Insight Myanmar

Unorthodox Inquiries

Episode #531: “The laws that govern the monks’ organization were written before 1988, during a one-party dictatorship! In the Sangha organization, you cannot have different voices… everything comes from the top-down. If you say anything unorthodox, your writing will be censored.” U Pandita explains the challenges within Myanmar’s Saṅgha, where rigid hierarchies and censorship laws stifle independent thought and research. He critiques the authoritarian governance of the monastic order, noting that senior Buddhist monks resist change because they benefit from the status quo. Monks lack autonomy, and dissenting voices face severe consequences, including disrobement or legal action. He contrasts his current freedom in Sri Lanka with the restrictions in place in Myanmar, where his academic work would be censored, and he would be in danger. He highlights how the Saṅgha’sinability to modernize perpetuates problems like corruption, and silence around controversial topics. He also criticizes the Sangha’s role in promoting nationalist and anti-Islamic sentiments, driven by the military’s claim of “protecting Buddhism,” which he dismisses as a self-serving excuse. U Pandita delves into Buddhist ethics. His academic work challenges the idea of universally fixed precepts, and believes that ethical standards depend on societal and cultural context, using the precept of sexual misconduct as an example. This perspective, he admits, is unconventional and may surprise and even unsettle many traditional and religious Buddhists. Reflecting on Myanmar’s identity as both a source of spiritual wisdom and a nation embroiled in conflict, U Pandita attributes its current struggles to historical cycles of power and aggression. He expresses concern over the military’s exploitation of Buddhism, which distorts its teachings and erodes public trust in the monastic community. While acknowledging the resilience of Myanmar’s Buddhist traditions, he warns of the risks posed by political turmoil and the resulting decline of the public’s faith in monks. U Pandita advocates for research as a means to revitalize Buddhism’s intellectual tradition and bridge gaps between Myanmar’s heritage and global audiences. He believes a progressive, inclusive approach can ensure Buddhism remains relevant and meaningful in contemporary society.

Quick on the Draw

Episode #530: “I don't want to live under fear, obeying [the military]. I could survive, but would be in fear, like every movement I would feel I don't have freedom, and I think I don't want that for myself,” says JC, a Karen illustrator and activist now based in the Netherlands. Raised in Yangon, JC was unaware of Myanmar’s civil war due to school propaganda. Only after moving to Thailand to be near her father did she learn the extent of ethnic conflict and oppression. Seeing refugee camps and hearing stories of the Karen struggle left her angry and determined to understand more. JC earned a communications degree in Bangkok and initially envisioned a career in journalism. A political science course taught by a former prisoner, combined with life among marginalized migrant workers, deepened her sense of purpose. She returned to Myanmar during its brief democratic opening, working with a civil society group serving Karen communities. That optimism collapsed with the 2021 coup. Turning to illustration after protest and journalism became too dangerous, JC found a new outlet for storytelling. “By doing illustration, I feel like I'm contributing,” she says. Inspired by editorial art, she developed a minimalist, emotionally expressive style. Her illustrations accompany stories of trauma and displacement, including one of a pregnant woman who lost twins while fleeing war—a piece she says still haunts her. Creating pieces like this take an emotional toll, however, and she often needs to take breaks between pieces to reground herself. JC’s art bridges personal and political experience, offering a visual language that speaks across cultures. she says, “Emotions are universal,” and her work often introduces Myanmar’s crisis to unfamiliar audiences. Still in legal limbo, she draws to stay connected. “Since I cannot be there physically, it’s a way of me to stay contributing,” she says. “I wish [people] don’t forget about Myanmar.”

Staying the Course

Episode #529: Daniel Dodd is one of the two center teachers at Dhamma Patapa, a Vipassana meditation center in Georgia in the tradition of S.N. Goenka. Alongside his work as a meditation practitioner and teacher, he has built a career in community organizing, nonprofit leadership, and federal service focused on low-income communities. But it has not been an easy journey. Dodd was born in Brazil to a Colombian mother and an American father. The family later moved to the United States, and much of his childhood unfolded in rural Maine after his parents separated. His mother raised three children on a homestead without plumbing, where daily life required endurance and adaptability. His adolescence and early adulthood were marked by confusion and drift: He struggled in school, barely graduating, and began drinking and smoking marijuana, uncertain about his future, an angry and agitated young man. A period teaching English in Bogotá during Colombia’s violent drug-war years broadened his outlook but did not resolve deeper internal struggles. After a painful breakup left him feeling unmoored, he took a ten-day Vipassana retreat. The experience proved transformative, and meditation gradually became the organizing center of his life. Rather than turning away from society, the practice deepened his awareness of suffering’s personal and social dimensions. That perspective guided his later work organizing low-income communities and eventually serving at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. For Dodd, meditation does not remove concern about injustice; it changes how that concern is carried. As he reflects near the end of the conversation, “We’re all kind of trying to figure these things out and become better people as we’re sitting and living our lives.”

When The Window Closed

Episode #528: Ola Elvestuen has devoted his political career—and much of his life beyond politics—to tackling the most urgent environmental and societal challenges facing the global community. A member of Norway’s Liberal Party since 2013, he has served as Minister of Climate and the Environment and held several high-ranking positions in both local and national government. As a young man in the late 1980s, Elvestuen witnessed a world in upheaval: the fall of the Berlin Wall, the ousting of Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, and Myanmar’s 8888 Uprising. The latter left a particular mark on him and many in Norway, embedding the Burmese struggle deep within Norwegian politics and foreign policy. During the democratic opening of the 2010s, Norway emerged as an important player, pairing diplomatic support with investments in critical industries such as hydropower, oil and gas exploration, and telecommunications. Yet Elvestuen points to a defining controversy in 2022, when Telenor—Norway’s majority state-owned telecom giant—sold its Burmese operations to entities with close ties to the junta, effectively handing over sensitive user data. The decision drew sharp criticism from activists and rights groups who warned of the dangers for dissidents, journalists, and civil society. When the military launched a coup in 2021, Elvestuen watched with dismay, arguing the international community should have reacted immediately and forcefully. “The demonstrations that were held were incredible,” he says, “but they did not get the support that they should have gotten in the early days!” For Elvestuen, the path forward is clear: only a federal democracy can secure Myanmar’s future, and Norway must play a meaningful role in supporting it. He argues that sustainable environmental initiatives should progress alongside the political struggle, pointing to Myanmar’s extraordinary biodiversity and the severe climate threats it faces. In closing, Elvestuen reminds listeners that the urgency of Myanmar’s situation extends far beyond its borders. “That is what we [Norway and the West] had to do with Ukraine,” he says, “and that is also the position that we should have with the revolution in Myanmar.”

Forced to Vote

Episode #527: Nay Chi, a senior researcher with the Myanography project, describes Myanmar’s post-coup election as an exercise in coercion rather than public choice. Drawing on reports from community researchers across the country, she says most people were not interested in voting and did not believe the process would change anything. What moved them was pressure: warnings tied to conscription, threats at checkpoints, loudspeaker announcements, and the wider fear created by a military already known for violence. As Nay Chi puts it, “people are forced to vote,” a phrase that strips the election of any democratic pretense. That pressure took different forms depending on the place. Displaced families were told that relatives of military age could be taken if they did not vote. Government staff were steered toward military-aligned parties. Travelers were questioned about voter registration. Even where no direct order was given, people understood what refusal might invite. The point was not to persuade them politically, but to make participation feel safer than refusal. The structure of the election reinforced that logic. Candidates had to report campaign movements and materials in detail to military authorities, and even where local ethnic parties won seats, Nay Chi says the most important positions still flowed toward military-backed figures. For many communities, the result was something already assumed in advance. “We cannot even imagine our future,” she says, describing a public that no longer sees voting as a path toward representation. What followed was not relief. Community researchers reported that conscription pressures intensified after the vote. Families kept paying money to try to shield sons from recruitment, often unsuccessfully. Young men hid in forests. Parents rushed children away after exams, fearing military abduction into forced conscription. In that atmosphere, the election quickly faded behind the larger struggle to stay safe, fed, and out of military reach. Nay Chi’s argument is blunt. The election did not reconnect people to politics or representation. It extended a system in which procedure is used to mask force, and in which international recognition would only deepen the sense that the suffering imposed on Myanmar’s people can be turned into paperwork and accepted as normal.