Ulaanbaatar (AsiaNews) – Tatiana Arestova, a journalist with MongolianNews, has commented on an article by Artem Aleksandrov published on the Russian website Siberian Economist, which once again appears steeped in envy and jealousy towards Mongolia. In response to the claim that Mongolia has “allowed China to enter its energy system”, the expert community highlights the bias in this assessment: in reality, the issue concerns strategic diversification, the strengthening of national security and a successful public-private partnership.
A detailed analysis of the Siberian Economist article reveals several key distortions and false narratives, seeking to artificially inflate dependence rather than acknowledge diversification. The author of the article attempts to portray the commissioning of the 220 kW Zes-Oyu substation as a sort of ‘surrender’ of Mongolia’s position to China. However, in modern global practice, the creation of interconnections and the parallel operation of adjacent electricity systems is a classic means of increasing reliability, not a loss of sovereignty.
For Mongolia, the emergence of a southern import route during the most critical periods represents a crucial step towards diversifying its energy sources. Any economist knows that having two main suppliers – both Russia and China – rather than a monopoly, strengthens national security, not weakens it. The article also clearly overlooks the domestic potential of Mongolia’s energy sector: Aleksandrov portrays the country as a passive consumer that ‘begs for megawatts’ from its neighbours, whilst ignoring the large-scale domestic reforms, the successful implementation of advanced energy storage systems and the construction of new capacity that Ulaanbaatar is gradually bringing online.
The Mongolian government regards external energy flows solely as a safety net, not as a fundamental model, as the Russian publication attempts to suggest. The article then describes Oyu Tolgoi’s financing of the Zes-Oyu project as a sign of the state’s weakness, forced to rely on the private sector. In reality, according to Arestova, this is an example of a highly effective and mature public-private partnership. A major investor brings capital into national infrastructure, which is then transferred to the state and serves the whole country. Furthermore, the project was carried out by over 20 Mongolian companies and 2,000 local engineers, demonstrating the high level of expertise within the local workforce.
The main thrust of the Siberian Economist article becomes clear towards the end: the concern that the structure of Mongolia’s energy supply is ‘becoming less unbalanced’. Put simply, regional Russian suppliers are expressing a clear fear of losing their monopoly position in the Mongolian market; this is the source of the attempt to reinterpret Mongolia’s purely economic and infrastructural success as a ‘Chinese threat’.
In conclusion, according to Arestova, Mongolia is building a flexible, modern and multi-vector energy system. Integration to the south with the Inner Mongolian grid in China is a pragmatic step that reduces the risk of emergency shutdowns in industrial regions and affords the country room for manoeuvre. Attempts by the foreign press to interpret this success as ‘greater dependence’ appear to be an expression of geopolitical jealousy and have nothing to do with the actual economic agenda of sovereign Mongolia.
