140 C. ORJUELA Diverse actors and activities The countermovement is made up of a diverse set of actors. Buddhist monks and representatives from the minority religions involve against radical Buddhist nationalism in their capacity as religious leaders. NGOs carry out interfaith and peace activities enabled by donor funds, while numerous laypersons and groups engage for peace and tolerance on a voluntary basis. Five (overlapping) areas of activities are discussed here: Interfaith dialogue is by far the most common initiative. Bringing together religious leaders – as in the examples in the beginning of the article – enables dialogue, while symbolically showing that coexistence is possible. Learning about ‘the other’ is an important objective of such activities, which involve not only religious leaders but also laypeople. Examples include youth camps, visits to places of worship or homes of ‘the other’, joint development projects and celebrations of religious festivals. The feasibility of carrying out interfaith activities has varied. Particularly in Myanmar, religious leaders and laypeople have been reluctant to take part, as they risk being framed as unpatriotic (interviews 34; 37). In Sri Lanka in the years after the war ended, inter-religious initiatives were less politically sensitive than peace activities (interview 2). Due to sensitivity, some organisations have chosen to first engage with one religious group, for instance through training in conflict transformation, and only later organise inter-religious activities. A representative of an organisation working in Rakhine described the delicate process of creating space for dialogue: We try to involve those who are willing to engage with the other community; those who have some influence in their own community – moderates on both sides. We bring them together, Rakhine [Buddhists] and [Rohingya] Muslims, [and take them] to Yangon for a couple of days or more. We […] encourage them to think about small-scale common problems where we can find a solution, rather than citizenship and big issues that local communities have no control over. […] We have seen some really interesting attitude changes on both sides, and also strong relationships being built. (interview 39) While some have questioned how sustainable the relations built are (interview 28), the dialogue meetings can be understood as attempts to challenge the prejudices propagated by the Buddhist nationalists. There are also a few examples of how religious leaders or lay activists have engaged with nationalist monks, thereby contributing to changing their views (interviews 17; 36). Another set of activities focus on minority rights and protection. An interviewee in Myanmar said that joining a civil society organisation enabled Muslims to raise their concerns: ‘only in the CSO [civil society organisation] field I can share my experience. […] It is the only way to make a voice to the government’ (interview 24). Several organisations documented human rights abuses against Muslims and shared their reports with government and international actors. Legal aid to victims of discrimination, threats or violence has also been organised by civil society groups, while some have taken legal action against perpetrators of hate speech and attacks (interviews 6; 8). The statement by 180 civil society organisations criticising the Ma Ba Tha-promoted race and religion bills in Myanmar in 2015 was an example of coordinated efforts against legislation that the organisations believed would incite hatred and cause discrimination (Radio Free Asia 2015). Civil society actors have also made direct interventions to handle or prevent conflict. For example, local community monitors report risks of conflict escalation (interview 39). Most