On 3 February 2026, a HDFF team attended a seminar titled “Myanmar in Transition or Protracted Crisis? Looking Ahead for and Beyond 2026” that was organized by the Nelson Mandela Center for Conflict Resolution, Violence Prevention, and Human Security at the Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University.

Organized in collaboration with the Hanns Seidel Foundation and the UBC Myanmar Initiative at the University of British Columbia, the seminar served as a platform for academic and policy-oriented exchange on Myanmar’s trajectory, the challenges ahead, and strategies to support the aspirations of the Myanmar people meaningfully.

Moderated by Assistant Professor Dr. Bhanubhatra Jittiang from Chulalongkorn University, the keynote session brought together analysts and scholars to reflect on the evolving crisis and the regional dynamics shaping Myanmar’s future.

Kai Ostwald’s Keynote: Myanmar’s Crisis and the Uncertain Road Ahead

The keynote address by Kai Ostwald, Associate Professor and HSBC Chair in Asian Research at the University of British Columbia, offered a sobering but important overview of Myanmar’s trajectory since the 2021 coup.

He noted that Myanmar’s decade-long political and economic opening ended abruptly when the military returned to power, triggering an unprecedented wave of protest and resistance. By late 2025, the conflict had become one of the world’s most severe humanitarian crises, with tens of thousands killed and millions displaced.

He also emphasized how the conflict has entered a new phase marked by fragmentation and fatigue, making it difficult to predict what comes next. He highlighted that Myanmar’s governance landscape is no longer defined by a single center, but by multiple actors controlling different territories and institutions.

Importantly, he reflected on the transformative role of the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM), which evolved from mass non-cooperation into parallel services and underground administration. This shift, he suggested, has reshaped state capacity and will remain a key factor in any future transition.

Looking ahead, Ostwald outlined several possible scenarios beyond 2026—from highly decentralized federal arrangements to continued instability—reminding the audience that tipping points can emerge suddenly, leaving stakeholders scrambling to respond.

Myanmar’s Crisis as More Than Politics

One of the strongest impressions from the keynote session was how deeply Myanmar’s crisis is not only political, but also economic, social, and regional.

Nyantha Maw Lin, Principal of Anagat Initiatives, opened the discussion by highlighting how Myanmar’s military regime has increasingly relied on economic control as a tool of governance.

He described a system characterized by arbitrary export-import restrictions, widespread corruption, and growing constraints on exchange. These measures, he argued, have disrupted supply chains and deepened the economic suffering of communities across the country.

Rather than stabilizing governance, such restrictions have further embedded Myanmar’s economy within an unstable conflict landscape, raising urgent questions about possible scenarios beyond 2026.

State-Building Beyond “Square One”

Policy analyst Naw Show Ei Ei Tun emphasized that Myanmar’s political crisis cannot be understood as a simple break from the past. The military, she noted, has remained structurally consistent, repeatedly returning the country to “square one” of the nation-state project.

She argued that the future of Myanmar requires a deeper reckoning with the country’s diversity and the need for political inclusion. Her reflections outlined several key challenges:

• Building new political coalitions around a shared identity
• Crafting legal and institutional foundations for state-building
• Strengthening practical governance efforts, from law enforcement to addressing cross-border criminal economies
• Recognizing that no single actor holds complete legitimacy or capacity

She stressed that the National Unity Government (NUG) cannot operate above the political landscape but must bring together a broad range of actors to represent the people effectively.

Thailand’s Uncertain Approach: Is a Grand Strategy Possible?

A major theme of the seminar was the role of Thailand and the wider region.

Dr. Lalita Hanwong, Assistant Professor from Kasetsart University, posed a central question: Is it time for Thailand to develop a genuine grand strategy toward Myanmar?

She argued that Thailand’s current approach remains fragmented—an “à la carte” policy rather than an inclusive and coherent strategy. Domestic political instability and uncertainty within Thailand, she suggested, continue to shape Thai-Myanmar relations.

Dr. Lalita also challenged conventional diplomatic assumptions, noting that Thailand’s historical focus on government-to-government relations with Yangon and Nay Pyi Taw overlooks a crucial reality: much of Thailand’s western border is inhabited not by state authorities, but by ethnic resistance organizations and diverse non-state actors.

This raises the need to rethink borderlands not merely as peripheral zones, but as spaces of global-local governance, humanitarian engagement, and political complexity.

Beyond ASEAN: A Changing Regional Landscape

The seminar also highlighted the limits of ASEAN engagement with Myanmar. Participants noted that there is no single “ASEAN way” forward, and that international actors such as China and the United States are playing increasingly influential roles.

Myanmar today, speakers emphasized, is shaped by “centrifugal” dynamics—multiple players with distinct identities, beliefs, and agendas. This complexity challenges conventional diplomatic protocols and calls for new approaches tailored to Myanmar’s exceptional situation.

Migration, Nationalism, and Human Security

The discussion also touched on developments within Thailand itself. Dr. Sriada Khemanitthathai from Chiang Mai University noted recent changes in immigration rules and increasing ultra-nationalism, which have direct implications for Myanmar migrants, displaced communities, and human security along the border.

This was an important reminder that Myanmar’s crisis is deeply interconnected with regional politics, migration governance, and the broader question of protection for vulnerable populations.

Looking Ahead Beyond 2026

The seminar underscored a sobering conclusion: Myanmar’s future cannot be reduced to a simple transition narrative. The crisis is deeply political, economic, and regional, shaped by fragmented authority, contested state-building, and shifting geopolitical pressures.

At the same time, the discussions reaffirmed the importance of sustained dialogue and inclusive strategies that center the aspirations of Myanmar’s people—both within the country and across its borderlands.

As Myanmar moves toward and beyond 2026, the question remains open, but what is clear is that any pathway forward must move beyond narrow diplomatic frameworks and center the voices, needs, and rights of those most affected by Myanmar’s ongoing crisis. Will the coming years bring pathways toward transformation, or further entrenchment of a protracted crisis?

HDFF would like to thank the Nelson Mandela Center and Hanns Seidel Foundation for the opportunity to attend and is looking forward to future events.

3 February 2026