About the Report

This report both examines the attitudes among Pakistani youth 

on terrorism, relations with India and the United States, and 

other related issues, and traces the roots of these narratives. 

Funded by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP), the 

research includes a curriculum and textbook study and is 

complemented by interviews and fieldwork in Punjab high 

schools in 2013 and 2014 all conducted by the author.

About the Author

Madiha Afzal is an assistant professor at the University of 

Maryland’s School of Public Policy and a nonresident fellow at 

the Brookings Institution. Her current work examines the roots 

of radicalization in Pakistan, focuses on the role of education, 

and includes research on Pakistan’s politics and development. 

Named in 2013 to Lo Spazio della Politica’s list of Top 100 

Global Thinkers, Afzal holds a PhD in economics from Yale 

University and has consulted for the World Bank, DFID, and 

IFPRI. The author would like to thank Muhammad Ali Syed and 

Mehwish Rani for research assistance and USIP for comments.

2301 Constitution Ave., NW • Washington, DC 20037 • 202.457.1700 • fax 202.429.6063

Special Report 367 April 2015

© 2015 by the United States Institute of Peace. 

All rights reserved.

Contents

Background 2

Methodology 3

Curriculum Development and Reform 5

Textbook Review 6

Classroom Observation 8

Narratives 9

Discussion and Recommendations 13

Madiha Afzal

Education and 

Attitudes in Pakistan

Understanding Perceptions of Terrorism

Summary

• Pakistan’s official education system does not equip students to counter the prevailing, 

problematic narratives in society and the media in any way. Instead it both creates and 

propagates them. 

• Pakistan studies textbooks forge an identity exclusively based on Islam and derived in 

opposition to India. The United States, mentioned sparingly, is portrayed as having 

betrayed Pakistan at key points in its history.

• Textbooks are memorized verbatim and class sessions do not permit questions from the 

students, teachers’ presentation of evidence, or discussion of alternative sources.

• A common Pakistani narrative of terrorism pins the blame on the United States and India. 

Explanations range from conspiracy theories to justifications of militant action as retaliation 

for U.S. policies. 

• A second narrative interprets the militants’ cause as primarily religious and supports it on 

this basis.

• Pakistan needs curriculum reform to follow an international-level curriculum that incorporates 

rigorous analysis and critical thinking and to create tolerant and analytical global citizens.

• Official textbooks need both to be reimagined to include a full view of history and to be 

authored by international scholars.

• In addition, the government needs to find a way to halt the circulation of terrorist narratives from both mainstream media and madrassas.

Introduction

This report aims to understand the roots of an array of intolerant, biased, and—in some 

cases—radical attitudes in the Pakistani populace, including anti-Americanism, hatred of India 

UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org

SPECIAL REPORT
2 USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367

and Hindus, intolerance of minorities, and some sympathy for militant groups. Underlying such 

attitudes are intolerance, prejudice, hate, and bigotry, along with a misguided notion of the 

so-called enemy—views that are likely the product of long-term state policy, global trends, 

and individual proclivities. This report examines the role of Pakistan’s official education system 

relative to other possible influences, such as the home and the media, in contributing to such 

attitudes. It is based on a curriculum and textbook study and fieldwork in high schools in 

Punjab from the fall of 2013 to the summer of 2014.1

In the spring of 2014, 59 percent of respondents to the annual Pew Global Attitudes 

poll in Pakistan had an unfavorable view of the United States.2 At the same time, few actually reported having favorable views of the Taliban and al-Qaeda—8 percent and 12 percent, 

respectively—even before the Taliban’s Peshawar school attack that rattled the country in 

December 2014.3 Asked to choose, however, 51 percent stated that India was the greatest 

threat to the country, relative to the 25 percent who identified the Taliban and the 2 percent 

who named al-Qaeda, reflecting a national narrative that even in 2014 was more wary of India 

than of terrorist groups.4

Overt expressions of sympathy for the Taliban in polls are limited in Pakistan and have 

decreased sharply since the spring of 2008, when the favorability statistic stood at 27 percent. 

Why do Pakistanis continue to hold a skewed assessment of the Taliban threat to their country? What narratives underlie their attitudes toward the Taliban, the United States, India, and 

religious minorities?

This report illustrates some common narratives of Pakistani high school students and 

teachers on these issues and traces the roots of these narratives to the education system as 

compared to other sources. Pakistan’s current education system is problematic partly because 

it drives unhealthy narratives, but also because it does not equip students to counter societal 

and media narratives, conspiracy theories, or terrorist narratives in any way. Students are never 

taught how to assess and question sources of information and thus are easily swayed by narratives that are, in many cases, misguided.

Background

It is conventional wisdom that more education is correlated with “better” attitudes, such as 

greater tolerance and lower support for terror groups. As an example, Punjab’s chief minister, 

Shahbaz Sharif, recently stated that more education “will comprehensively defeat terrorism 

and militancy.”5 Researchers have used data and evidence across multiple contexts to show 

that this notion does not stack up: The quantity of an individual’s education, measured in 

years of schooling, appears to be unrelated to his or her support for terror groups and terrorism, measured using public opinion survey responses.6

But such quantitative research misses a good look inside the black box of schooling, 

at how the quality of schooling and what you learn affect attitudes. One aspect of this is 

learning outcomes—how well students actually learn and retain what is taught in schools, 

as measured in test scores—and another is the content of the curriculum and teaching. This 

report focuses on content rather than on learning outcomes, though it is clear that learning outcomes fare poorly in Pakistan, and one can argue that poor learning directly affects 

attitudes as well.7

Evidence is accumulating globally on the effect of education content on attitudes. A 

new study in China on its recent curriculum reform, for example, shows that changes in the 

curriculum causally affected attitudes in the direction the government desired. The phased 

implementation of the reform made it clear that students who were exposed to the new 

The views expressed in this report do not necessarily 

reflect the views of the United States Institute of Peace, 

which does not advocate specific policy positions.

To request permission to photocopy or reprint materials, 

e-mail: permissions@usip.org

About the Institute

The United States Institute of Peace is an independent, 

nonpartisan institution established and funded by Congress. 

Its goals are to help prevent and resolve violent conflicts, 

promote postconflict peacebuilding, and increase conflict 

management tools, capacity, and intellectual capital 

worldwide. The Institute does this by empowering others 

with knowledge, skills, and resources, as well as by its direct 

involvement in conflict zones around the globe.

Board of Directors

Stephen J. Hadley, (Chair), Principal, RiceHadleyGates, LLC, 

Washington, DC • George E. Moose (Vice Chair), Adjunct 

Professor of Practice, The George Washington University, Washington, DC • Judy Ansley, Former Assistant to the President and 

Deputy National Security Advisor under George W. Bush, Washington, DC • Eric Edelman, Hertog Distinguished Practitioner 

in Residence, Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International 

Studies, Washington, DC • Joseph Eldridge, University Chaplain 

and Senior Adjunct Professorial Lecturer, School of International 

Service, American University, Washington, DC • Kerry Kennedy, 

President, Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human 

Rights, Washington, DC • Ikram U. Khan, President, Quality Care 

Consultants, LLC., Las Vegas, NV • Stephen D. Krasner, Graham 

H. Stuart Professor of International Relations at Stanford 

University, Palo Alto, CA • John A. Lancaster, Former Executive 

Director, International Council on Independent Living, Potsdam, 

NY • Jeremy A. Rabkin, Professor of Law, George Mason 

University, Fairfax, VA • J. Robinson West, Chairman, PFC 

Energy, Washington, DC • Nancy Zirkin, Executive Vice 

President, Leadership Conference on Civil and 

Human Rights, Washington, DC 

Members Ex Officio

John Kerry, Secretary of State • Ashton Carter, Secretary of 

Defense • Gregg F. Martin, Major General, U.S. Army; President, 

National Defense University • Nancy Lindborg, President, 

United States Institute of Peace (nonvoting)
USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367 3

curriculum were statistically significantly more likely to view China’s political system as 

democratic, to trust government officials, and to view an unconstrained market economy 

with skepticism.8

Narratives on India and Hindus are a large part of the Pakistani curriculum, which was 

redesigned in the late 1970s and early 1980s to foster a nationalism derived in opposition 

to India. Student attitudes on India today are largely in line with the textbook narratives. 

Textbooks and the schools sketch the skeleton of views on the United States, which the 

media and societal narratives then fill in. Views on terrorism today derive largely from societal narratives and the media, as well as from extremist madrassas, but the curriculum also 

encourages conspiracy theories.

Since the 1980s, historians and scholars have criticized Pakistan’s official curriculum and 

textbooks (especially English and Urdu language textbooks, and both Islamic and Pakistan 

studies), have documented biases and historical errors in them, and have argued that the 

books promote intolerance and bigotry.9 Most recently, a study by prominent scholar A. H. 

Nayyar examining the 2006 curriculum reform and new textbooks concluded that the reform 

was a “missed opportunity” and that the new curriculum continues to violate Pakistan’s 

constitution by forcibly teaching Islamic teachings to non-Muslim students (in core subjects, 

including Pakistan studies, English, and Urdu), and that historical errors, distortions, and 

biases persist in Pakistan studies textbooks.10

Why are misguided, bigoted, or intolerant views problematic? The vast majority of 

those who hold such views will not turn toward violent extremism. In Pakistan, however, 

these views exist in conjunction with increasing terrorism, sectarian violence, and violence against minorities. This violence does not often result in large public protests (with 

notable exceptions, of course) or levels of public outrage comparable with, say, the release 

of a movie about the Prophet Muhammad. A disturbing rise in mob violence against religious minorities is also evident in vigilante justice for alleged blasphemy cases—so even 

civilian bigotry can turn violent.11 Finally, the most extreme or radical attitudes, even 

when not violent themselves, can create an enabling environment for militants, who need 

shelter and operational, logistical, and financial support from sympathizers to survive in 

any context.

In addition, government action against violent actors is partly driven by civilian demand 

for such action. In Pakistan, this demand has long been muted because of intolerant and 

bigoted narratives, though the events of 2014—the Karachi airport attack in June, the 

Peshawar school attack in December—changed the situation. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif 

held off on military action against the Taliban for months with the aim of pursuing talks 

with them, partly because of public support for the talks.

Methodology

This report focuses on Pakistan studies in grades 9 and 10. The course covers the country’s 

history, politics, economy, and geography and is a core subject on the grade 10 matriculation examination (Matric), a provincial exam required for graduation from both government 

high schools and private high schools that follow the government curriculum.12 The gross 

enrollment ratio at the Matric stage is approximately 57 percent, according to the 2013–14 

Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement Survey.13 Grades 9 and 10 were chosen 

because students are approximately fourteen to fifteen years old and mature enough to 

have views on these topics, but have not yet dropped out—as many do—following the 

Matric examination.

Since the 1980s, historians 

and scholars have criticized 

Pakistan’s official curriculum 

and textbooks, have documented 

biases and historical errors in 

them, and have argued that 

the books promote intolerance 

and bigotry.
4 USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367

The study consisted of a textbook review across three of the four provinces in Pakistan—

Punjab, Sindh, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), excluding Balochistan—and field visits to 

twenty-three schools in Punjab. The field visits involved student focus groups, one-on-one 

teacher interviews, and attending Pakistan studies classes. Interviews were open-ended, 

unlike conventional public opinion surveys. This narrative approach is useful because it 

yields a detailed exposition of the attitudes and helps identify what drives them.14 This 

report is novel in examining the views of students when they are in their learning environment, as opposed to later in life, so that the impact of schooling can be more clearly traced.

The focus on the Lahore and Sheikhupura districts in northeastern Punjab (including the 

most rural and poorest parts of these districts) was mainly in response to security concerns 

about conducting research elsewhere. The population of the Lahore metropolitan area was 

estimated at 9.2 million as of July 2014, and of the Sheikhupura metropolitan area at 3 million 

as of 2013.15 Caution should be exercised in extrapolating the results from these two districts 

to the rest of the country, however. Both districts are more urban, prosperous, and connected 

on various dimensions—to the media, to the rest of Pakistan, and so on—than other parts of 

the country, though these factors can affect attitudes in either direction. Additionally, these 

two districts had not been the target of major terrorist violence in the years immediately preceding the interviews (despite attacks, especially between 2008 and 2010 in Lahore and again 

in November 2014 at the Wagah border) and may have a higher tolerance for terrorist groups 

than other parts of the country that have suffered violence more recently.

This study examined both government and private schools following the official government curriculum in grades 9 and 10. School visits and field interviews were undertaken 

between October 2013 and June 2014. Because the curriculum does not vary across schools 

within a province, no definitive causal effect of curriculum on attitudes can be identified. 

However, how the content from the curriculum and the school comes through in attitudes can 

be traced, as can whether varied teaching quality and family backgrounds affect attitudes. 

Conclusions can therefore be drawn about the role of schooling versus that of the home, the 

media, and society.

Direct field observation was first piloted in three schools, selected randomly from among 

all government and private schools registered with the Lahore Board of Intermediate and 

Secondary Education (BISE). In the main study, twelve schools in Lahore and its surrounding 

villages and four schools in Sheikhupura and its surrounding villages were randomly selected 

from among BISE-registered schools.16

In the next phase, four schools were selected nonrandomly to provide a contrast to the 

main set by purposefully choosing schools that varied on some dimensions other than the 

fixed official curriculum. Two major elements varied. One was teaching quality: a liberal nonprofit school that invests heavily in teacher training, a set of low-cost private schools that 

receive direction in teaching methods from an elite network of schools, and an elite private 

school were selected. The other was family background. As a result, exposure to the media 

was also varied in that more affluent families have greater media exposure.

The schools selected varied greatly in size, ranging from two hundred to three hundred 

students to more than two thousand students, the average school size hovering around 

a thousand students. The government schools generally tend to be larger and more overcrowded than private schools; rural schools tend to be smaller than urban schools. The 

school student-to-teacher ratio number also varies quite a bit, the average hovering at about 

thirty students.

In each school visited, one Pakistan studies teacher was interviewed on a one-on-one 

basis, and a focus group was held with six to ten grade 9 or grade 10 students led by the 

author or a research assistant.17
USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367 5

Curriculum Development and Reform

The structure of the curriculum in its current form was introduced during General Zia ul Haq’s 

military dictatorship in the 1980s.18 Pakistan studies was made a compulsory subject for all 

degree students, including medicine and engineering professional degrees, in 1981. Also in 

1981 the University Grants Commission issued the following guiding directive to Pakistan 

studies textbook authors: 

to demonstrate that the basis of Pakistan is not to be founded in racial, linguistic, 

or geographical factors, but, rather, in the shared experience of a common 

religion. To get students to know and appreciate the Ideology of Pakistan, and 

to popularize it with slogans. To guide students towards the ultimate goal of 

Pakistan—the creation of a completely Islamized State.19

This new policy represented a break from the past; the textbooks of the 1950s and 1960s 

were “incomparably more liberal” relative to the books written in the 1980s and included 

discussions of Hindu empires in the subcontinent, in contrast to the new books, which 

began with the arrival of Muslims in the subcontinent.20 The ideology of Pakistan, which is 

defined as equivalent to Islam, was introduced into and became a focal concept for Pakistan 

studies books only after 1977.21

In response to mounting criticism of biases in the curriculum, then president General Pervez Musharraf set a curriculum reform process in motion in 2004 that culminated in the revised 

National Curriculum of 2006. Historically, responsibility for writing and distributing textbooks 

according to the federal curriculum fell to provincial textbook boards, which were required to 

secure approval by the Federal Ministry of Education (Curriculum Wing). The 2007 National 

Textbooks and Learning Materials Policy took away writing responsibility from the textbook 

boards and mandated that the official textbook be chosen as the result of a competition 

between private publishers, which would submit textbooks to the provincial governments.22

The eighteenth amendment to Pakistan’s constitution, passed in 2010, handed over 

curriculum responsibility to the provinces, and new curriculum authorities were formed in 

each of them. In practice, the provinces are still by and large following federal curriculum 

guidelines and have yet to write their own curriculum documents, though they certainly 

have taken leeway in their adaptations or interpretations of the curriculum.

The writing of new textbooks using the 2006 curriculum has been staggered.23 Punjab, 

Balochistan, and KPK introduced books following the 2006 curriculum for Pakistan studies 

for grades 9 and 10 in the 2012–13 school year; this study analyzes the content of the new 

Punjab and KPK textbooks, as well as that of those from Sindh and Punjab, which follow 

the pre-2006 curriculum. Sindh has not followed the 2006 curriculum as of summer 2013 

for Pakistan studies for secondary classes (grades 9 and 10), and its pre-2006 book is still 

being used in high schools.

Ultimately, the 2006 curriculum reform has brought about marginal improvements but has 

failed at any real change. This is unsurprising, given that the curriculum is a direct product 

of state policy and a narrative that justifies the existence of Pakistan with respect to India. 

The aims of the reform the Ministry of Education outlined seem to have been narrow to begin 

with—not taking on or altering the current narrative, but instead simply aiming to remove 

problems—and appear to have been further diluted in the conversion of the curriculum to 

the textbooks.

Textbook authors and private publishers are producing textbooks more biased than the 

curriculum guidelines. Insofar as many of them were likely products of the old curriculum, 

this is unsurprising. The official textbook review committees (part of the new provincial curriculum authorities) do not help either, in that they reject the more tolerant submissions. For 
6 USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367

example, the Oxford University Press in Pakistan submitted textbooks to a competition in 

Punjab but was asked by the review committee to reintroduce the word “jihad,” even though 

the curriculum documents do not ask to write about it.24 In addition, the teaching method 

goals of the reform, such as reducing rote memorization, seem to have been lost along the 

way. Teachers still ask students to memorize and examiners still test it, ensuring that the 

textbooks remain critical, for the exam is based entirely on them.

In some places where improvements have been made, political factors are already undoing them. Following revisions to KPK textbooks during the liberal Awami National Party’s 

regime, the conservative Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party has come into power in KPK and 

reversed many of the changes made (partly under pressure from its coalition partner, the 

Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami), such as reintroducing mentions of jihad.25

Textbook Review

Pakistan studies textbooks in English are a direct translation of Urdu textbooks, typically 

the language in which they are developed. The textbooks generally are poor quality in 

regard to language and grammatical errors, and more significantly and seriously in regard 

to substance. They are thin volumes that tend to focus more on historical events and dates, 

not on explanations. Many subjective statements are made without ascribing any basis or 

justification or source and tend to be entirely one-sided, in favor of Muslims and Pakistan.

Each province in Pakistan has one official textbook for Pakistan studies for each grade 

for all government schools. Students in private schools that follow the official matriculation curriculum also study the designated government textbook. The 2013–14 Punjab 

grades 9 and 10 Pakistan studies textbooks (one for each grade) are currently being used 

across the province and were in use in the schools visited in Punjab. They were written by 

private publishers and were selected through a competition run by the Punjab Education 

Department. Sindh’s official Pakistan studies secondary school textbook (one book for both 

grades) for the 2013–14 school year continues to be based on the old, pre-2006 curriculum 

and was written by the Sindh Textbook Board. The KPK counterpart volume for grade 9 for 

the 2013–14 school year followed the 2006 curriculum reform and was written by the KPK 

Textbook Board (though, in keeping with the 2007 learning materials policy, a private publisher should have written it).

Pakistani Identity

All Pakistan studies textbooks begin with a chapter on the Pakistan ideology, which is 

equated entirely with Islam and is considered all-important, something that needs to be 

defended and held on to at all costs. Most textbooks mention the pillars of Islam in that first 

chapter, which is problematic because it excludes non-Muslims from the Pakistani identity 

and forces them to study Islam. Islam features heavily in the old textbooks—in the 2002 

Punjab textbook, Islam is mentioned 255 times in a thin volume. Jihad also features in the 

first chapter, in the discussion on the pillars of Islam: 

Besides Haj, Jehad [sic] also has great significance. Jehad means that financial 

and physical sacrifice which is made for the protection and promotion of Islam. 

Jehad not only means to fight against the enemies of Islam but also to make a 

struggle for the promotion and enforcement of Islamic teachings, keeping one’s 

desires and wants under the orders of Allah and uttering words of truth before a 

tyrant ruler.26

The Oxford University Press in 

Pakistan submitted textbooks 

to a competition in Punjab 

but was asked by the review 

committee to reintroduce the 

word “jihad,”even though the 

curriculum documents do not 

ask to write about it.
USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367 7

Mentions of jihad have decreased significantly in the new textbooks following the 2006 

reform but have not been eliminated. Pakistan’s identity continues to be defined in terms 

of Islam, to the exclusion of other religions. Toward the beginning of the book, all the 

textbooks talk about the principle of no discrimination—on the basis of caste, race, color, 

language, wealth—but none other than KPK’s mention religion at that stage.

India and Hindus

The second chapter in the textbooks typically covers the creation of Pakistan, which is generally explained with references to the conspiring of Hindus and the British against Muslims, 

who are depicted as victims. The description of events is relentlessly one-sided. In the latest 

Punjab textbooks (post-reform), the word “conspiracy” is used frequently, especially in reference to Hindus pre-1947 and India post-1947. India is described as “cunning,” considered to 

put obstacles in Pakistan’s path, whether through the dispute over water between the two 

countries or in the division of assets at Partition, and especially through India’s role in 1971, 

in the separation of East Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh.27 The “negative role of 

Hindu teachers” in East Pakistan is highlighted.28

The Punjab and Sindh textbooks based on the old curriculum are more negative. The 

old Punjab textbook uses words such as “hostile”, “biased”, “destroy”, “deprive”, “ruin”, 

and “hatred” for Hindus’ attitude toward Muslims pre-Partition and India’s attitude toward 

Pakistan post-Partition, along with phrases such as “evil collusion between the Congress 

[party] and the British” and the “machinations of the Congress [party].”29 The current Sindh 

textbook, also based on the pre-2006 curriculum, is similarly biased. For example, on Syed 

Ahmed Shaheed Barelvi (an important religious, political, and military figure from the early 

nineteenth century) fighting against the Sikhs, the book states, “His struggle was against 

the evil forces in the subcontinent.” Barelvi is said to have preached “jihad because it was 

not possible to get freedom from evil force without armed struggle.”30

The West and the United States

The United States is mentioned only a handful of times in the textbooks. The West is generally 

considered to have “two-face[d]” characters, and the United States in particular is considered 

to have betrayed Pakistan historically.31 A few instances are mentioned in this context. The 

first is Bangladesh’s creation, which is asserted to have been the work of a “secret agreement 

of big powers.”32 The second describes the United States as having blocked and punished 

Pakistan’s nuclear program and nuclear tests (of which the country and its textbooks are 

exceedingly proud) while turning a blind eye to India’s program. U.S. aid is acknowledged but 

its benefits are not, even in the latest Punjab textbook: “In these 10 years, America has given 

loan[s] of billions of dollars to Pakistan. However, it has never given aid for any big project of 

long-lasting economic and defense benefits to Pakistan.”33

The books make it clear that Pakistan’s real loyalties lie with the Islamic world or the 

Muslim millat, and that the relationship with the West is mainly strategic and economic:34

The main objective of Pakistan’s foreign policy is to protect the ideological borders of 

Pakistan...It can protect its ideology only by establishing better relations with the 

Islamic countries...The main reason for close contacts with the western countries is 

economic aid which made Pakistan closer to America and the western world.35

In the old Punjab textbook, the United States was mentioned neutrally, in terms of trade 

or of its role on the Security Council; the newer textbooks are somewhat more negative. 

The latest KPK textbook also invokes the secret behind-the-scenes influence of the United 

States in terms of the separation of East and West Pakistan: “Taking advantage of the 

Toward the beginning of the 

book, all the textbooks talk 

about the principle of no 

discrimination—on the basis 

of caste, race, color, language, 

wealth—but none other than 

KPK’s mention religion at 

that stage.
8 USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367

internal political situation of Pakistan the then superior powers (Soviet Union and America) 

used to interfere in east Pakistan through different means...The process of separation of 

east Pakistan was secretly supported by America.”36 This sets up a framework for blaming 

Pakistan’s current problems on the United States as well.

The old Punjab textbook is very negative about Jewish people, describing them when 

articulating Pakistan’s support for the Palestinian cause as “the wicked Jews [who] put a 

portion of Masjid-e-Aqsa on fire to demolish it.”37 This phrase was removed with the 2006 

curriculum reform.

All is not negative, however, even in the old books; the old Punjab book, for example, 

ends on a positive and peaceful note: 

As an Islamic country, Pakistan stands for international cooperation and peace. 

Islam teaches us peace and amity and discourages aggression. Although Islam 

allows to raise arms in self defence yet it strictly prohibits domination or 

persecution of people through military force. Pakistan has been taking necessary 

steps to promote international brotherhood and peace on the basis of these 

Islamic principles.38

Terrorism

Terrorism is not mentioned in any of the textbooks written before the 2006 curriculum 

reform, which is understandable, given that Pakistan’s security situation has worsened considerably since 2007. But even in the latest Punjab textbook, written in 2012, terrorism and 

extremism are mentioned only a couple of times, in the chapter on world affairs. First is the 

statement “Pakistan supported America in the Afghan war but as a consequence Pakistan 

itself is facing terrorism,”39 which lays the entire blame for terrorism in Pakistan on the alliance with the United States in Afghanistan after 2001. Second is a statement that praises 

Pakistan’s counterterrorism efforts: “Pakistan is playing a very effective role against terrorism and extremism in the world.”40 Pakistan’s efforts to counter terrorism have largely been 

unsuccessful and ineffective within the country, and tens of thousands of Pakistanis have 

become its victims, so this statement obfuscates reality. It would be worthwhile to have a 

real conversation about the issue of terrorism in the textbooks.

Classroom Observation

Variation in schooling occurs in the medium of instruction, the quality of teacher training 

and teaching in the classroom, students’ discussions with their teachers outside the classroom, students’ discussions with fellow students outside the classroom, and school-specific 

policies on posting daily news headlines on bulletin boards or reading them in the school 

assemblies. The average size of classes observed for this study was about forty students, 

but this number varied widely, from fewer than ten to nearly eighty. Class sizes tended to 

be larger in urban areas and in government schools.

The majority of classes attended were taught in Urdu (and thus referred to the Urdu 

textbook, from which the English version is translated), but a number were taught in English.41 Other than in the elite school, even when the medium of instruction was purportedly 

English, the teachers explained the material in Urdu or translated it to help the students 

better understand it.

In grade 9 and 10 classrooms observed across government, private, and nonprofit 

schools, the assigned textbook reigned supreme, which is unsurprising, in that the matriculation board examination is based exclusively on the textbooks. The teachers taught almost 

Even in the latest Punjab 

textbook, written in 2012, 

terrorism and extremism are 

mentioned only a couple of times, 

in the chapter on world affairs.
USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367 9

exclusively to the exam, making sure the students learned or memorized the content verbatim, going through the textbooks two to three times over the course of the academic year, 

and giving multiple tests to ensure memorization.42

The teachers taught a couple of pages of the textbook per lecture, repeating the sentences in the book, and offering little explanation and no additional learning materials. 

The validity of the textbook material was not questioned, and neither the teacher nor the 

students engaged in any evaluation of the information in the books. Classes did not veer 

from the topic at hand, although in some cases the teachers seemed to be teaching material 

from the older Punjab textbook. Some teachers referred to examples from current news or 

from history as further illustrations of the topic. The additional material or examples brought 

in were generally no more controversial or radical than the material in the textbooks.

Some variations were notable: Teachers in nonprofit or private schools that emphasized 

improving teaching methods tended to use illustrative examples and engaged students 

with the material a bit creatively (assigning homework questions that deviated from the 

textbook exercises, for instance). The (male) teacher at the elite private school encouraged 

the students to further explore the material on their own and on the Internet, using Google 

and Wikipedia.

In government schools, male teachers seemed more likely to introduce examples from 

current news and history. Their female counterparts appeared less likely to diverge from the 

textbook, other than to ensure that their students had memorized the material. Relative to 

private schools, both male and female teachers in government schools stuck more closely 

to the curriculum and textbooks and allowed less room for teacher-student interaction in 

the lecture and beyond. This may be partly attributable to the larger class sizes in government schools.

Outside the classroom, student focus group discussions and teacher interviews showed 

variations in students’ exposure to the media, including television, newspapers, social 

media, and the Internet at large.43 Within and across schools, the degree of discussion varied in the home on political and security matters that included these children. Differences 

were also evident in family attitudes: whether they were liberal or conservative, secular or 

religious. Finally, access to interactions outside the home also varied and was greater for 

boys. Access to the Internet, unsurprisingly, was directly correlated with socioeconomic 

status. Gender also played a role: Boys in general appeared to have more Internet access 

than girls, and girls in private schools were much more likely to have access than girls in 

government schools. Exposure to television varied less: Most students were exposed to it. 

Newspaper exposure was limited across the board.

Narratives

Terrorism

To understand attitudes toward militant groups and terrorism, teachers and student focus 

groups were both asked a few related questions: the major problems they thought Pakistan 

was currently facing, how they ranked terrorism as one of those problems, the causes of 

terrorism, the groups involved in terrorism, and how the problem of terrorism could be 

fixed. These explanations helped shed light on any latent or active (logistical or financial 

support, or membership in an extremist organization) sympathy for terrorist groups without 

our directly asking a question about views of terrorist groups (which would be more sensitive and could generate nonresponse). They also helped us understand the logic behind 

any sympathy.

In grade 9 and 10 classrooms 

observed across government, 

private, and nonprofit schools, 

teachers taught a couple of 

pages of the textbook per 

lecture, repeating the sentences 

in the book, and offering little 

explanation and no additional 

learning materials. 
10 USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367

Opinions on the issue varied, with most respondents ranking terrorism as one of the most 

important problems Pakistan is facing; at times this response came after they were explicitly 

asked what they thought about terrorism. Economic problems were often at the forefront of 

respondents’ minds, which is not surprising in light of their family backgrounds and because 

they had not been direct victims.

In terms of causes of terrorism, one set of responses argued the causes were economic, 

that terrorism stems from poverty, unemployment, lack of education, and inequality. In the 

words of a female student from the nonprofit school in Lahore: “People have taken a wrong 

meaning of Islam. They think that Islam says this is how to do jihad. But that is not right. 

They come toward this because of poverty—if they had a job they wouldn’t.” Female teachers 

and students were more likely to offer the economic explanation.

A second, dominant response blamed “foreign influences”—India and the United 

States—for terrorism. Although the new textbooks barely mention terrorism and the old 

ones did not mention it at all, the main mention in the current Punjab grade 10 text encompasses the blame-the-U.S. explanation: “Pakistan supported America in the Afghan war but 

as a consequence Pakistan itself is facing terrorism.”

Explanations ranged from conspiracy theories to partially rationalized ones. The conspiracy arguments blamed the agencies or the governments of India and the United States 

for wanting to destroy Pakistan (some specifically pointing to an alliance between the two 

countries) and for training terrorists, providing them with weapons, and funding them for 

this purpose. “We say that bomb blasts are done by Taliban and MQM in Karachi—the major 

cause is the Americans and the Indians...the American agencies and the Indian agencies.” A 

male student from an elite private school spoke entirely in English when saying this.

The media—television, Urdu language newspapers, and social media in particular—certainly perpetuate the conspiracy theory explanations for terrorism. A few students reported 

something they saw online: 

There was a place they showed in America, where there were religious Islamic men 

[maulvis], with long beards, who were being taught the Quran, but they were all 

kafirs [nonbelievers]—they were being sent in the midst of Muslims to derail/

sidetrack Muslims. 

Many argued that the United States not only wanted to cause Pakistan harm but also did 

not want to see Islam rising, and hence wanted to destroy all Muslim countries.

A second strand of the foreign influences explanation was more indirect, arguing that 

militants are engaged in terrorism to protest the U.S. war in Afghanistan and Pakistan’s 

helping America in that war, which is seen as America’s war, and that once Pakistan stops 

helping the United States, terrorism will end. A related argument focused on terrorism as a 

mode of retaliation or revenge for drone strikes; this argument figured much more in the fall 

of 2013 but had receded in the May 2014 interviews, which took place during a monthslong 

lull in these strikes. Still, a male student from an elite private school said in early June of 

2014, “When somebody kills one’s family, like America does in FATA or Waziristan, then he 

has to take revenge.”

That Muslims could be responsible for terrorism against other Muslims was generally not 

believed, just as official accounts pinning responsibility for terrorist attacks on the Taliban 

were considered not necessarily true and not reliable. “Whenever there is an incident, we 

hear after a little bit that the Taliban have claimed responsibility. But I don’t believe it,” a 

male student at a private school in Lahore said. Perhaps the most sophisticated version of 

this explanation argued that there are two types of terrorists: those working against the 

United States, who are pro-Pakistan, and those working against Pakistan in alliance with the 

United States. None are considered to be working against Pakistan on their own.
USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367 11

A third explanation blamed Pakistan’s government—politicians, the police, and their 

corruption—for terrorism. An elaboration of this view was generally lacking, however. Lack 

of trust in the government is a dominant narrative in contemporary Pakistani society, driven 

partly by the media and partly by the actual poor and insecure circumstances, under which 

many Pakistanis feel that they do not control their fate, economic and otherwise.

A final explanation interpreted the militants’ cause as primarily religious—to impose 

the Islamic way of life in Pakistan—and supported it on this basis. “They want Islam too,” 

a male government schoolteacher in Lahore explained. “It is the duty of Muslims to spread 

God’s words. They are just fulfilling their duties. Now you can call them either terrorists or 

jihadis.” The religious explanation appears to derive more from students’ family background 

and direct contact with Islamist fundamentalist groups, though the emphasis on religion 

and Pakistan following Islamic law in the textbooks may also contribute to it.

Two students interviewed in focus groups, a girl and a boy, from separate public schools, 

stood out in having more radical views than the others and were followers of Muhammad 

Ilyas Attar Qadri’s fundamentalist group Dawat-e-Islami.44 The male was a madrassa student, a Hafiz-e-Quran (one who memorizes the Quran) and a deputy imam at a mosque. In 

his view, terrorism was justified in terms of religion: “The day our leaders start following the 

examples of Khulfa-e-Rashideen [the Prophet’s four companions and successors] and when 

there will be Nizam-e-Mustafa [the law of Muhammad] the terrorists themselves will give 

up. They are Muslims too and that is their only concern.” But for him, the religious cause 

was conflated with anti-Americanism: “People say Taliban are not willing to talk but actually 

the Taliban are willing for this. But first we need to stop drone attacks. Actually we should 

launch an operation against the U.S. first then against any other.” The girl with the radicalized views was influenced by a pamphlet published by Dawat-e-Islami that she read in her 

home, though her family seemed to be followers of the group as well.

These views demonstrate a general refusal to pin the blame on militant groups, and in 

some cases sympathy for militant groups, as in the drone strikes or countering America 

explanation. The sympathy was also on occasion more direct, such as when the militant 

cause was seen as religious. Some respondents expressed some overlap across different 

explanations; others contradicted themselves by espousing two inconsistent explanations. 

Some students, significantly, did say that militants were traitors who espoused the wrong 

version of Islam and should be punished. “The Taliban are ruining the reputation and name 

of Islam,” a male student from a government school said.

In a number of cases, groups of students and their teachers had similar viewpoints—

when the attitude was relatively uncommon, such as the economic explanation for terrorism, a transfer of views from the teacher to the students seemed to explain it.45 Overall, 

views on terrorism and terrorist groups are certainly not derived entirely from schools, 

though blaming the United States and India is consistent with textbook content; the religious motivation may also be reinforced by the textbooks.

The United States

The United States looms large in Pakistan. In the interviews, respondents were questioned 

on Pakistan’s relationships with other countries (which they perceive as Pakistan’s friends, 

which they don’t, and why), and specifically about U.S.-Pakistan relations and views on 

President Obama. These questions followed others about Pakistan’s internal situation and 

terrorism, but in many cases respondents brought up the United States themselves early in 

the discussion when talking about the causes of terrorism in Pakistan.

By and large, America is seen as dominating Pakistan, and Pakistan’s government is seen 

as being excessively dependent on the United States for aid, in return for which America 

Overall, views on terrorism and 

terrorist groups are certainly not 

derived entirely from schools, 

though blaming the United 

States and India is consistent 

with textbook content; the 

religious motivation may also be 

reinforced by the textbooks.
12 USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367

dictates Pakistan’s internal affairs. Opinions followed a spectrum much like those on terrorism, and the picture was largely negative. Some believed that the United States and American “agencies” are training and funding terrorists in Pakistan in a bid to divide, destroy, 

and eventually conquer Pakistan, the United States following the colonial British policy of 

divide and rule. The motivation was considered to be either a war against Islam or a bid for 

Pakistan’s natural resources. Many respondents argued that India and the United States are 

allied in wanting to destroy Pakistan.

Others pointed to U.S. drone strikes and other infringements on Pakistani territory or 

Pakistan’s help in “America’s war” as being the root cause of Pakistan’s problems and struggle 

with terrorism. They argued that drone strikes, such as the one that killed Baitullah Mehsud, 

derail peace talks with the Taliban: If drone strikes stopped, terrorism would end.

Still others focused on Pakistan’s sovereignty and invoked the bin Laden operation 

and the Raymond Davis incident as violations of Pakistan’s sovereignty and lamented the 

Pakistani government’s inability to stand up for the country. Davis was a CIA contractor in 

Lahore who killed two men on a motorcycle in January 2011, was acquitted within a few 

weeks of all charges after payment of blood money to the victims’ families, and was flown 

out of Pakistan. In this context, the fate of the Pakistani Aafia Siddiqui was often mentioned 

in contrast to that of Raymond Davis. Siddiqui was a Pakistani neuroscientist who, while in 

custody in Afghanistan for suspected links to al-Qaeda, attempted to kill American security 

officers in 2008; she was convicted by a New York court in 2010 and is serving an eightysix-year sentence in the United States.

Pakistan’s relationship with the United States, interviews clearly indicated, has its 

positives and negatives, especially over the course of history. A male student from an elite 

private school put this in stark terms: “Sometimes they give us aid, sometimes they kill people.” Respondents said that relations were better when Pakistan helped the United States 

against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan but are worse now. America was perceived as being 

insincere with Pakistan and as having betrayed it, especially vis-à-vis the Pakistan-India 

relationship. The United States is considered to have provided weapons and help to India 

in the 1971 war that eventually led to the separation of East Pakistan and the formation 

of Bangladesh (in fact, Washington provided weapons to Pakistan). Similarly, Washington is 

considered to have pressured France, which had wanted to help Pakistan start developing 

its nuclear program, to not provide help. These examples come directly from the textbooks 

and the classrooms.

Other respondents did not focus on U.S. policy but said that Pakistan cannot and should 

not have good relations with America for the simple reason that it is not a Muslim country. 

Ironically, these respondents said this while maintaining that China is Pakistan’s staunch 

friend. The same respondents at times also mentioned that America “is Jewish” or at the 

very least sympathetic with the Jewish people. In the words of the radical male student, 

“We need to follow the examples of Khulfa-e-Rashideen and fight against the enemies of 

Islam, dushman-e-Islam.”

The mentions of the United States in the Pakistan studies textbooks, though sparing, set 

the stage for respondents’ attitudes, which are filled in by media and society narratives. The 

textbooks offer a skeleton picture of a United States that dragged Pakistan into the Afghanistan war, leading to terrorism in Pakistan, and that has supported India over Pakistan in 

the dispute between the two countries by trying to thwart Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions and 

by helping India in the 1971 war that led to the separation of Bangladesh. Many students 

mentioned these points when they discussed their views.

However, respondents also discussed and invoked many recent events that are not 

mentioned in the textbooks. These events are discussed widely in the news and media and 

The mentions of the United 

States in the Pakistan studies 

textbooks, though sparing, 

set the stage for respondents’ 

attitudes, which are filled in by 

media and society narratives.
USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367 13

are the basis of the prevailing narrative about the United States in Pakistani society. The 

perception of Osama bin Laden’s killing as a blow to Pakistan’s national sovereignty, for 

example, is a direct product of the Pakistan military’s press strategy in the wake of that 

event.46 The conspiracy theories about the United States running everything in Pakistan, 

and being responsible for everything bad that happens in the country, are constants in the 

Urdu language media and on social media.47

India and Hindus

Little reference was made to Pakistan’s small Hindu minority—which is largely concentrated 

in Sindh and Karachi rather than in Punjab—but students voiced negative views of India. 

The two-nation theory—that Muslims and Hindus in pre-Partition India had separate customs and traditions and therefore could not live together, necessitating the creation of 

Pakistan—is taken as fact and widely accepted.

The goal of the state in defining itself by the conflict with India has led a large part of the 

textbooks to be concentrated on the India-Pakistan relationship. Student views are almost 

homogeneous on this topic and follow the textbook view of India as the enemy, as creating 

problems for Pakistan (such as in sharing river water), and generally as not being sincere in 

wanting to resolve the Kashmir dispute and further the cause of peace. Where the responses 

go beyond the textbooks is in the view of India and the Indian intelligence agency RAW 

(Research and Analysis Wing) as being sponsors of terrorism in Pakistan because of their desire 

to destroy Pakistan. This perspective is in line with the textbook framework of India as out 

to harm Pakistan.

Minorities

On the question of religious minorities (Shiites, Ahmedis, and Christians) in Pakistan, both 

students and teachers believe that they are treated perfectly well and that the real issue is 

poor treatment of Muslims in India and the United States. Attacks on religious minorities 

within Pakistan were not mentioned, however, only those elsewhere, which are both real and 

important.48 The near-universal refocus in attention to minorities in other countries, however, indicates a similar focus in the societal narrative. Minorities were by and large interpreted 

to be Christians (Shiites were not considered a minority). Responses also deflected attention 

to the more important issue, in their opinion, which is fighting between Muslim sects, and 

suggested that more attention is given to attacks against Christians than deserved.

Students reiterated the theoretical textbook view that minorities have equal rights in 

Pakistan. Although a few did acknowledge the recent attacks on Christian churches and 

neighborhoods, many seemed entirely removed from the reality that these minorities are 

persecuted; the few who mentioned attacks were the more aware students, who followed 

the news closely.

Discussion and Recommendations

Pakistan’s current educational system does not equip students to counter the prevailing, 

problematic narratives in society and the media. It instead both creates and propagates 

narratives of its own. Without any ability to question and critique sources on their own, 

students use the framework the school system provides them to understand the world and 

to fill it in with the narratives surrounding them.

Respondents with more extreme attitudes on one dimension (such as terrorism) tend to 

have more extreme attitudes on other dimensions as well: views of America and India, views 

Without any ability to question 

and critique sources on their 

own, students use the framework 

the school system provides them 

to understand the world and 

to fill it in with the narratives 

surrounding them.
14 USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367

of minorities, and a cross-cutting belief in conspiracy theories. Students who believe that the 

Taliban are not responsible for terrorism, for example, and that the United States and India are 

responsible for such attacks are also more likely to have negative views of the West and India, 

and to believe that Muslim countries cannot be friends with non-Muslim countries.

Attitudes varied within schools. Some students appeared to be more sympathetic toward 

the Taliban than others, and some more radically anti-American than others. The most radical attitudes within a group seemed to arise from interactions outside the school, typically 

exposure to the radical materials of extremist groups in the home or in madrassas.

Peer influences are a reality: In focus group discussions, the students with more extreme 

views appeared to have a clear influence on the more tolerant students. The two radical students observed were loud and confident, and when they spoke their fellow students would 

listen to them. They spoke up more, had a clear narrative, and often invoked religion. In the 

Pakistani context, it is very difficult to speak up against an argument based on religion—the 

country’s current legal, institutional, social, and educational environment ensures that no 

one wants to be in that position.

Looking across schools, students from urban, male, and private schools were all more 

likely to offer more detailed descriptions of their views, but these views were no less 

extreme on average than those of students in rural, female, and government schools. This 

is likely because of greater exposure to and greater thought given to the media and societal 

narratives by these groups. On the other hand, in more remote areas without much media 

access, students seemed to have more of a tendency to regurgitate things heard somewhere 

in passing; among female students the trend was similar in government schools, where 

students have less access to the media and may also be less confident than their private 

school counterparts.

Differences in average attitudes or the spectrum of attitudes across the schools were not 

large, despite varied teacher training, teaching methods, teacher-student interactions, and 

student socioeconomic backgrounds. No student questions or contradicts what is learned 

in schools. For many views, we saw a direct correspondence between textbook content and 

what the students say, which then appears to be beefed up by societal and media narratives.

Textbooks and schools, by all these indicators, play a large role in forming and cementing views of India and Hindus. The textbooks outline the skeleton of perspectives on the 

United States, which the media and societal narratives then flesh out. On views on terrorism, 

a combination of societal narratives and the media, along with the influence of extremist 

organizations, helps form views and may predict radicalization. Indeed, for the origin of 

specific conspiracy theories that contribute to the current societal narrative about the Taliban and the United States, we need look no further than elements of the Pakistani state, 

politicians, and religious leaders. These groups often function as “conspiracy entrepreneurs,” 

creating and using these theories to divert attention from their internal failings and pin 

blame elsewhere.49 Pointing the finger at India also helps Pakistan’s military, whose power 

depends on sustaining the conflict with India. Of course, other conspiracy theories may arise 

spontaneously simply because they explain things that are otherwise difficult to understand, 

and the tendency to point fingers elsewhere rather than take the blame is a natural one.

Pakistanis are particularly susceptible to accepting conspiracy theories because they are 

never taught how to seek and evaluate information and evidence in school, making them 

dependent on the opinions of those in positions of authority—their teachers and textbooks 

at school, and the media, the state, and religious figures, all of whom propagate conspiracy 

theories—to form their views. Pakistani society and culture are also hierarchical, contributing to excessive emphasis on the views of authority figures. These theories then spread in 

“informational cascades,” in which individuals rely on the judgment of those they trust to 
USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367 15

form their opinions; for each successive individual, it becomes more difficult to oppose the 

theory because known and trusted people accept it.50 Conspiracy theories are hard to counter once they exist because attempts to rebut the theory can be explained as yet another 

ploy by the conspirators and can further legitimize it.

The aim of the education system should be to create tolerant and analytical “global” citizens.51 People, ordinary citizens, should be able to acquire and critically evaluate multiple 

sources of information on any issue and to reject false information and conspiracy theories. 

If it is to deliver on these goals, Pakistan needs another go at a systemic curriculum reform.

In light of the experience with the 2006 curriculum reform, doing so will not be easy. 

That curriculum development responsibilities have now been devolved to the provinces only 

makes the process more difficult. One way to go about it would be to follow the example 

of the federal textbooks in India. India overhauled its federal textbooks in the mid-2000s 

and chose a university professor, Krishna Kumar, to lead the effort. Their new textbooks for 

high schools “demonstrate how historians work, how they use sources and evidence, and 

why interpretations of the same event differ” and notably use this approach in discussing 

Partition.52 However, the state textbooks in India continue to be biased, which shows the 

difficulty with decentralized reform.53

It might be easiest to start at the federal government level in advocating for reform, 

and, once reform is agreed upon, to also have the federal government set a baseline level 

of guidelines for the new curriculum. The provinces could then be tasked with implementing the reform. The aim should be to follow an international-level curriculum that includes 

rigorous analysis and critical thinking.

For Pakistan studies specifically, well-respected scholars who have authored international scholarship on the topics should be consulted in devising the curriculum and in writing 

the texts. Removing negativity from textbooks is not enough. A full view of history needs 

to be provided to students, not simply a mention of selected facets of history that happen 

to fit into a certain narrative. Lessons on peace and tolerance and global citizenship need 

to be part of the Pakistan studies curriculum. Relatedly, students should actively discuss 

and debate current issues outside school. They should also be taught world history as a core 

requirement in high school.

High school students should ideally be presented with scholarship on any given topic in 

class and be allowed to debate its merits and be encouraged to seek out further unbiased 

and reputable research to understand more about an issue. Deemphasizing the matriculation exam and fostering classroom engagement is one way to encourage such exploration.

Any reform would of course also need to be accompanied by rigorous teacher training to 

ensure that the new materials get to the students. Teachers would essentially need to be 

reeducated twice—once to understand the materials themselves and again to teach in an 

entirely different way.

Such reform will take time to take effect, and results will be apparent only in the longer 

term. But reform should be pursued with urgency. Some changes that are easier to implement can begin immediately, and additional changes made incrementally.

Pakistan’s government should halt the circulation of terrorist narratives, from both 

mainstream media and the madrassas. It took a few major steps in this direction after the 

Peshawar attack by articulating the need for madrassa reform and asking media not to give 

terrorist statements any airtime. But militants (and conspiracy theorists) like Hafiz Saeed, 

who blamed the Peshawar attack on India, are still allowed to conduct large public rallies, 

and government security is provided for them.54 This certainly needs to end.
USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367 16

Notes

1. The study reported here did not focus on Pakistan’s parallel British-examination-based elite private schooling

system or on religious madrassas in the fieldwork. It was designed as an in-depth examination of the official

education system catering to the vast majority of the population. For a discussion of attitudes in public versus

elite private schools that follow the British curriculum and in madrassas, see Tariq Rahman, Denizens of Alien

Worlds: A Study of Education, Inequality and Polarization in Pakistan (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2004).

Rahman documents both more tolerant and less “militant” attitudes of students in the elite private schools

relative to government schools, and less tolerant and more militant attitudes of students in madrassas relative

to government schools.

2. Pew Research Center, “A Less Gloomy Mood in Pakistan,” August 2014, http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2014/08/

PG-2014-08-27_Pakistan-FINAL.pdf.

3. This poll was also undertaken before the Karachi airport attack in June 2014. Forty-two percent of respondents

reported unfavorable views of al-Qaeda and 59 percent of respondents reported unfavorable views of the Taliban;

more than 30 percent abstained from responding about each of these organizations.

4. Pew Research Center, ”A Less Gloomy Mood.”

5. Michael Barber, “The Good News from Pakistan,” Reform Research Trust, 2013, p. 33, http://www.reform.uk/

wp-content/uploads/2014/10/The_good_news_from_Pakistan_final.pdf.

6. For a good overview of this literature, see Alan Krueger, What Makes a Terrorist: Economics and the Roots of

Terrorism (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007).

7. Poor learning outcomes have been documented across developing countries: see Lant Pritchett, The Rebirth of

Education: Schooling Ain’t Learning (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2013). The Annual Status of

Education Report (ASER) documents learning outcomes across Pakistan. The Learning and Education Achievement 

in Punjab Schools (LEAPS) project has also documented poor learning in primary schools in Punjabi villages:

see Tahir Andrabi, Jishnu Das, Asim I. Khwaja, Tara Vishwanath, and Tristan Zajonc, Learning and Educational

Achievements in Punjab Schools (LEAPS): Insights to Inform the Education Policy Debate (Washington, DC: World

Bank, 2007). For a discussion of the argument that learning outcomes affect attitudes, see Rebecca Winthrop

and Corinne Graff, “Beyond Madrasas: Assessing the Links between Education and Militancy in Pakistan,” Center

for Universal Education Working Paper 2 (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2010).

8. Davide Cantoni, Yuyu Chen, David Yufan Yang, Noam Yuchtman, and Y. Jane Zhang, “Curriculum and Ideology,”

NBER Working Paper no. 20112 (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2014). For an overview

of the results, see VOX CEPR Policy Portal, May 2014, “Curriculum and Ideology,” http://www.voxeu.org/article/

curriculum-and-ideology.

9. See K. K. Aziz, The Murder of History: A Critique of History Textbooks Used in Pakistan (Lahore: Vanguard Press,

1993); A. H. Nayyar and Ahmed Salim, eds., The Subtle Subversion: The State of Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan

(Islamabad: Sustainable Development Policy Institute, 2003).

10. A. H. Nayyar, “A Missed Opportunity: Continuing Flaws in the New Curriculum and Textbooks After Reforms,” draft

report prepared for Jinnah Institute, Islamabad, June 2013.

11. In the most recent example of this, more than a thousand people in Kasur, Punjab, burned a Christian couple alive

in a brick kiln for allegedly desecrating pages of the Quran. See Afzal Ansari, “50 Villagers Held over Burning a

Christian Couple to Death,” DAWN, November 6, 2014, http://www.dawn.com/news/1142612.

12. Despite contentious content in the Urdu, Islamic studies (Islamiat), and English textbooks, a quick review of these

and attending classes in these subjects during the pilot indicated greater problematic content in the Pakistan

studies books.

13. Results available at Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, 2012, http://www.pbs.gov.pk/content/pakistan-social-andliving-standards-measurement-survey-pslm-2012-13-provincial-district. In terms of numbers, in the 2012–2013

school year, 2.9 million children were enrolled in secondary school (grades 9 and 10); the number in higher

secondary school (grades 11 and 12) was less than half that, at 1.4 million (Ministry of Finance, “Pakistan

Economic Survey 2013–2014,” Islamabad: Government of Pakistan, 2014).

14. We were mainly interested in the views of students but conducted teacher interviews to identify parallels in

thinking, which can be indicative of the influence of the teacher.

15. Bureau of Statistics, Punjab Development Statistics (Lahore: Government of the Punjab, 2013), http://www.bos.

gop.pk/?q=system/files/Dev-2013.pdf.

16. In Lahore, the twelve schools visited in the first phase of fieldwork were divided as follows: five government girls’

schools, four government boys’ schools, two private girls’ schools, and one private boys’ school. In Sheikhupura,

one government girls’ school, one government boys’ school, one private girls’ school, and one private boys’ school 

were chosen.

17. In boys’ government schools, the teachers are male; in the girls’ government schools, the teachers are female.

The teachers’ gender in private schools could be different from the students’ gender, but there are more female

teachers in boys’ private schools than male teachers in girls’ private schools.

18. Nadeem F. Paracha, “Rebooting the Idea of Pakistan,” DAWN, August 11, 2014, http://www.dawn.com/

news/1124097/nfp-rebooting-the-idea-of-pakistan.

19. Stephen Philip Cohen, The Idea of Pakistan (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2004), p. 171.

20. Pervez Hoodbhoy and A. H. Nayyar, “Rewriting the History of Pakistan,” in Islam, Politics, and the State, ed.

Asghar Khan (London: Zed Press, 1985).

21. Ibid.

22. In an interview with the chairman and senior staff at the Punjab Textbook Board in October 2013, it appeared

that the board was very unhappy with the paring down of its role given that it had subject specialists and

expertise. It considered the quality of the books written by private publishers to be deficient because of their lack 

of expertise and the incentives for corruption by the government in granting the contract, and profit maximization 

by the publisher in keeping costs, and therefore quality, low. On the other hand, officials at the Curriculum

Authority argued that the Punjab Textbook Board ran a monopoly and compromised quality.

23. Interview with the chairman and senior staff of the Punjab Curriculum Authority, Lahore, October 2013.
1 USIP.ORG • SPECIAL REPORT 367

24. Interview with Ameena Saiyid, managing director, Oxford University Press, Karachi; Madiha Afzal, “Pakistan’s

Failed Curriculum Reform,” Express Tribune, January 16, 2014.

25. Sadia Qasim Shah, “Verses on Jihad in Syllabus: KP to Rectify ‘Mistake,’” DAWN, August 17, 2013, http://www.

dawn.com/news/1036457/verses-on-jihad-in-syllabus-kp-to-rectify-mistake.

26. Pakistan Studies for Secondary Classes, Class IX–X, Punjab Textbook Board, Lahore, 2002, p. 10.

27. Pakistan Studies, Class 9, G.F.H. Publishers, Lahore, 2013.

28. Ibid., p. 126.

29. Pakistan Studies, Class IX–X, pp. 43, 55.

30. Pakistan Studies for Classes IX–X, Sindh Textbook Board, Jamshoro, 2013, p. 15.

31. Pakistan Studies, Class 9, p. 126.

32. Ibid., p. 127.

33. Pakistan Studies, Class 10, Gohar Publishers, Lahore, 2013, p. 42.

34. Pakistan Studies, Class IX–X, p. 244.

35. Pakistan Studies, Class 10, p. 30.

36. Pakistan Studies for Grade IX, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Textbook Board, Peshawar, 2013, p. 88.

37. Pakistan Studies, Class IX–X, p. 244.

38. Ibid., p. 262.

39. Pakistan Studies, Class 10, p. 42.

40. Ibid., p. 49.

41. Some interviewed teachers expressed confusion about the required medium for instruction for Pakistan studies.

Apparently the government had recently mandated that it be English but had changed the requirement back to

letting the school choose.

42. In fact, classes could not be observed in all schools because the students were having exams at various different

points throughout the year, but both grade 9 and grade 10 classes were attended in a large majority of schools

visited.

43. The effect of the media on attitudes has been documented in the literature. As an example, see Matthew

Gentzkow and Jesse Shapiro, “Media, Education and Anti-Americanism in the Muslim World,” Journal of Economic

Perspectives 18, no. 3 (2004): 117–33. 

44. The assassin of Punjab’s governor Salman Taseer was a member of this organization and adopted Qadri’s name

as his own.

45. For a related study in Pakistan that sees similarities in teacher and student attitudes, see Azhar Hussain, Ahmad

Salim, and Arif Naveed, Connecting the Dots: Education and Religious Discrimination in Pakistan: A Study of Public

Schools and Madrassas (Washington: U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2011), http://www.

uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/resources/Pakistan-ConnectingTheDots-Email(3).pdf.

46. Initial attention after the OBL raid was focused on the Pakistani military’s incompetence or complicity in hiding

bin Laden (see Jane Perlez, “Pakistani Army, Shaken by Raid, Faces New Scrutiny,” New York Times, May 4,

2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/world/asia/05pakistan.html). Within a few days, Pakistan’s army

chief forcefully shifted the discussion to a violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty (see Jane Perlez, “Pakistan’s Army

Chief Warns U.S. on Another Raid,” New York Times, May 6, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/world/

asia/06react.html).

47. For a discussion of some common conspiracy theories, see Robert Mackey, “A Grand Conspiracy Theory from

Pakistan,” New York Times Lede Blog, May 12, 2009, http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/a-grandconspiracy-theory-from-pakistan/.

48. See Sumbul Ali-Karamali, “American Muslims Live in Fear 11 Years after 9/11,” CNN Opinion, September 11, 2012,

http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/11/opinion-american-muslims-live-in-fear-11-years-after-911/.

49. For the origin of the term “conspiracy entrepreneurs”, see Cass R. Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule, “Conspiracy

Theories,” Harvard Public Law Working Paper no. 08-03, January 15, 2008, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.

cfm?abstract_id=1084585. The authors set up a useful generic framework for thinking about conspiracy theories.

50. Ibid.

51. See Education Above All (Doha, Qatar: Education for Global Citizenship, July 2012), http://www.ineesite.org/

uploads/files/resources/EAA_Education_for_Global_Citizenship.pdf.

52. Krishna Kumar, “Textbooks: India Is Ahead in Text Reform,” India Today, August 11, 2012, http://indiatoday.

intoday.in/story/krishna-kumar-india-is-ahead-in-text-reform-than-pakistan/1/212827.html. See also Madiha

Afzal, “The Emergency in Pakistan’s Schools,” Express Tribune, October 24, 2013, http://tribune.com.pk/

story/621513/the-emergency-in-pakistans-schools/.

53. Editorial, “False Teachings for India’s Students,” New York Times, October 9, 2014, http://www.nytimes.

com/2014/10/09/opinion/false-teachings-for-indias-students.html?smid=tw-share.

54. See “Hafiz Saeed, Musharraf Blame India for Peshawar Carnage,” Times of India, December 17, 2014,

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Hafiz-Saeed-Musharraf-blame-India-for-Peshawar-carnage/

articleshow/45554131.cms; Syed Shoaib Hasan, “Head of Group Linked to 2008 Mumbai Attacks Speaks at

Pakistan Rally,” Wall Street Journal, January 27, 2015, http://www.wsj.com/articles/head-of-group-linked-to2008-mumbai-attacks-speaks-at-pakistan-rally-1422207886.
ISBN: 978-1-60127-293-5

An online edition of this and related 

reports can be found on our website 

(www.usip.org), together with additional 

information on the subject.

United States 

Institute of Peace

2301 Constitution Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20037

www.usip.org

@usip

Of Related Interest

• Conflict Dynamics in Sindh by Huma Yusuf and Syed Shoaib Hasan (Peaceworks, January 2015)

• Religious Authority and the Promotion of Sectarian Tolerance in Pakistan by Michael Kalin and 

Niloufer Siddiqui (Special Report, October 2014)

• Youth Radicalization in Pakistan by Raheem ul Haque (Peace Brief, February 2014)

• Mapping Conflict Trends in Pakistan by Saira Yamin and Salma Malik (Peaceworks, February 2014)

• Pakistan and the Narratives of Extremism by Amil Khan (Special Report, March 2013)

• Conflict Dynamics in Karachi by Huma Yusuf (Peaceworks, October 2012)