After the defeat in the House of Representatives elections held on 21 Falgun, a serious debate has begun in political circles about the future of the Congress and President Gagan Thapa. On the one hand, Thapa's intention to resign has been made public at a time when the unexpected election results are being reviewed, creating a serious wave in the Congress circle.

On the other hand, after the party, which went to the elections with the main slogan of 'Congress has changed, we will change the country', was defeated, another series of accusations have begun between the establishment party and the former President Sher Bahadur Deuba's party. The establishment party led by Thapa has argued that it was defeated due to Deuba's failure and unpopularity in the past, as well as interference in the elections. However, the Deuba group has alleged that the main reason for the defeat was Thapa's failure and has also claimed that the rationale for the special general convention has ended. 

However, not only the Congress, but also the old parties including the UML, the NCP, and the like have been shamefully defeated. But why was the major democratic party, the Congress, which led three successful political revolutions and movements from 2007 to 2062/63, defeated in this way? Is this the failure of the Congress party itself or is it the failure of Thapa as alleged by the Deuba group? What will be the future of the Congress and Thapa now? Should Thapa resign or not? What are the reasons for the defeat? Is there a possibility of revival for the Congress? Questions, counter-questions and direct questions have been raised. Therefore, for the future of the Congress, it is inevitable to objectively review such questions, counter-questions and direct questions and reach a concrete conclusion.

Why was the Congress defeated?

A detailed analysis and review of the distortions and anomalies of almost three decades, the impact it has had on the Congress, and the election results is not possible in this short article. If we were to prepare a detailed and objective list of the reasons for the defeat, it would be a long poem. But if we mention them point by point, there are seven main reasons. 

First, after the establishment of democracy in 2046, it had the opportunity to come to power repeatedly. But except for the period from 2048 to 2051, it failed to make the people feel the change by running the state according to the people's will. Neither could the Congress government lead economic development, nor could it win the hearts of the people by delivering. The public was told that the Congress is an exploitative party that brokers power and exploits the state by coming to power.

Second, corruption control and good governance were the people's desires. But not only was it unable to guarantee good governance by controlling corruption, but new cases of corruption and misgovernance were exposed during the Congress government. As Congress leaders, ministers and MPs got caught up in one case after another of corruption and abuse of authority, the image of the Congress became even more negative. 

Third, the extreme power-oriented tendency to make unnatural alliances and compromises for power and power by sacrificing the politics of values ​​and principles is another major reason for the defeat. Due to the power syndicate and the game of 'musical chairs' between the three leaders of the three parties - Congress, UML, and Maoists - Deuba, KP Sharma Oli, and Pushpa Kamal Dahal, not only the three parties and the three leaders, but also the democratic system and the constitution were distorted and defamed.

Fourth, the constitutional bodies, judiciary, civil administration, security agencies, universities, diplomatic agencies, and state bodies were over-partisanized. The people were against such unwanted partisanization. Fifth, after these overall distortions and anomalies and the government's killing and suppression during the Gen-G uprising of 23-24 Bhadau, the people were against the Congress-UML and were in favor of change. Therefore, the people voted against the Congress, UML, and the supporters of change supported Balen Shah due to his image and popularity, and the RSP was able to achieve an unexpected historic success. 

Sixth, another important reason for the defeat is sabotage. The Congress has been a victim of the assassination, sabotage and counter-attack that has been going on since the by-election in which former President Krishna Prasad Bhattarai was a candidate this time too. Even before the election was over and the results were not made public, analyzing the public statements and accusations against Thapa by the Deuba group has made it clear as day to what extent non-cooperation and sabotage have taken place. Deuba did not even issue an appeal to vote by ballot, even for formality. On the contrary, he boycotted the vote and went to Singapore. None of the leaders of the Deuba group, including Purna Bahadur Khadka, Krishna Prasad Sitaula, Prakash Man Singh, Shashank Koirala, were seen in the election campaign. What could be a bigger irony for the Congress?

Seventh, due to the short time, the message that the Congress has changed could not be effectively conveyed to the people and workers. The biggest loss was to the Congress and Thapa. Based on the above facts and figures, it is clear as day that the reason for the defeat is not Thapa's leadership and policies, but the failure, unpopularity, misrule and corruption of the leadership of the Deuba group. Therefore, now the Central Committee should conduct an objective self-review and self-reflection of the election, correct the mistakes and weaknesses of the past, and immediately set a date for the general convention. Only then will the real new journey of building a new Congress begin.

Resignation or roadmap for a new Congress?

Thapa came to the leadership about 2 months ago at a time when the Congress was extremely unpopular and the organization was extremely weak. It was an ironic situation to have to go to the election leading such a weak and unpopular party on the 50th day of his presidency. If Thapa had not come to the leadership, the Congress would not have even had the basis to ask for votes from the people. If it had gone to the election under Deuba's leadership, not only would the election result have been weaker than that of the UML, but the Congress would have been ostracized by the people. Therefore, before criticizing and making negative comments about Thapa, Congressmen need to understand this political reality. 

Fate is now taking another difficult test on Thapa, who has been successful in every political ordeal after a long political struggle. Thapa, who has been achieving success due to dreams, determination and struggle, has no room for failure now and no room for disappointment. If he fails and gets disappointed, a whole generation will fail in politics and be disappointed in politics. 

It is natural for a leader like Thapa, who has been pursuing politics of values, ethics and principles, to think of resigning after the party is defeated, taking moral responsibility. This is a high democratic culture, a sense of responsibility and a test of morality. Such an example and culture make the leadership more democratic, responsible and moral. But the test of leadership does not happen in just 50 days. Thapa's leadership as the President has not been tested. If he had been defeated in the election held after the completion of one term as the President, his resignation would have been natural. Therefore, it is not appropriate from any political, moral or legal point of view to suffer punishment for a crime you did not commit or to punish yourself. 

No matter how skilled and successful a player is, he may not score a goal when he enters the field of play in extra time after the end of 90 minutes. Even world-famous players like Messi and Ronaldo may not score a goal after entering in such a time. Therefore, how fair is it to criticize a skilled player who entered in 'injury' time for not scoring a goal? The comments or criticism made against Thapa now are like that incident in football. 

Interference, suicide and self-criticism have been the cursed destiny of the Congress. But this is not a time for accusations, internal strife and self-criticism, but a time for all Congressmen to gain confidence through self-reflection, self-reflection and self-criticism. This is not the time for Thapa to resign, but a time to be determined to fulfill the historical responsibility entrusted by history to form a new Congress. The process of transformation, purification and reorganization of the Congress has finally begun under Thapa's leadership. If he resigns, this entire process will be disrupted. 

The process of transformation and reorganization of a party like the Congress, which is traditional and dominated by a leader-dominated system, is relatively long and complex, so it seems that it will take time to see results. There was little time to convey the message of change in the Congress to the people by ending the distortions and anomalies of three decades. Only the leadership had changed from the special general convention held in Poush. Now it is necessary to fundamentally reinterpret it from a theoretical-ideological point of view and comprehensively restructure it from an organizational point of view and transform it into a new Congress. The thinking, culture and working style of such a Congress should also be democratic and responsible. 

Just as Tony Blair, after taking over the leadership of the British Labour Party in 1994, transformed it from a theoretical, ideological and organizational point of view and formed the New Labour Party. Similarly, now is the time for Thapa to play a leading role in transforming the old Congress into a new Congress. It is necessary for Thapa to accept this reality and set a concrete roadmap for forming a new Congress. This is the need of the day and this is Thapa's role. Otherwise, not only the future of the Congress, but also its legitimacy will be seriously questioned.

The history of the victories and defeats of Churchill and Gandhi

The history of the victories and defeats of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and former Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi is the most relevant and frequently mentioned event in terms of election results. If the then Chancellor of Germany, Adolf Hitler, had not been defeated in World War II, the map of the world would have been different today. But Churchill played a leading role in defeating Hitler by forming military partnerships with powerful leaders from the opposite pole, from US President Franklin Roosevelt to the then Prime Minister of the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin.

The strategy and military partnership were successful due to the high diplomatic skills of Churchill, the strategist of that policy. Historians around the world have highly praised Churchill's strategy, diplomacy and success, who also received the Nobel Peace Prize. But after the end of World War II, which is considered a stain on human history, Churchill's Conservative Party, considered a hero of World War II, was defeated in the British general election of 1945. But Churchill was not discouraged and did not retire from politics. After the Conservative Party won a majority in the general election held in 1951, Churchill became the Prime Minister again.

The political history of Indira Gandhi, considered the Iron Lady in the history of India, is also equally ups and downs. Due to India's internal political disputes and conflicts, the then Prime Minister Gandhi imposed a controversial 21-month emergency from 1975 to 77. During the emergency, democratic rights were restricted and opposition parties, leaders and activists were widely repressed. Therefore, she was defeated in the 1977 election. But in the 1980 election, Gandhi made a grand political comeback when the Congress won 353 out of 543 seats in the Lok Sabha. Therefore, losing an election does not end politics, and winning does not establish politics forever. This is a universally accepted principle of political science. Learning from such a principle will be beneficial for the political health of the Congress and Thapa themselves.

What will be the future of the Congress?

A democratic, progressive, and centrist party like the Congress, which has been fighting for democracy and people's rights without compromise for nearly eight decades, has a strong theoretical and ideological foundation. Due to the liberal democracy that developed after the establishment of democracy in 2046, the open society, free press, development of information technology, and the role of social media, the development and influence of the intellectual community and 'critical mass' in Nepal have also increased significantly. The intellectual community with critical awareness, the middle class, civil society, and the critical mass are committed to democracy from all three perspectives of self-interest, principles, and nature and support democratic parties. Despite being critical, this community has been supporting and cooperating with the Congress so far. 

The class base is not weak either, with about 40 percent middle and lower middle class, including about 25 percent middle class and about 15 percent lower middle class. This class is naturally committed to democracy and democratic parties. Therefore, except for the 2064 Constituent Assembly and 2079 and this election, the Congress has always won 30 to 38 percent of the vote. Since there was no other credible democratic party, the Congress had so far received the sole support of the intellectual and professional community, the middle and lower middle class and democratic voters and the highest political dividend from this group.

However, after the RSVP won about two-thirds of the votes in this election, the theoretical, ideological and class base of the Congress has narrowed to some extent. Even the intellectual and professional community, the middle and lower middle class and democratic voters, which are considered the traditional base areas, supported and supported the RSVP as an alternative to the Congress in this election. Therefore, after this election, it seems that a challenge has been created to the Congress to some extent from all theoretical, ideological and class perspectives. 

When analyzed from the perspective of political ideology, the RSVP is not as clear as the Congress and the Communists. But based on the political documents published so far, the RSVP is a non-communist and democratic party. But even though it is non-communist and democratic, its ideological trend is more likely to be populist, center-right and liberal. Therefore, from a theoretical and ideological point of view, the Congress needs to be more democratic, liberal, centrist, progressive, inclusive and in favor of social justice than the RSVP. The future of the Congress also depends on this. If it is not separated from the RSVP in theoretical, ideological and class terms and cannot effectively convey this message to the people, then the Congress will suffer both in the immediate and long-term perspective.