Conflict, Education, and Development: Perspectives from Afghanistan

Reza Ehsan, PhD candidate, South Asian University

 Afghanistan has endured more than five decades of war and conflict, and the repercussions of war can be felt across every facet of society, particularly in the realm of education and development. When I refer to development, I am not solely addressing economic development but development in a broader sense. The development process either stagnated or slowed down due to the prolonged conflicts.

Conflict, education, and development are intertwined and interlinked. The connection is strong yet not overly complicated to comprehend. There is a profound connection between conflict and the ability of a society to provide quality education, and low-quality education can be one of many root causes of conflict. As far as development is concerned, education serves as the cornerstone. A robust connection exists between education and health, education and human capital development, education and economic growth, and so forth.

For example, focusing solely on economic development or growth, one can argue that education imparts individual knowledge and skills, preparing individuals for the workforce and enabling them to adapt to new technologies and industries. Education can impact economic growth through increased productivity, fostering innovation and creativity, promoting entrepreneurship and self-employment, and improving governance, among other factors. However, the impact depends on the type of education received or provided by society. This area might be familiar to you, but I wish to discuss it from Afghanistan's perspective.

The type of education matters. Is it a traditional, old education system or religious, liberal, secular, or critical education? When discussing education, it is crucial to recognize that education and the institutions providing it are not neutral. Michel Foucault argues that knowledge or education is not neutral; it has a relationship with power, and power dictates the terms of knowledge production. In other words, power produces knowledge, shaping discourses, instruments, and tools for knowledge production, ultimately influencing the ideas and mindsets of people. Other intellectuals, such as Paulo Freire and Noam Chomsky, have emphasized the impact of educational systems and pedagogies on individuals. Paulo Frair argues that traditional/uncritical education is oppressive. Uncritical education perpetuates some of the social inequalities and marginalizes certain groups and classes of people. He emphasized the importance of critical education and critical thinking. The relationship between teacher and student should be a relationship between equals, and it should be democratic.

Further, Noam Chomsky argues that present traditional education trains individuals to be conformist and obedient; it teaches individuals not to think critically. He says that the goal of education should be to produce human beings whose values are not the accumulation of domination but free associations on equal terms. Education must teach students critical thinking skills, he adds.

Considering what Foucault, Paulo Freire, and Noam Chomsky have stated about power dynamics, knowledge creation, critical education, and more, I want to delve into Nationalistic Education in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan has undergone numerous regime changes over the past 5-6 decades, each bringing a different education system. We transitioned from a traditional education system to a communist one, followed by religious education and eventually a semi-liberal post-2001 education. Religious education, in particular, tends to promote a single narrative without encouraging critical thinking. In religious education, you don't think critically. For example, if you are talking about communism, you don't discuss ideas and theories; you say that communism is equal to atheism and atheism is evil.

Similarly, the communist regime had its textbooks promoting leftist theories. Post-2001, the education system became more nationalistic, as noted by Yahia Biaza, an intellectual from Afghanistan. High school history books propagated a nationalistic narrative, often rooted in ethnonationalism, presenting a biased view of kings and elites as heroes while ignoring their cruelties and oppression. This one-sided narrative has contributed to conflicts in the past century. Our high school history books indoctrinate students to learn the state's nationalistic narrative. It does not talk about the cruelties and oppression of kings and rulers. Post-2001, the education system became even more nationalistic. History books do not talk about the mass killing and brutalities of King Abdur Rahman in the 1890s. They only say King Abdur Rahman did everything and used any means to strengthen his government. It does not talk about the Genocide of Hazaras and other ethnic groups in the hands of Abdul Rahman. Part of our conflict in the past century has been because of these kinds of narratives. The religious rulers portrayed their opponents in their school and Madrassa texts as infidels and evils, and the communist regimes tried to do the same to religious groups. The nationalistic textbooks and history books have been denying the pain and suffering of different and diverse ethnic groups and have been pushing for one narrative. Critical thinking and critical education have been missing from our state textbooks and curricula.

Currently, as of post-15 August 2021, the educational system has transitioned towards religious education. Opportunities for education and employment have been restricted for women. The de facto government is changing the curricula and making them “Islamic,” causing challenges for women and girls who are experiencing difficulties in accessing educational and work opportunities.

Post-2001 changes in Afghanistan brought some positive aspects to the education sector, such as the emergence of private education. During this period, hundreds of private high schools and universities emerged. Unlike public schools, private educational institutions did not strictly adhere to the state's narrative. However, the nationalistic tilt persisted in public schools, where history books glorified historical figures involved in invasions. This nationalistic education fuelled a sense of pride and nationalism among students but also created a stark contrast with perspectives in other countries. I did my schooling at a public high school; we were taught in history books that Mohammad Ghori and Ahmad Shah Durrani were our heroes. They attacked India several times, captured lands, and took millions worth of wealth as war bounty. However, when I came to India for my undergraduate degree, in my discussion with classmates and friends, I understood that people here have the opposite feelings about them. Those people invaded India and killed people.

Critical education and exposure to different worldviews are crucial for a better understanding of the world. Higher education in a foreign country is one effective way to achieve this. Scholarship programs, exchange programs, and self-financed education in different countries offer numerous benefits, including building a global network, fostering mutual understanding, exposing students to diverse learning systems, expanding employment opportunities, language acquisition, adaptability, and cultural learning.

Returning to the main topic, I argue that our uncritical educational system is one of the biggest reasons for our conflicts and static situation. Lacking robust curriculums and qualified educators and embracing traditional, religious, and nationalistic education have contributed to conflict, impacting our development process. We need critical education, compassionate educators, and exposure to different educational systems and global cultures.

 

Need to revive civil activism in Afghanistan

By Bipin Ghimire & Reza Ehsan

Published at: South Asia Monitor

In a country devastated by wars and lacking national cohesion, Afghan civil activists have consistently been in a state of alert to the unwanted and catastrophic events. Fuelled by aid from international donors, civil activism in Afghanistan has had steady growth over the last decade during the involvement of the US and its allies with the country.  

Civil activism in Afghanistan reached its peak in the last two years but failed to earn any positive response from the government -- and accelerated by the direct attacks of insurgent groups on the activists, it seems that civil activism in the conflict-ridden nation is declining. An unprecedented democratic achievement is facing a tragic death. 

On November 11, 2015, a mass of peaceful protestors surrounded the Presidential Palace in Kabul demanding justice in the case of beheadings of seven members of the Hazara community, including a seven-year-old girl, on the Kabul-Qandahar highway.  

There was another round of protests -- organised by the same activists -- on May 16, 2016, against the re-routing of a power line project which was originally set to pass through the Bamyan province (a Hazara-dominated province) of central Afghanistan. However, the government apparently abandoned the previous plan and decided to proceed through Salang pass, a new route. The protestors were accusing the government of systematic discrimination against ethnic Hazaras who predominantly inhabit the central provinces of Afghanistan. 

A couple of months later, on July 22, 2016, two explosions took place among the protestors during their second round of protests, which resulted in 80 casualties and left more than 231 injured. These protests became famous as 'The Enlightenment movement'. After this explosion, the movement did not launch any further protests fearing attacks.  

Hitherto, the social movements in Afghanistan have not been able to earn governments concessions. This situation has raised two questions -- whether the civil movements are failing or does the government intend to get rid of civil activism. 

The Afghan government has shown token acceptance of civil activism and democratic movements, merely to attract aid and assistance from the liberal world, particularly from the US. There are two reasons behind it -- the totalitarian tradition of governance, which still casts its shadow over the conduct of the post-2001 bureaucrats and the over-concentration on security politics. 

The post-2001 government in Afghanistan is old wine in a new bottle which replicates the 1970s bureaucratic settings. The same bureaucrats from 1970s-1980s totalitarian governments were recalled on the onset of Hamid Karzai's administration. Not used to the democratic ways of governance, the Afghan officials lack both accountability and transparency to the public or civil activists.  

This lack of democratic accountability is backed by the high political prioritisation on security issues. Such an over-focus on high politics have led to not only the official corps inherited from 1980s but also the President, a former World Bank official, turning a blind eye to non-security issues. 

Incumbent President Ashraf Ghani, in one of his speeches to military officials, satirically criticised the media saying "winds come out of TV channels, we count on you; bombs come out of you". Many media activists interpreted his words as not being sensitive to the media and popular opinion. 

The decline of civil activism may allow the Afghan state to carry on with its priorities without civil griping in its ears. However, overwhelmed with its undemocratic bureaucratic background and its traditional governmental setup in place, it is prone to authoritarian rule.

The presence of the international community in the country since 2001 assisted civil activists to create an internal self-re-correcting mechanism within the Afghan society which constantly undercuts governmental aspirations for totalitarian behaviours. 

To rescue the Afghan civil activists, firstly, the Afghan government needs to create a safe environment for their activities with specific protective measures to secure them against attacks by terrorists and insurgents. Secondly, the government should respond positively to their demands to keep civil movements alive which in turn, encourages the armed opposition to seek their political demands through civil activism. 

(Bipin Ghimire is a Doctoral fellow (International Relations) at the New Delhi-based South Asian University. Reza Ehsan is pursuing MA in development economics at the same institution. Comments and suggestions on this article can be sent to editor@spsindia.in)