In August 2019 the government passed a law stripping Jammu and Kashmir of special status under Article 370. J&K was split into two union territories and a security clampdown was imposed.
Hundreds, including veteran political leaders like Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti, both ex-chief ministers were put under house arrest, internet services were shut down, and troops were deployed.
The newly-created Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir was on edge; the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party was accused of stifling dissent and blacking out almost all communication with the rest of the country, and there were reports of violent clashes, even some civilian deaths.
But over the border in Ladakh, there was no violence, tension or political crackdown.
There was only jubilation because separation from J&K has been a long-standing demand of the Ladakhi people, who want direct political representation, i.e., a legislature and local governance, as well as constitutional safeguards, including being listed under the Sixth Schedule.
Other safeguards demanded have to do with quotas for employment and ownership of land, similar to benefits enjoyed by tribal communities in the northeastern states and, in many aspects, even by the former state of J&K (which included Ladakh) under Article 370.
Also demanded was increased parliamentary representation. At present Ladakh has just the one Lok Sabha seat - held now by Mohmad Haneefa, an independent lawmaker.
The ask is for one more seat, for Kargil, and one Rajya Sabha seat too.
The formation of the Union Territory of Ladakh was seen as a positive step to achieving statehood and the above-mentioned demands, except that final step was never taken.
But in the six years since the patience of the Ladakhi people seems to have worn thin, culminating in a re-awakening and dramatic escalation of the statehood movement this week.
Fierce protests in capital Leh - which included a local BJP office being vandalised - killed four people and injured dozens of others. Police had to open fire to bring the situation under control.
Why Did Protests Turn Violent?
The initial protests, the face of which was (and remains) environmental activist Sonam Wangchuk were peaceful. The violence now reflects the Ladakhis' long-felt frustration.
Talks between the Leh Apex Body and the Kargil Democratic Alliance - representing the Buddhist majority and Shia Muslim-dominated regions in Ladakh - and the centre have stalled.
Activists who met Home Minister Amit Shah in Delhi last year came away disillusioned.
The proximate cause was the hospitalisation of statehood activists on a hunger strike. And, of course, the centre announcing a fourth round of talks - for October - didn't help.
Four people were killed in Ladakh statehood protests on September 24. Photo: PTI
Over the past three years the LAB and KDA have worked together - the unity of the Buddhist and Muslim communities has been a highlight - to hold strikes and negotiate with the government.
However, as time passed and statehood was no closer, the rallies became tenser.
And young people, many from the 'Gen Z' demographic - which made headlines this month for protests in Nepal that forced a corrupt government to stand down - responded, holding more forceful rallies and shutdowns and, in this case, torching a Central Reserve Police Force van.
READ | 4 Killed, Many Injured In Clashes In Ladakh During Statehood Protests
The cops responded with force; baton charges and teargas was used.
It is critical to note this is the first moment of violence in the Ladakh statehood movement.
READ | During Hunger Strike For Ladakh Statehood, A Birthday Wish For PM Modi
It is also critical to note Leh and Kargil, regional rivals in many aspects, are united in demanding statehood for Ladakh, which emphasises the intensity of emotion driving these protests.
Government Response
The BJP's response has been cautious.
Promises were made to the Supreme Court and Parliament that J&K's statehood will be restored - the conduct of an Assembly election in October last year, the first since Article 370 and the first in 11 years, was a major threshold - but no mention was made of Ladakh.
On Sixth Schedule demands, it has been pointed out these safeguards already exist under the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Councils of Leh and Kargil.
RECAP | Can March To Delhi 10 Times: Sonam Wangchuk On Ladakh Statehood
Activists, however, say these councils have limited authority and power, and are subordinate to the Lieutenant-Governor of Ladakh, who is the federal government's representative in the union territory.
Ladakh's location - on the contested border with China - is another reason why the centre is unwilling to commit to statehood demands. Making Ladakh a state will lead to devolution of powers that might compromise military logistics and key infrastructure projects in the area.
Is There A Solution?
Unlikely, at least in the short term.
The continued border stand-off with China means the federal government will need complete and unfettered access to Ladakh at all times, specially to build roads to facilitate troop movements and keep a check on Beijing's intrusions. Granting Ladakh statehood makes that difficult, particularly if it is not the BJP, or a reliable ally, that wins any potential election.
That means the Ladakhi statehood protesters will plan more rallies and put more pressure on the government to get what they want, which could mean more (and increasing) violence.
How will this end? Possibly with a compromise for both sides. The government, for example, might agree to expand the Hill Councils' powers to satisfy the Ladakhi people's demands for increased control over governance and offer special reservations for jobs and land ownership.
In return, the LAB and KDA might have to stand down statehood demands, and accept that Ladakh will remain, at least for now, a Union Territory and not a full-fledged State.
With input from agencies
NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.
