PoGB should return to India's constitutional fold, says Gilgit-Baltistan activist
Synopsis
A prominent Gilgit-Baltistan activist based in Washington has publicly called for PoGB to come under India's constitutional framework — arguing that independence would only turn the region into a permanent battleground, while Pakistan's occupation is rooted in strategic and economic exploitation rather than any legitimate governance interest.
Key Takeaways
Senge Sering , founder of the Institute for Gilgit-Baltistan Studies in Washington, said PoGB should ultimately integrate into India's constitutional framework .
He described PoGB as an 'occupied area' and a 'colony' , saying Pakistan deliberately denies the region political and constitutional rights.
Pakistan's interest in PoGB is driven by its land link with China , the upper Indus River system, and strategic geography, according to Sering.
Sering drew parallels between PoGB and Balochistan , citing political marginalisation and resource exploitation in both regions.
He warned that an independent PoGB would risk becoming a permanent battleground for competing external powers.
Sering cautioned that Pakistan faces prolonged instability, with peripheral regions including PoGB, Balochistan and Pashtun areas most exposed.
Senge Sering, a political activist from Pakistan-occupied Gilgit-Baltistan (PoGB) and founder of the Institute for Gilgit-Baltistan Studies in Washington, has argued that the region should ultimately come under India's constitutional framework, saying Pakistan's continued occupation is driven by PoGB's strategic location, water resources, and its land corridor linking Islamabad to China. Sering made the remarks in an interview with Strat News Global on 10 October 2026.
Pakistan's Strategic Interest in PoGB
According to Sering, Pakistan values PoGB primarily for three reasons: its position as a land bridge to China, the upper reaches of the Indus River system, and the region's broader geopolitical importance. He described PoGB as part of the erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, noting that unlike Pakistan's four provinces, the territory does not enjoy equivalent constitutional standing and is instead governed through arrangements dictated by Islamabad.
Sering characterised PoGB as an 'occupied area' and a 'colony', arguing that Islamabad has deliberately denied the region full political and constitutional rights to maintain its grip on the territory.
Growing Demand for Rights and Self-Determination
Sering pointed to rising political awareness within PoGB as a driver of stronger demands for rights and self-determination. He said some activists are now openly challenging Pakistan's presence in the region and pushing for independence. Drawing a parallel with Balochistan, he argued that both regions have suffered political marginalisation and the exploitation of natural resources by the Pakistani state.
He also invoked the historical example of East Pakistan, contending that Pakistan has consistently struggled to accommodate diverse ethnic and linguistic identities within its borders — a pattern he believes continues today.
Why Sering Rules Out Full Independence
Despite the growing independence movement, Sering said he views a fully sovereign PoGB as an unlikely long-term outcome. His concern is that an independent PoGB would become a 'warzone forever', caught between competing external powers. 'We will be this warzone forever,' he said, referring to the risk of PoGB becoming a battleground for rival strategic interests if it were to stand alone.
He argued instead that integration with India would offer greater economic, military and political stability while allowing PoGB to retain its distinct linguistic and cultural identity.
Pakistan's Military Interest in Keeping Dispute Unresolved
Sering contended that Pakistan's military establishment holds a vested political and economic interest in leaving the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) dispute unresolved, making Islamabad structurally unwilling to pursue a lasting settlement. He warned that Pakistan could face prolonged instability, with peripheral regions — including Balochistan, PoGB, and Pashtun areas — bearing the heaviest burden.
He added that rising unrest in Balochistan and shifting dynamics along Pakistan's western frontier could open greater political space for groups seeking autonomy or outright independence. For PoGB specifically, he said the central question is whether its people can secure meaningful political rights and control over their own resources while protecting their cultural identity.
Point of View
Warning that a sovereign PoGB would be perpetually contested by external powers. That framing sidesteps the self-determination debate and repositions integration with India as a stability argument rather than a nationalist one. What mainstream coverage misses is the significance of voices from within PoGB — not New Delhi — making this case publicly in Washington; it shifts the narrative from India's territorial claim to a rights-and-governance argument originating in the region itself. Pakistan's structural reluctance to resolve PoK, as Sering frames it, is not a diplomatic failure but a deliberate military-economic strategy — and that distinction matters for any serious assessment of the dispute's trajectory.
NationPress
10 Oct 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is Senge Sering and why is he significant?
Senge Sering is a political activist from Pakistan-occupied Gilgit-Baltistan and the founder of the Institute for Gilgit-Baltistan Studies in Washington. He is significant as a prominent voice from within the PoGB diaspora who publicly advocates for the region's integration into India's constitutional framework rather than independence.
Why does Sering argue PoGB should come under India's constitutional framework?
Sering argues that an independent PoGB would become a permanent battleground for competing external interests, making full sovereignty an unstable and unlikely outcome. He contends that integration with India would provide greater economic, military and political stability while preserving the region's linguistic and cultural identity.
How does Pakistan control Gilgit-Baltistan?
According to Sering, PoGB does not hold the same constitutional standing as Pakistan's four provinces and is governed through arrangements dictated by Islamabad. He describes it as an 'occupied area' and a 'colony' that is deliberately kept deprived of full political and constitutional rights.
Why does Pakistan want to retain control over Gilgit-Baltistan?
Sering says Pakistan values PoGB for its strategic land link with China, its position over the upper Indus River system, and its broader geopolitical importance. He argues Pakistan's military also has a vested interest in keeping the broader Kashmir dispute unresolved.
What does Sering predict for Pakistan's future stability?
Sering warned that Pakistan could face prolonged political and economic instability, with peripheral regions including PoGB, Balochistan and Pashtun areas bearing the heaviest burden. He said rising unrest in Balochistan and shifting dynamics on Pakistan's western frontier could expand political space for autonomy and independence movements.
