New Delhi: A day after his controversial remarks on the Indian government’s handling of the situation in Ladakh, activist Sonam Wangchuk has come under fire from the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA).
Wangchuk had compared Ladakh’s situation with that of Tibet and said that China may be handling the situation better than India. The CTA, in response, has expressed “deep concern”, calling the remarks “misplaced and inaccurate”.
The CTA is Tibet’s government-in-exile.
Its spokesperson Tenzin Lekshay, on a post on X, said Wangchuk’s statement did not reflect the reality inside Tibet.
“Tibet continues to remain under China’s authoritarian rule, where Tibetans face systematic repression of their fundamental rights, religious freedom, and intensification of measures aimed at erasing its distinct cultural identity,” Lekshay said.
The CTA cited what it described as systematic repression of Tibetans’ fundamental rights, restrictions on religious freedom and increasing efforts to erode Tibet’s distinct cultural identity, as reported by News18.
Its response draws a distinction between the political and constitutional demands being raised in Ladakh and Tibet’s experience under Chinese rule.
Wangchuk made the remarks during a public address in Leh marking the first anniversary of the September 24, 2025 violence in Ladakh. He argued that alleged failures to fulfil promises relating to statehood and Sixth Schedule protections were at the root of the protests.
In his address, the activist reportedly said that even China was not treating Tibetans as badly as the Indian government was treating people in Ladakh. These remarks prompted the CTA to object to the comparison and stress the conditions it says Tibetans continue to face under Chinese rule.
Protests in Ladakh took a violent turn on September 24, 2025, after which security personnel opened fire, resulting in the deaths of four persons. Nearly 90 people were injured in the incident.
Comparing the situation in Ladakh with Tibet was inaccurate and did not reflect the situation inside Tibet, the CTA has said.
The disagreement centres on whether the political situation in Ladakh can be compared with Tibet’s experience under Chinese rule.
The CTA’s response highlights what it described as restrictions on fundamental rights, religious freedom and cultural identity in Tibet. Its remarks also reflect concern that equating the two situations could minimise the scale of restrictions and cultural suppression that Tibetan groups say occur inside Tibet.
The CTA has therefore sought to draw a clear distinction between Ladakh’s constitutional and political demands within India and what it describes as decades of authoritarian rule and repression in Tibet.
