Voices of Ladakh: Demands for Statehood and Sixth Schedule Protection
Context:
- Violent protests in Leh, Ladakh demanding full statehood and Sixth Schedule status have resulted in four deaths and over 30 injuries.
- Activist Sonam Wangchuk ended his 15-day hunger strike amid rising unrest, drawing attention to the escalating tensions in the Union Territory.
- The protests reflect growing frustration over governance, representation, and cultural safeguards since Ladakh became a Union Territory in 2019.
1. Background of Ladakh Protests:
- In 2019, following the abrogation of Article 370, the J&K Reorganisation Act split the state into two UTs:
- J&K with legislature
- Ladakh without legislature
- Initially welcomed, UT status soon created discontent due to:
- Reduced powers of Hill Councils
- Shrinking local recruitment opportunities
- Removal of land safeguards
- LAB (Leh Apex Body) and KDA (Kargil Democratic Alliance) have led peaceful protests, now escalating due to perceived inaction by the Centre
2. Demands of Ladakhi Protesters:
- Full Statehood – for legislative powers, accountability, and stronger local representation
- Sixth Schedule Inclusion – to protect tribal population (90%), their land, jobs, and culture
- Parliamentary Representation – separate Lok Sabha seat for Kargil; one Rajya Sabha seat
- Public Service Commission – for transparent local recruitment
- Land & Job Security – restrict outsiders from acquiring land or monopolising employment
3. Arguments for Statehood:
- Democratic Deficit: Governance under bureaucrats and LG limits self-rule and accountability
- Cultural Safeguards: Sixth Schedule protections secure land, jobs, and culture for the tribal majority
- Geopolitical Stability: Local governance fosters trust in a frontier region bordering China and Pakistan
- Youth Aspirations: Statehood promises local recruitment and prevents migration of educated youth
- Promise Fulfillment: Honouring the 2019 government pledge reinforces democratic credibility
4. Arguments Against Statehood:
- National Security: Strategic location near LAC (China) and LoC (Pakistan) requires central oversight
- Small Population: Around 3 lakh residents may not justify full statehood
- Existing Hill Councils: Leh and Kargil already enjoy some autonomy
- Risk of Factionalism: Divergent interests between Leh and Kargil could destabilise governance
- Resource Dependency: Heavy reliance on central funds may make statehood financially challenging
5. Government Efforts So Far:
- Formation of High-Powered Committee (HPC) for dialogue with LAB and KDA
- ST reservation increased from 45% to 84%
- One-third reservation for women in Hill Councils
- Bhoti and Purgi declared official languages
- Recruitment initiated for 1,800 government posts
6. Implications of Violence:
On Ladakh:
- Social Fabric: Unity of Buddhists and Muslims strengthens cause but violence risks communal tensions
- Youth Radicalisation: Frustration among Gen Z may lead to long-term instability
- Tourism & Livelihoods: Violence affects eco-tourism and Pashmina trade
On India:
- Security Concerns: Protests in a border region may be exploited by China or Pakistan
- Federalism Debate: Raises questions on Centre’s handling of UTs
- Political Credibility: Government image may be affected if promises remain unfulfilled
- Diplomatic Sensitivity: Global attention on unrest in a strategically sensitive region
7. Way Ahead:
- Structured Dialogue: Continue talks with LAB & KDA through HPC with timelines
- Enhanced Autonomy: Devolve more legislative and financial powers to Hill Councils
- Partial Sixth Schedule: Apply selectively to protect land and jobs while maintaining central security oversight
- Youth Engagement: Create employment schemes, eco-tourism initiatives, and local entrepreneurship
- Balanced Approach: Safeguard Ladakhi identity without compromising national security
Conclusion:
- The Ladakh agitation highlights the tension between democratic aspirations and national security.
- While it has united diverse communities, violence risks long-term instability.
- A middle path combining expanded autonomy, cultural safeguards, and youth empowerment can balance people’s aspirations with India’s strategic interests.
Source : The Hindu
