Was Siberia destined for conquest?

Is it ASB for Siberia (or at least a substantial portion of it) to never be controlled, at least until far later than OTL, by any sort of state authority? Perhaps ending up a bit like OTL Antarctica as far as respected (for the most part) terra nullius?

I can imagine this happening with a weak/puppeted/fractured Rus in the west and an isolationist China to the east other states like Persia and Tibet might go north a bit but I'm not convinced they could go far. Is it plausible that a arrangement like this could lead to a Siberia that is never truly controlled/conquered until 1900, at the earliest?

I'd love to hear what more educated folk think.
 
The problem with a stateless Siberia is that there's enough islands of more livable terrain to establish effective state control in those regions atleast, and from there increases in tech will just keep things going.
 
given that Siberia is landbound, sooner or later someone is going to make a bold grab at it, beyond Russia and China, both Korea and Japan might try toget a bite, and depending on just how fractured your russia would be, Sweden just might go north around them and grab white sea and following the northern coastline out of a northeastern port (say, a proto-Murmansk), even if it would be a cashsink of proportions
 
About Murmansk - cashsink it is. Tried in many Russia-centric TLs, but general consensus is that before the advance of railroad transportation you can't have anything bigger than fishermen village here - food delivery is a beyotch.
On general topic yes - either Russia or China are going to claim this sooner or later. It was rich in furs and other resources and the powers of the region saw $$$ when they advanced in Siberia.
 
Top