Modi’s Ladakh protest response risks alienating vital community
Anger grips Ladakh after protest deaths, activist arrest, raising worries that Modi’s stance could further alienate the fragile region.
Ladakh Protests Expose Growing Frustration with Modi Government
Known for its stark landscapes and strategic significance, Ladakh in northern India had largely remained calm for decades, despite being bordered by some of the most volatile regions in South Asia. That calm was shattered on September 24, when weeks of demonstrations culminated in violence, leaving four civilians dead and dozens injured.
The unrest began as largely peaceful protests led by Sonam Wangchuk, a widely respected climate activist, who went on a hunger strike starting September 10. Demonstrators voiced growing frustrations over governance and autonomy in the region. Tensions escalated when protesters set fire to a local office of India’s ruling BJP party, injuring security personnel. Police responded with gunfire, citing “self-defense,” while the Home Ministry accused Wangchuk of inciting the violence. Wangchuk was arrested under the stringent National Security Act, sending shockwaves through the region.
The protests and the central government’s heavy-handed response have raised concerns about the Modi administration’s rapport with Ladakhis, a community that historically supported New Delhi, especially during military standoffs along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China. Local leaders warn that trust between the region and the central government is eroding.
Much of the unrest stems from long-simmering dissatisfaction over autonomy. Until 2019, Ladakh enjoyed semi-autonomous status as part of the former state of Jammu and Kashmir. That year, the BJP-led government revoked the special status of Jammu and Kashmir and split Ladakh into a separate Union Territory, placing it under direct central control. While many initially accepted the new arrangement, believing it would bring development, frustrations have grown over six years of unfulfilled promises.
“People realized that losing all autonomy was a problem,” says Mohammad Ramzan Khan, a local lawyer from Leh and member of the Leh Apex Body, one of the groups leading the protests. “We lost control over the land, employment, and important decisions now rest with bureaucrats who do not understand our culture or needs.” He added that the community had been appealing for legislative control or constitutional safeguards that would give locals meaningful agency.
The discontent has been particularly acute among younger Ladakhis, who feel marginalized by policies imposed from Delhi. Local advocacy groups, including the Leh Apex Body and the Kargil Democratic Alliance, have long demanded more autonomy, but repeated appeals have gone largely unheeded. Frustration reached a boiling point in September, with Wangchuk emerging as a central figure in mobilizing protests. His hunger strike and environmental advocacy made him a hero in the eyes of many, and his arrest has only intensified anger and fear among the local population.
As the protests highlight, Ladakhis are seeking more than symbolic gestures—they want tangible control over their land, resources, and governance. How New Delhi responds could shape the region’s future relationship with India, at a time when Ladakh’s strategic significance is higher than ever.