When selfish ambition hijacks public sentiment, peaceful dissent risks turning into dangerous theatre. Leh’s eruption raises urgent questions on timing, geography, and narrative.
For fifteen days, Leh embodied calm resistance. Hunger strikes, silent marches, and community-led shutdowns symbolized the valley’s demand for statehood and constitutional safeguards. Then, on Day 15, the streets erupted: mobs clashed with police, vehicles were torched, and even temples were set on fire. Farooq Abdullah and the National Conference (NC) leadership rushed to justify the aggressive turn, giving political cover to chaos that mirrored Nepal’s violent uprisings , attacking authorities, targeting civilians, and destroying sacred sites. Only one thing set Leh apart: unlike Nepal or even Kashmir, the Indian flag remained untouched, preventing the narrative from sliding into outright rebellion.
Why Day 15? Why Leh city? The timing and geography are striking. After two weeks of fasting, when protesters began collapsing, frustration reached its tipping point. Choosing Leh’s administrative heart ensured maximum visibility. Behind it all, one must ask: was this spontaneous public anger, or the ambition of a few leaders bending the people’s cause to their narrative? Congress and National Conference leaders also tried to insert themselves, aiming to shift attention to Rahul Gandhi. Ideally, Gandhi should stay out of this, the focus is Wangchuk’s framing, whose role remains central. For decades, Ladakh suffered from political neglect, with development delayed due to fear of China. Now that meaningful progress has begun, it will take time, yet opportunistic voices are exploiting unrest to undermine it.
Sonam Wangchuk ended his hunger strike and framed the unrest as a “Gen-Z uprising”, young, restless, uncontrollable. Ostensibly a call for calm, it also distanced leadership from responsibility while linking Leh to Nepal and Bangladesh’s youth-led revolts. Was this description or a calculated amplification to dramatize the protest nationally?
Ladakh’s grievances: land protections, Sixth Schedule safeguards, statehood , remain urgent. But when peaceful protest turns violent, and leaders like Wangchuk, Farooq Abdullah, and NC figures publicly defend aggression, the movement risks losing moral authority. Ordinary Ladakhis’ aspirations are now clouded by suspicion: is this genuine public anger, or the performance of a few ambitious actors?
On the government’s side, the response was reactive. Fifteen days of visible fasting and mounting participation should have prompted dialogue. While not solely responsible for escalation, delayed outreach contributed to the spiral.
Leh’s Day 15 is a stark lesson: when real demands are overshadowed by ambition and narrative engineering, protest can become performance. Ladakh now stands at a crossroads, will its movement remain disciplined and dignified, or will it be hijacked to echo the chaos of Nepal?
Image curtsey Al Jazeera. Video Curtsey statement of Sonam on X
About The Author
NC and CONG-RESS party is responsible for unrest in Ladakh region , Since decades they never ever think about the development and basic needs of the region like good medical facilities, quality educational institutions, food on reliable rates.
Thanks to the Indian Army who to some extent take care of public,.
Now this is amoung the priority for GOI to think about the interests of Ladakh and Ladhaki people .