As far as the first point is concerned, the research has concluded that the national stereotypes in the Balkans share certain constants, and essentially all that changes is the name of the 'other' to which they are applied. In most cases, each nation-state presents its own members as a 'chosen people', heroes or victims in relation to the 'other'. Also, references to minorities are comparatively fewer than references to neighboring nations. The second point is not unconnected with the first, for it is the existence of national stereotypes that has led to the writing of a history that consists of conflicts and wars. Wars and battles dominate most of the school textbooks, and exaggerated emphasis is given to them.
War is presented as a heroic epic, cosmeticized, and held up as a means of gaining liberation.
The damage done by military campaigns is not adequately discussed, nor is there any mention of how ordinary people view the role of war. This overemphasis on war keeps nationalist sentiments alive and perpetuates the political tensions in the region. All the speakers stressed the need to find solutions that will help to defuse the tensions created and sustained by the school textbooks. The reason for this was that the political climate in the Balkans in the last decade has been such that the professional integrity of both historians and teachers has been severely tested. The Bosnian delegate, for instance, pointed out that it is just as impossible for historians and teachers to respond to a 'Pedagogy of Peace' as it is for schoolchildren to accept a different perception of Serbs, Croats, and Moslems.