Ladakh Will Be Back’: Javid Rana Predicts Return to J&K, Sparks Fresh Political Storm in 2026
Javid Rana claims Ladakh will again become part of Jammu and Kashmir, triggering fresh political debate and sharp reactions
Senior political leader Javid Rana has triggered a fresh political storm by claiming that Ladakh will once again become part of Jammu and Kashmir, a statement that has reignited intense debate over the region’s future, constitutional status, and the legacy of the 2019 reorganisation of the erstwhile state. Rana’s remarks, made during a public interaction, have drawn sharp reactions from across the political spectrum, particularly in Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.
The statement comes at a time when the political climate in the region remains sensitive, with ongoing discussions around statehood restoration, representation, and regional autonomy.
Addressing party workers and local residents, Javid Rana asserted that Ladakh’s separation from Jammu and Kashmir was temporary and politically motivated, adding that “history will correct itself.”
“Ladakh will again be part of Jammu and Kashmir,” Rana said, arguing that the 2019 decision to carve Ladakh out as a separate Union Territory had failed to address the aspirations of people on both sides.
The remarks quickly went viral, triggering reactions from political parties, civil society groups, and residents of Ladakh.
In August 2019, the central government revoked Article 370 and bifurcated the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories—Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh. Ladakh was created as a Union Territory without a legislature, encompassing the districts of Leh and Kargil.
The move was hailed by some as a step toward better governance and national integration, while critics argued it diluted local representation and autonomy.
Since then, Ladakh has witnessed multiple protests and demands, including calls for:
- Statehood
- Sixth Schedule protection
- Greater political representation
Rana’s statement taps directly into these unresolved concerns.
Rana’s claim drew swift reactions from regional and national leaders.
Leaders from Ladakh rejected the statement, calling it “misleading” and “politically irresponsible.” Several Ladakhi activists reiterated that their demands were not about merging back with Jammu and Kashmir, but about securing constitutional safeguards.
“This statement does not represent Ladakh’s aspirations,” said a Leh-based leader. “Our struggle is about rights and protections, not reversal.”
On the other hand, some political voices in Kashmir welcomed Rana’s remarks, arguing that Ladakh and Kashmir share deep historical, cultural, and economic ties.
Political analysts see Rana’s statement as both symbolic and strategic, especially ahead of upcoming political developments in Jammu and Kashmir.
“Such statements resonate with a section of the population that feels the 2019 reorganisation fractured regional unity,” said a Srinagar-based political commentator. “However, it also risks alienating Ladakhi voices.”
Experts believe the statement is aimed at reopening conversations around regional cohesion, even if it lacks immediate constitutional feasibility.
From a legal standpoint, reversing Ladakh’s Union Territory status would require parliamentary approval and a major shift in central government policy. Constitutional experts point out that such a move is unlikely in the near future.
“The reorganisation was carried out through an Act of Parliament. Reversing it would require another legislative process and broad political consensus,” said a constitutional lawyer.
As of now, the central government has shown no indication of reconsidering Ladakh’s separate status.
Public opinion in Ladakh remains complex. While many in Leh have long demanded statehood or Sixth Schedule protection, sentiments in Kargil have often differed, with stronger historical ties to Kashmir.
Some residents believe that political leaders must avoid making sweeping claims without consulting stakeholders.
“Statements like these create confusion,” said a Kargil-based academic. “The people of Ladakh must be part of any conversation about their future.”
Within Jammu and Kashmir, Rana’s statement has reopened debates about territorial integrity and political identity. Several leaders argue that Ladakh’s separation weakened the region’s collective political voice.
“Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh have always been interconnected,” said a senior regional politician. “The fragmentation has not benefited the people.”
Others caution that romanticising the past ignores the distinct aspirations of Ladakh’s population.
So far, the central government has not responded directly to Rana’s remarks. Officials have reiterated in the past that Ladakh’s status as a Union Territory is final and aimed at improving governance and development.
Union ministers have previously stated that Ladakh would receive focused attention and tailored policies under its current structure.
The timing of Rana’s statement has led to speculation about its political intent, especially with discussions around assembly elections, statehood restoration, and delimitation gaining momentum.
Analysts believe such remarks are likely to feature prominently in political campaigns, polarising opinions and shaping narratives.
“This is not just about Ladakh,” said a political strategist. “It’s about how leaders frame the future of the entire region.”
On social media, Rana’s comment triggered intense debate. While some users praised him for “speaking boldly,” others criticised the statement as divisive and unrealistic.
Hashtags related to Ladakh and Jammu and Kashmir trended briefly, reflecting the public’s deep engagement with the issue.
