As the 21-day hunger strike of Sonam Wangchuk—a revered climate activist and Ramon Magsaysay Award winner—enters its 19th day, his health is reported to have been deteriorated significantly. Despite the insistence of co-protestors, he has decided to hold on to the mantle for a fight that, as per him, relates to ‘environment, democracy, and truth’. The likes of Wangchuk are rare crusaders against climate change, who not only talk and grieve but also show the dare to act. His fight for ‘truth’ gets even more weight from the method he has adopted—that of the Gandhian principle to inflict pain upon oneself to appeal to the conscience of the ‘repressor’—if such a harsh term can be used in the present context! Wangchuk might have used an extreme simile by likening the present-day Ladakh to ‘a colony in the olden times’, but the concerns raised by him are backed by visible evidence and demand close scrutiny.
At the heart of Wangchuk's protest are demands that speak to the unique identity and precarious ecological balance of Ladakh. The call for special status under the Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, alongside demands for statehood, parliamentary representation, and a Public Services Commission, is growing louder with each passing day. The current protest is seen by many as a plea for the preservation of Ladakh's fragile ecosystem and its indigenous way of life against the onslaught of unchecked development and military strategizing. The implementation of the Sixth Schedule, designed to offer autonomy to tribal areas, seems tailor-made for Ladakh, which boasts of a tribal population percentage that far exceeds the threshold for such status.
However, Sonam Wangchuk’s hunger strike, which is reportedly resonating among a significant population in Ladakh, is not able to effectively shake the ‘conscience’ of those who wield power. The reasons are not certain. Is the ‘pain and suffering’ inflicted by protestors, upon themselves, is not enough? Or there is no weight in the issue they are fighting for? Answering the first question in negative would be akin to hurling and insult on the protestors who are suffering on a daily basis, on account of protest or otherwise. The answer to the second question is visible to the naked eyes. The array of developmental projects underway in Ladakh—from geothermal power plants to solar energy systems—while ostensibly beneficial, raises significant concerns about the sustainability of such endeavours in a region known for its ecological vulnerability. The protesters argue that these projects, along with increased military infrastructure and tourism initiatives, threaten the very survival of Ladakh's unique environment and its inhabitants' way of life.
The issue of putting Ladakh under the Sixth Schedule has found mention, and was in fact a major claim, in BJP’s manifestoes of both 2019 General Elections and Hill Council polls. That, in itself, testifies the credibility of the demand put forth by Wangchuk and others. Protestors have come hard on the government for not attempting to fulfil their manifesto agenda. Furthermore, Wangchuk has claimed that “Our nomads are losing prime pasture land to huge Indian industrial plants to the south and Chinese encroachment to the north”. Here also comes the question of territorial sovereignty of India. A certain set of dialogue has already failed to address the concerns of the protestors. Considering the gravity of the issue, the government should make more comprehensive effort to allay the genuine grievances of the protestors.