Climate activist Sonam Wangchuk has accused the Centre of betraying Ladakh by going back on an understanding reached with the protesting groups in May, saying its failure to hold a proposed meeting on Thursday, days after both sides exchanged draft proposals, had once again dashed hopes in the region.Demanding nothing short of a Union Territory with a legislature and other safeguards, he said the Centre “must not weaken Ladakh through its stubbornness”.Speaking at a press conference in Delhi, Wangchuk said the representatives of the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA) had prepared for the next round of talks following their October 15 meeting in Leh where they submitted their draft to the Union Home Ministry and received the ministry’s proposal in return.Wangchuk said the two drafts were compared point by point, with the expectation that the differences would be discussed at the next meeting. “I had already booked my tickets. We made our plans accordingly, but now they are saying the meeting is not happening,” he said, describing the development as “another betrayal of trust”.The climate activist also pointed out that Ladakh’s position on the border with China made the protection of its democratic rights particularly important. He stressed the region should be strengthened by giving its people the same democratic rights as citizens elsewhere in India.“China is claiming Ladakh as its territory. We condemn that. But do not crush Ladakh under your feet…. Do not weaken the borders because of your stubbornness,” he said.Wangchuk claimed that decisions were currently being taken unilaterally by the administration, and that the powers of the district councils had been curtailed. “A Lieutenant Governor has been appointed like a British Viceroy, who makes unilateral decisions. This is a blot on Indian democracy,” he alleged.Referring to the talks with the Centre, the activist said the May 22 meeting between the LAB, KDA and the Home Ministry sub-committee had raised hopes of a democratic framework for Ladakh. The talks focused on constitutional protection, democratic representation and the long-pending demand for statehood.He said the government had then proposed safeguards along the lines of Articles 371A and 371G and agreed in principle to a governance structure for the entire region, rather than limiting powers to district councils. The representatives, who had initially sought statehood, then proposed a Union Territory with a legislature and constitutional safeguards after being told Ladakh lacked the resources to sustain statehood.The activist argued that the demand for a legislature was rooted in the need to give Ladakh’s people a say in how the region was governed. Citing Arunachal Pradesh, which was granted statehood in 1987 despite its sensitive border location, he said strategic considerations should not be used to deny Ladakh an elected legislature.He also raised concerns about the protection of Ladakh’s land, resources and identity, noting that around 90 per cent of its population belonged to tribal communities. He said local people risked being marginalised in decisions involving corporate interests, and questioned policies that were “being pursued without adequate public consent”. He cited protests by women against the expansion of liquor sales, saying many people wanted Ladakh to remain a dry region.