“Not a Prison of Peoples, but a Union of Free Peoples”: Washington Discusses the Place of the Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East in a Future Russia

On 17–18 September, a two-day meeting of representatives of the Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East with representatives of Russian democratic movements and organizations took place in Washington. Participants discussed Indigenous Peoples’ rights, self-government, relations with the state and businesses, decolonization and federalism, as well as the possible position of Indigenous Peoples under different scenarios for Russia’s political future.

The meeting, “The Place of the Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East in Present-Day and Future Russia,” was held at the Navajo Nation Washington Office as part of the Dialogue and Cooperation Platform.

The meeting was organized by the Batani Foundation, Russian America for Democracy in Russia (RADR), the International Committee of Indigenous Peoples of Russia (ICIPR), and the Indigenous Institute.

Participants were welcomed on behalf of the host organization by Di Crane, Deputy Executive Director of the Navajo Nation Washington Office. She spoke about two important concepts in Navajo culture — K’é, meaning kinship and interconnectedness, and Hózhó, associated with harmony, beauty and well-being — and suggested that these principles serve as the foundation for the dialogue.

Opening the conference, Pavel Sulyandziga, chair of the Batani International Foundation for the Development and Solidarity of Indigenous Peoples, said that the meeting was taking place at a difficult time for the Indigenous small-numbered peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East, when independent leaders and activists are facing repression. He specifically mentioned Daria Egereva and Natalia Leongardt, who remain in detention, and described the charges of terrorist activity brought against them as “completely fabricated.”

“But life goes on, and we must try to do everything within our power,” Sulyandziga said.

He thanked the Navajo Nation Washington Office and the Navajo people for providing a venue for the meeting, as well as PACE President Petra Bayr and UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Russian Federation Mariana Katzarova for their attention to the problems facing Indigenous Peoples of Russia.

Sulyandziga also highlighted the contribution of Russian America for Democracy in Russia (RADR) and Vladislav Inozemtsev to developing dialogue between independent Indigenous representatives and Russian democratic forces. He also welcomed Refat Chubarov, Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, who had travelled from Kyiv.

Speaking about the meeting’s programme, Sulyandziga identified several key areas: Indigenous self-government and relations with state authorities; interaction between Indigenous Peoples and businesses and mechanisms for protecting their rights; and cooperation with Russian civil society. The second day of the conference focused on the situation of the Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East and their independent organizations, as well as their place in a possible future political system in Russia. On the first day, PACE President Petra Bayr and UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Russian Federation Mariana Katzarova took part in the Platform’s work.

Petra Bayr devoted a significant part of her speech to the preservation of languages, traditional knowledge and Indigenous Peoples’ connection to their territories.

“When a language disappears, we lose more than a vocabulary. We lose one of humanity’s ways of understanding itself,” she said.

Speaking about Russia’s future, Bayr articulated one of the meeting’s key principles:

“The place of Indigenous Peoples in a future Russia should not be decided for them. It should be shaped by them and together with them.”

Mariana Katzarova focused on the situation of independent Indigenous activists and human rights defenders, criminal prosecutions and the risks facing those who have been forced to leave Russia. She also spoke about the consequences of the war and mobilization for small Indigenous communities, the situation of Indigenous languages and the need for international support for activists, including assistance in obtaining humanitarian visas.

Katzarova made a separate appeal to Russian democratic forces.

She said that decolonization should not automatically be equated with separatism: the discussion should include recognition of historical injustice, protection of rights and the participation of Indigenous Peoples themselves in determining their future.

A significant part of the first day was devoted to practical issues. Representatives of Indigenous Peoples and experts from different countries discussed models of self-government and interaction with the state, relations between businesses and Indigenous Peoples, mechanisms for free, prior and informed consent (FPIC), responsible investment and the protection of community rights in industrial projects.

A separate session focused on cooperation between Indigenous Peoples of Russia and Russian civil society. Participants discussed countering propaganda, protecting human rights defenders, cooperation with educational and civic initiatives, and the “17 December Case.”

On the second day, representatives of Indigenous Peoples spoke about the work of independent organizations. Discussions covered the creation and work of the International Committee of Indigenous Peoples of Russia (ICIPR), the history of the Batani Foundation — from being designated a “foreign agent” to being included by the Russian authorities on the list of “undesirable organizations” — as well as preserving an independent Indigenous voice under conditions of pressure.

“Internal Decolonization”

One of the central themes of the second day was the discussion “The Future of Russia and the Indigenous Peoples of the North. Decolonization and Federalism,” which brought together representatives of Indigenous Peoples, Russian opposition politicians, human rights defenders and political scientists.

Before the discussion began, Pavel Sulyandziga said that, in his assessment, many representatives of the Russian opposition have insufficient knowledge about the Indigenous small-numbered peoples and their situation. One of the aims of the meeting, therefore, was to develop dialogue between independent Indigenous representatives and Russian democratic forces.

Sulyandziga also spoke about the need to openly discuss the historical processes of colonization and decolonization and their impact on contemporary relations between the state and Indigenous Peoples.

Vladislav Inozemtsev, a member of the Council of the Free Russia Forum, said that the Russian democratic movement cannot ignore the views of Indigenous Peoples and the consequences of Russian and Soviet assimilation policies, including the loss of lands and threats to Indigenous identities.

Refat Chubarov, Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, in turn described the right of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination as fundamental, considering it a starting point for restoring other rights. In his view, the outcome of Russia’s war against Ukraine could give Indigenous Peoples of Russia an opportunity to determine independently how their rights should be exercised. Chubarov also noted the extensive preparations by Indigenous representatives to discuss different scenarios for Russia’s future and their possible consequences for the peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East.

Russian politician Vladimir Kara-Murza linked the discussion to the broader debate about Russia’s political system after the current regime changes. He noted that Russian democratic organizations are already discussing a future parliamentary system, transitional justice and the restoration of international trust, but argued that the country’s internal structure and its relations with Indigenous Peoples are no less important.

Kara-Murza described “internal decolonization” as one of the key directions of possible democratic transformation.

“For me, one of the key aspects of the democratic transformation of post-Putin Russia is precisely internal decolonization — that is, moving the foundations of relations between the Russian state and the peoples who inhabit our country toward mutual, voluntary cooperation. Not a prison of peoples, but a union of free peoples.”

Kara-Murza also spoke in favour of genuine federalism and said that Russia’s cultural and ethnic diversity should be regarded as an asset of the country. In closing, he referred to Canada’s experience and the 1996 report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, emphasizing that a state’s attitude toward Indigenous Peoples reflects its own understanding of justice and its view of itself.

Three Scenarios for Discussion

The organizers proposed that participants consider three possible scenarios — not as predictions, but as a basis for discussing the rights and guarantees of Indigenous Peoples under different possible political futures.

These included the preservation of Russia while restructuring relations with Indigenous Peoples; the possible emergence of several states on the territory of the present-day Russian Federation; and a hypothetical change in the state affiliation of certain territories inhabited by Indigenous small-numbered peoples, including a scenario in which some territories could come under Chinese jurisdiction.

In all three cases, the organizers identified the central issue not as predicting the country’s political structure, but as guaranteeing the collective and individual rights of Indigenous Peoples, self-government, the preservation of lands, languages and cultures, and the ability of Indigenous Peoples themselves to participate in decisions about their future.

Resolution on the Elections

One of the political outcomes of the meeting was the adoption of a “Resolution on the Non-Recognition of the 2026 Russian State Duma Elections,” signed by the meeting’s co-chairs Pavel Sulyandziga and Vladislav Inozemtsev.

In the document, participants stated that, in their assessment, the elections did not meet the standards of free and fair expression of the popular will. Among the arguments cited by the authors were the removal of the Yabloko party from the elections, the absence of conditions for free political competition and anti-war campaigning, the holding of voting in occupied territories of Ukraine, the absence of full independent international observation, and the lack of transparency surrounding remote electronic voting.

The authors called on the governments of democratic states, the European Parliament, the OSCE and other international institutions not to recognize the new composition of the State Duma as a legitimate representative body. The resolution also expressed solidarity with Russian political prisoners, independent journalists, lawyers and democratic activists.

From Orcas to Washington

The event continued a dialogue launched at an international conference on Orcas Island, Washington State, in April 2025. At that time, representatives of the Indigenous small-numbered peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East and Russian civil society adopted the “Orcas Island Declaration: A Statement of Reconciliation and Respect.”

The document marked the beginning of a permanent Dialogue and Cooperation Platform whose objectives include monitoring violations of Indigenous Peoples’ rights, developing legislative initiatives, protecting rights to land and resources, and strengthening cooperation with Russian civil society. The Washington meeting was the next stage in this work.

The two-day meeting concluded with a solidarity action for Daria Egereva and Natalia Leongardt and the adoption of a Resolution in their support.

IR