Tuva possesses major natural resources, yet many decisions concerning their use are made far from Kyzyl. Who should determine how the land, water and minerals of Tuva are used?
On 28 September, the Free Nations League published an analysis entitled “Energy of Another Land: Tuva and the Colonial Model of Russian Federalism.” The organisation presents Tuva’s energy system as an example of what it considers an unequal distribution of economic benefits between the region and the federal centre.
One of the central examples is the Sayano-Shushenskaya Hydroelectric Power Station. Its installed capacity is 6,400 MW, with projected average annual generation of approximately 23.5 billion kWh. The station is located in Khakassia and is operated by RusHydro.
Yet a substantial part of the reservoir is located in Tuva. Water-management sources report that 42% of the reservoir’s water surface lies within Tuva. The creation of the reservoir resulted in the flooding of, among other settlements, Old Shagonar and Chaa-Khol.
This raises a fundamental question: who should benefit from the natural resources of a territory, and who should have the authority to determine how those resources are used?
Energy is produced — but control remains elsewhere
In 2026, the single-rate household electricity tariff in Tuva is 5.22 rubles per kWh until 30 September and 5.81 rubles from 1 October for the first consumption band.
The Free Nations League uses these figures to argue that Tuva does not receive a fair share of the economic benefits generated by the region’s energy resources. That characterisation is the League’s political-economic assessment, rather than an independently established conclusion that the system is legally “colonial.”
What can be established independently is that major power facilities operate within a centralised energy system and that Sayano-Shushenskaya is a major source of generating capacity for Siberia.
Coal: another resource frontier
The issue goes beyond hydropower.
An official 2026 environmental and resource report states that Tuva had approximately 2.75 billion tonnes of balance coal reserves as of 1 January 2026. Coal production in 2025 amounted to approximately 972,000 tonnes.
At the same time, Moscow’s long-term plans envisage a substantial expansion of coal production.
The Russian government’s coal-development programme through 2050, approved on 22 September 2026, identifies several Tuva deposits as future production centres. It envisages the possibility of increasing Tuva’s coking-coal production to 12–15 million tonnes annually, subject to further mine development and construction of the Elegest–Kyzyl–Kuragino railway.
Tuva’s mineral wealth is therefore already incorporated into a long-term federal resource strategy.
From economics to self-determination
The history of Tuva adds a political dimension to the resource question.
Before 1944, the Tuvan People’s Republic existed as a formally independent state, although it was heavily influenced by the Soviet Union. In October 1944, the Soviet Union incorporated Tuva into the Russian SFSR. Historical sources note that no popular referendum was held on the incorporation.
For advocates of Tuvan self-determination, the question of resources is therefore connected to a broader issue: whether the Tuvan people should have the right to determine the political status of their land and control its natural wealth.
The Free Nations League and other decolonisation advocates frame Tuva in these terms. The historical incorporation of Tuva in 1944, however, should be distinguished analytically from contemporary cases of military occupation.
Ukraine and the future of nations under Moscow’s control
Russia’s war against Ukraine has brought questions of empire and self-determination back into international debate.
Ukraine’s struggle is a struggle to restore sovereignty over territories occupied by Russia. National movements from Tuva, Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Sakha, Chechnya and elsewhere view Ukraine’s resistance as evidence that imperial political structures are not necessarily permanent.
Whether the weakening of Russia would result in an independent Tuva remains a question for the future rather than an established prediction. What is already present is a political debate over the Tuvan people’s right to self-determination.
The economic and political questions therefore intersect: control over land, water, energy and minerals is closely connected to the ability of a society to determine its own future.
