leaders/MPs have been criticizing the functioning and attitude of the government in various public statements from the House. Even though veteran Speaker Sher Bahadur Deuba and his party leaders stand in defense of the government, most of them say that a review should be done in collaboration with the UML. Some are arguing that there is no point in staying in the government and that they should leave.

On the other hand, factionalism and domestic dissension are also simmering in the Congress. With the Fifteenth Congress uncertain since the active member dispute, other questions have also arisen. Shekhar Koirala is seeking to ensure the convention on time, while Deuba is planning to become the prime minister first and complete it according to his own convenience.

What will the meeting be like in this background? What will Deuba, who is pursuing the 'dream' of becoming the prime minister for the sixth time, stop the dissatisfied line? There is curiosity in the party circle. Deuba's expressions are very short. He can conclude the closing statement of the tenth day Central Committee meeting in one sentence. At the end of last year's central committee meeting, he said, "I thought there would be a lot of criticism, but it's not enough, man, thank you all." 

This time, will he get the facility to give the same witty and short answer? 

Can they get away without giving a satisfactory answer to the dissatisfaction within the party? Recently, in a public event, Deuba said that he is going to 'retire' and the convention will be held on time. Probably he will repeat the same thing in the meeting. 

But, will Deuba's verbal assurance solve all the Congress issues? Will the political/ideological and leadership crisis be resolved? It is an important issue of the Congress that there should be a convention at the appointed time, but the bigger question is 'What should the next leadership be?' Congress is hurt by unhealthy factionalism. Leaders who are said to be influential have become corrupt. There are many examples of this from the past. In other words, the image of Congress is blurred on the issue of good governance. The politics of reaction and thoughtlessness are dead. Therefore, the leadership that can give political direction is the most critical issue for the Congress.

When it comes to political/ideological matters, the capital shown by the Congress is BP Koirala. However, BP is not only the Congress, it is the country's capital. Even communists have considered BP as an ideal/paradigm. In accordance with the past environment and political situation, BP has made an incomparable contribution to Nepali politics. However, the context and dimensions of politics have changed. Domestic, geopolitical context, differences brought by technology in human society etc. are becoming more sophisticated. In that sense, it is necessary for the Congress to refine itself by putting itself in a political/ideological position. 

The Congress should be freed from the tendency to eat 'interest' because BP's socialism, leading role in the democratic movement, leadership in the constitution making and periodical elections were under the leadership of the Congress. 

Congress can discuss mainly three issues in this meeting focusing on government, ideas and party leadership. There is also a need for discussion in this party about leaders, policies and government participation and operations. Why in the government? 

The starting point of Congress' cooperation with UML was wrong. From there, Congress should review its role and participation in the coalition government. Why it was wrong, It was a partnership decided by two leaders in a non-political facilitation. Institutional discussions between the two parties did not reach the conclusion of cooperation.  In

parties, it is a rare practice to give concessions to the top leadership, which practically ignores the constitution. In this way, when the opaque transactions in politics are approved, their destiny becomes sad. The Congress-UML alliance is suffering the same fate. The seven-point agreement announced by these two parties in parliament has stalled. Prime Minister Oli is looking for the government's success in SEE results.

He also announced the success of the government from the UML secretariat meeting. However, the government has failed in the eyes of the people. Upendra Yadav's Jaspa may have a political urge to see the end of the Congress-UML alliance, but even from the eyes of the general public, there is no justification for this alliance. For the Congress, there is no justification for this alliance except to wait for its turn and become the Prime Minister. 

There are three types of opinions regarding the coalition government in the Congress. One type of leader is of the opinion that the cooperation with UML should be reviewed, the government is not dynamic. Those who hold this view are of the view that the alliance will be strengthened by improving the weaknesses. Secondly, Congress is a big party, it thinks that it should keep the key of power with itself.

Third, Deuba Dhar, who, like Oli, thinks this alliance is justified. In other words, the aspiration to reach the post of Prime Minister for the sixth time in a squeeze is mixed in this request. In this light, the question arises, should he wait for the prime minister's turn after completing the formalities of the review or be clear about his participation in the government?  As the government is being reviewed in the

meeting, Congress ministers are likely to be the target of criticism. Controversial Home Minister Ramesh Akhtar will be under question. There may also be a proposal to change the ministers. But, changing the face or criteria? This can also be a topic of discussion. Participation in the cabinet should be based on certain standards and expertise, not on the basis of the leader's favor or factional share. There are accusations of irregularities on the ministers including the home minister.

Accused leaders-ministers should be released from responsibility. At least this meeting should take the initiative to create a single standard for maintaining the difference between tainted leaders and innocent ones. The creation of a powerful commission to investigate the assets of those in positions of profit became too much for media consumption. You should be able to play a role in taking it to the level of implementation.

It may seem a bit more 'idealistic' to expect the above decision from the Congress, however, as the political values ​​are slipping, as the general public is becoming dissatisfied, the parties must make such reforms at some point to restore the legitimacy and existence of the party. This requirement is not only for Congress but also for other parties. However, if the Congress, which claims to be the leader of democracy, leads this kind of reform, it will be 'smelling in gold'. 

policy clarity

The life of any party depends on the ideology it adopts. The political inactivity of Narahari Acharya and the absence of Pradeep Giri have clearly affected the ideology of the Congress. There is very little ideological brainstorming in the Congress. Although the 14th Congress was supposed to hold a policy convention within three months, the General Committee meeting was held with the efforts of the General Minister Gagan Thapa and Vishwa Prakash Sharma. The reports of both the Chief Ministers were discussed and passed. The

is then confined to the pages of the political/ideological discourse report. "Socialism of BP" is hanging in the speech of all the leaders. But, is Congress socialist or capitalist? Questions are starting to arise. Congress adopted democratic socialism as its guiding principle since birth. But, according to analysts, with the evolving political developments, there has been a policy leap in Congress. 

Chief minister Thapa advocates 'social democracy'. The main 'theme' of his political report presented at the 14th Congress was Samunna Nepali, Honorable Nepali. He explained that 'social democracy' is the theoretical basis for the advancement of Nepali people. Analysts close to the Congress have started to say that Thapa's 'social democracy' is a sophisticated form of democratic socialism. Can 'social democracy' theoretically replace the democratic socialism that the Congress has been following since its inception? Congress should have a comprehensive discussion on this. This meeting is a suitable platform for that.

Whose policy is his leadership

Another issue that should be debated in Congress is whose policy is his leadership. Despite not being interested in policy discussions, there is a lot of hustling in the Congress to reach the leadership. According to the law, Deuba will not be allowed to become a candidate for the chairman again in the fifteenth congress. Therefore, he has expressed that he is going to 'retire'. Speculation has been going on in the Congress to succeed Deuba. Competitors all want to convince Deuba to reach the leadership. In today's situation, Congressmen think that Deuba, who has a strong hold on the party system, will be the leader. Therefore, everyone's first priority is to be chosen by Deuba. 

However, the presidential aspirants from the fifteenth convention can be divided into three categories. Shekhar Koirala has the highest number of candidates to become the chairman. He has announced long ago that he will be a candidate for the chairmanship in the fifteenth convention. It is also natural considering Deuba's closest candidate in the fourteenth congress. 

Mahamantri Thapa, although he did not make a formal announcement, has given the choice to compete for leadership in the upcoming convention. Defeated by competing with Deuba for the leadership of the parliamentary party, Thapa aspires to become the leader of both the party and the government and his activism is also in line with that. 

Purna Bahadur Khadka and other leaders who are close to Deuba had aspirations that they would have been able to reach the leadership. Shashank Koirala, Krishna Sitaula, Prakashman Singh, Bimalendra Nidhi, Gopalman Shrestha etc. are also counting their long political careers and expecting to reach the leadership. However, these characters are much more dependent on Deuba than Shekhar or Gagan. These characters will become candidates for leadership only if Deuba is right. 

is not dependent on what anyone carries to reach the leadership. Being a key leader requires some foundation. As such, Shekhar has experience working closely with Girijaprasad Koirala. Shashank would claim the real legacy of the Koirala family but Shekhar is also a leader from the same family background. More than that, Deuba has the experience and opinion of being the closest candidate in the fourteenth Congress. 

Gagan also has a political journey and experience from being a cell member of the Navy to the General Minister of the Congress. Gagan is poised to take the leadership of the Congress by putting forward a political program. He claims that he is preparing what to do if he becomes the Prime Minister. He has been claiming for a long time that he worked on the Mission Pradhan Mantri project in collaboration with more than 60 experts.  In order to break the story, Gagan's tenure as Chief Minister was successful, and how much was not, it remains to be accounted for. He was criticized for his ideas on some political issues including religion, popular vote should be allowed to run the government for five years. A party calendar was made but there was a problem in its full compliance. The idea of ​​holding meetings only at the party office and not at the leader's house also became a momentary impulse. Even now, he has put forward a very democratic proposal that the leadership of the convention should be 'chosen from the active members'. But, probably Congress will not be ready for that. 

Gagan has not made efforts but he is not yet in a position to intervene decisively within the party. He opined dozens of times that a powerful wealth commission should be formed, but the issue is still pending. Therefore, there can be a different review of what he did and failed to do as the Chief Minister. However, he is becoming more mature while facing the establishment from the other side. Under fire and questioning, he is also preparing himself to be tested on the future leadership of the Congress. There should be a constructive discussion in the central meeting to make this struggle for