Dangerous Delusion

TRACING LADAKH’S CONTACT with Buddhism is challenging and scholars have found it hard to establish claims that it dates to the Kushan period. Yet, it does appear that the Buddhist faith did reach Ladakh as early as the 7th century when Tibetans established control over the region inhabited by the Dard people. A mix of Tibetan and local tradi­tions grew to define Ladakhi culture that over time encompassed the study of elevated spiritual and philosophical concepts such as shunyata (inner contemplation). A powerful kingdom rose in the 10th century with its capital at Shey and successor states waxed and waned till the end of the Namgyal dynasty in the early 19th century. By the 13th century, Ladakh boasted a rich and varied culture with architecture and painting exhibiting the Tibetan influence through the depiction of all aspects of Buddhist teach­ings that help trace the region’s history and beliefs.

The anthropological view of tribes as small, culturally distinct, indigenous and autonomous communities—itself under scrutiny for following colonial definitions—is inadequate when applied to Ladakh’s well-developed social, religious and political institutions. A series of agitations in the 1980s demanding Union territory sta­tus and classification as Scheduled Tribes (ST) led to a presidential proclamation in October 1989 recognising eight communities as ST. The decision was essentially political as the Rajiv Gandhi gov­ernment could not accede to the Union territory demand due to resistance from Kashmir Valley politicians. Grant of ST status, it was felt, would assuage sentiments and keep Ladakhi youth from the kind of extremism rearing its head in Kashmir. The desire for a Union territory was partially met by the formation of the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council in 1995. It was only on October 31, 2019, that Ladakh finally became a Union territory, a day celebrated as a ‘second’ independence.

The circumstances that led to the grant of ST status to Ladakhi communities are not open to fresh review but underline the in­herent flaws in climate activist Sonam Wangchuk’s demand for the application of the Sixth Schedule to the region. A charismatic campaigner, Wangchuk argues Ladakh is in a “golden cage” and the Centre has gone back on promises held out in 2019. The Sixth Schedule, it is argued, will protect Ladakh’s unique identity and this is linked to calls to restrict infrastructure development said to pose a threat to the ecology. Wangchuk argues rising pollution and a population influx will place unsustainable pressures on the environment. Ladakh no doubt has a sensitive and fragile ecology; the mountains on the Indian side are more precarious than the flatter landscape of China-controlled Tibet. This makes building strategic roads and tunnels more arduous as India seeks to counter China’s fast growing military infrastructure.

Originally fashioned by the British, the Sixth Schedule is in­tended to “protect” the identity and autonomy of tribes in the Northeast by excluding people from the rest of India and restrict­ing purchase of land. The mechanism of autonomous district councils is meant to govern these areas. Any comparison of Lada­khis, despite a large section of the population being designated as ST, with indigenous tribes of the Northeast is misplaced. There is little in common in the economic, social and political conditions of the two very disparate regions. More importantly, provisions of the Sixth Schedule will take Ladakh back in time rather than carving out a path to the future. The gains of becoming a Union territory, something that seemed a mirage for decades, will not be served by converting Ladakh into a large open-air museum. The Wangchuk-led agitation feeds on the insecurities of people while offering populist but unviable solutions. It is not surprising that political opinion that has seldom expressed any sympathy for Ladakhis has aligned itself with the demand. The activism pow­ering the stir does not resonate with many in the region where people are keen to get on with their daily lives without disrup­tions. There is a desire to grow businesses with the unlocking of the full potential of tourism and the cultural tapestry of dozens of palaces, monasteries, temples, and festivals.

The need to protect Ladakh’s unique biosphere can be better met by regulating commercial activities, construction and tour­ism rather that imposing the straitjacket of the Sixth Schedule. Ladakh needs to integrate, albeit with caveats, with the rest of India rather than being further isolated, becoming in effect a re­mote enclave dependent on Central handouts. The self-defeating chants for the schedule reflect a certain obsolescence of the older Buddhist leadership that grew from the ranks of the Ladakh Buddhist Association that spearheaded the demand for Union territory and has been a cultural and religious lodestar. After the abrogation of Article 370, the Buddhist leadership has been un­able to chalk out a plan and ended up endorsing Wangchuk’s agenda without any conviction, or even a role to play other than being off-stage extras. Ladakh has the rightful claim to sending a Buddhist MP to Lok Sahba but it was National Conference leader Mohammad Haneefa, running as an independent, who defeated both Congress and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) nominees in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls. Over the years, dispensations in Srinagar had used Muslim-dominated Kargil as a counter to Buddhist Leh to tilt the political balance. If at all, a growing demographic imbalance ought to worry Buddhist leaders more—or at least as much—as any likely inflow of outsiders.

Ladakhis are a sturdy, large-hearted and patriotic people. They volunteered with unstinting commitment to aid Indian Army operations during the Kargil War, carrying loads of supplies up steep heights along with providing all the animal transport they could commandeer. The Ladakh Scouts is a proud mountain regiment that has never turned down a challenge, its war cry “Ki ki so so Lhargya­lo (victory to God)” echoing through val­leys and mountains. Ladakhis are un­likely candidates for separatist sentiment and observers in La­dakh feel the Union territory administra­tion and BJP’s politi­cal leadership can play a more active role in resolving genuine concerns and snuffing out isolationist trends.

Ladakh is critical for India’s security and the current turmoil can only work to China’s advantage. The demands raised by Wangchuk have a bearing on India’s defence preparedness— all the more since China’s aggression along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in 2020—and will be watched with keen interest by Beijing. A political vacuum in the post-Article 370 phase, when then BJP MP Jamyang Namgyal proved immature in responding to emergent situations, created the space for an unconventional actor. The result has been a lack of Buddhist unity and a danger­ous drift towards populist activism. The time for indecision is long over and with the Haryana and Jammu & Kashmir elections out of the way, Ladakh needs immediate attention from the government in Delhi.

Ladakhpoliticssensitive regionSixth Schedule statusSonam Wangchuk