The violence that shook Leh on Wednesday is unfortunate. No grievance, however genuine, can justify the loss of four lives, the torching of public property, or the injury of dozens of police personnel and protesters. What Ladakh witnessed was tragic—and avoidable.
There is no denying that the people of Ladakh are exercised over their demand for statehood. This is not a sudden outburst but a long-standing aspiration, dating back to the days of Sheikh Abdullah. When Ladakh was carved out of Jammu and Kashmir in 2019 and made a Union Territory, many saw it as only a halfway house to full statehood.
The Centre has indeed invested heavily in Ladakh’s infrastructure. Roads, communications, and basic facilities have improved significantly. Yet, for many Ladakhis, development is no substitute for political empowerment. Their demand is rooted in a sense of cultural identity and local control over land, jobs, and resources.
The question that remains is whether a sparsely populated region of 300,000 can realistically sustain a separate state. Leaders, past and present, have grappled with this. The late Kushak Bakula, the undisputed leader of Ladakhi Buddhists, did not extend his support to the idea of full statehood.
More recently, activist-engineer Sonam Wangchuk, whose innovative work brought him national recognition, has emerged as the face of the demand. His hunger strike gave visibility to the cause but also coincided with a disturbing outbreak of violence.
It is for the investigating agencies to determine whether he provoked the mob or whether frustration among unemployed youth spilled over into anger. He has denied responsibility and appealed for peace. Yet, history reminds us that true leadership requires the foresight to sense when passions are running beyond control. Mahatma Gandhi himself had called off agitations when they threatened to turn violent.
The tragedy should, therefore, serve as a sobering reminder: violence destroys more than it builds. The burning of offices and vehicles, the deaths of young men, and the tarnishing of an essentially peaceful movement will only make resolution harder.
Ladakh’s strength has always been in its composite culture—where Buddhists and Muslims, despite differing past aspirations, now speak in one voice for dignity and rights. That unity must not be allowed to fracture under the weight of anger.
Dialogue remains the only way forward. The committees already set up and the fresh round of talks scheduled should be pursued in good faith. Leaders must ensure that their followers do not stray from peaceful means. At the same time, citizens must recognise that negotiations, however slow, are more productive than street violence.
Ladakh is a land of unmatched beauty, strategic importance, and peace-loving people. Its future must rest on mutual trust, patient dialogue, and non-violence—the true path to peace and progress.
https://www.freepressjournal.in/analysis/ladakh-violence-4-dead-in-protests-calls-for-dialogue-and-non-violence-amid-statehood-demand
