Recently, Sindh Education Minister Syed Sardar Shah announced in a meeting at the Sindh Textbook Board in Jamshoro that the curriculum will be reviewed before the next academic year to eliminate the hateful content that it contains. However, the curriculum currently taught in schools and colleges across Pakistan, particularly the one introduced during General Zia-ul-Haq's regime, faces considerable criticism for its detachment from reality. KK Aziz's book The Murder of History is a significant critique of the distorted historical narrative presented in these textbooks.
Prominent educator Prof Pervez Hoodbhoy has also been vocal in opposing the curriculum founded on falsehoods and hate. In light of this, it is crucial to examine why such a curriculum is created and implemented only to be later criticised. A primary reason is that powerful circles fear the truth, often propagating a specific narrative that aligns with their interests. Moreover, many of those involved in writing and approving the curriculum lack the necessary academic credibility, frequently distorting truths to uphold personal or group agendas.
The curriculum taught in Pakistan contains various issues, including a distortion of history and a portrayal of women as weak from a gender perspective. There is an urgent need for reform in this area. In this article, I will provide a critical review of the syllabus for Pakistan Studies and Social Studies as presented by the Sindh Textbook Board.
In the Pakistan Studies and Social Studies curriculum used across the country, the origins of Pakistan are traced back to 712 AD, when Muhammad bin Qasim arrived in Sindh, leading to the region being referred to as "Bab-ul-Islam." Additionally, in the eighth-grade social studies textbook published by the Sindh Textbook Board, page 95 of the section titled "Ideology of Pakistan" states, "Sir Syed Ahmed Khan presented the Ideology of Pakistan for the first time due to the biased attitude of the Hindus."
It is important to understand that during Sir Syed's time, there was no country known as Pakistan, even in his imagination. However, if we adhere to the prevailing state narrative, which claims that Pakistan was founded on the principles of the Two-Nation Theory and that Sir Syed was its originator, then he is often regarded as a key figure in the conceptualisation of Pakistan. Nevertheless, to suggest that Sir Syed Ahmad Khan's actions were driven solely by "Hindu discrimination" implies that all Hindus are unjustly grouped together and held accountable for the mistreatment of Muslims. This raises a poignant question about the thoughts and feelings of Hindu children attending schools in Sindh as they encounter such narratives.
A textbook presents the contributions of each province to the Pakistan movement separately, with Punjab receiving considerable acclaim for its pivotal role. However, this portrayal oversimplifies reality, as the foundation of Pakistan was laid by the Lahore Resolution proposed by AK Fazlul Huq, a Bengali leader
Additionally, the text states, "The present behaviour of Indian Hindus is similar to that which they exhibited one hundred and fifty years ago." This assertion once again generalises the actions of all Indian Hindus, rather than specifically addressing the RSS, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) or the government of Modi. Consequently, it paints all Indians as perpetrators in the eyes of Sindh’s students.
There exists a significant number of progressive individuals in India who consistently raise their voices against the mistreatment of Muslims by the BJP government. However, this book depicts them in a singularly negative light.
In examining the Class 10 Pakistan Studies textbook, one can observe that while it includes various speeches and statements from Jinnah, it notably omits his speech from 11 August 1947, in which he envisioned a country free from discrimination and hatred based on religion. This omission can be attributed to the longstanding rejection of a peaceful and progressive society by the influential circles within the state, resulting in Jinnah's crucial message being excluded from the curriculum.
Furthermore, the textbook presents the contributions of each province to the Pakistan movement separately, with Punjab receiving considerable acclaim for its pivotal role. However, this portrayal oversimplifies reality, as the foundation of Pakistan was laid by the Lahore Resolution of March 23, 1940, proposed by AK Fazlul Huq, a Bengali leader. It is perplexing, therefore, that the book disregarded Bengal's significant contribution to the creation of Pakistan.
The role of Sindh in the creation of Pakistan has been explored, yet the Sindh Assembly's resolution in support of Pakistan in 1943—being the first Constituent Assembly to do so—is not acknowledged in the discourse. One possible reason for this omission could be the lack of inclusion of Mr. G.M. Syed in the curriculum. Just as the 1940 resolution is referenced in the literature without recognising the contributions of Bengal, it would have been appropriate at least to mention the resolution passed by the Sindh Constituent Assembly without focusing solely on G.M. Syed's role in it.
Moreover, there is an amusing misrepresentation of history regarding the inclusion of Balochistan in Pakistan. On page 31 of the book, it states that “in 1947, the Shahi Jirga of Balochistan decided to join Pakistan," which is used as a basis for discussing Balochistan's inclusion. However, the Shahi Jirga did not hold any legitimate status or validation from the Baloch people. At that time, the Khan of Kalat State held authority, and his consent to join Pakistan—along with the subsequent opposition from his younger brother, Prince Abdul Karim—represents a crucial chapter in Pakistan's true history.
The Shahi Jirga mentioned in the Sindh Textbook Board's book is officially acknowledged by the government of Balochistan on its website as lacking any formal status. It further clarifies that there are alternative narratives regarding Balochistan's inclusion in Pakistan that are stronger than the state's official narrative. A similar oversight is noted concerning Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's accession to Pakistan, as highlighted on page 32 of the book, which fails to mention the referendum that facilitated the then NWFP province's integration into Pakistan. Additionally, in addressing the separation of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), rather than acknowledging past mistakes to help students understand that wrong actions are inherently wrong, the Pakistan Studies book places blame on India and the Bengalis. For instance, pages 44 and 45 of the class 10 Pakistan Studies book assert that Bengali Hindus were Indian spies and that Pakistani authorities were making earnest efforts to resolve the conflict between East and West Pakistan. The text claims that progress was imminent until India launched an attack on East Pakistan, hindering any resolution. Moreover, the book also implicates Russia and even the United States in the formation of Bangladesh.
In the current scenario, it is important to recognise that Sindh is perceived as a progressive society within the broader context of the country, which holds true in various respects. However, credit must also be extended to Punjab, particularly for its revisions to the curriculum in 2017, which successfully removed hateful content and established the foundation of Pakistan as arising in 1947 rather than 712 AD. Additionally, the inclusion of Jinnah's missing speech from August 11 in the curriculum, along with an acknowledgement of the shortcomings of Muslim rulers following the prolonged period of Muslim rule in India, is commendable.
In contrast, the Sindh Textbook Board still has considerable progress to make. Nevertheless, it is encouraging to note that although the curriculum depicts Muhammad bin Qasim as a hero and Raja Dahar as a villain, there is a prevailing sentiment among the Sindhi society that contradicts this portrayal. Today, many people view Raja Dahar as a hero, a shift credited to the progressive political parties of Sindh and the influence of intelligentsia.
In the wake of the 18th Amendment, education has transitioned from a federal to a provincial responsibility, a change that has notably benefited the Sindh government. This shift allowed Sindh to reject the Single National Curriculum, despite significant pressure from various influential groups during Imran Khan's administration. In line with this context, the current education minister's call to revise the curriculum should be actively implemented.
To achieve this, it is crucial to include subject-matter experts in the curriculum development committee, ensuring that those involved possess a deep understanding of the relevant fields. Furthermore, the leadership and membership of this committee must embody progressive thinking.
The design of the curriculum is critical, as it significantly shapes the mindset of our children. Pakistan currently faces challenges such as religious extremism and terrorism, alongside a burgeoning youth population and rapid population growth. Thus, it is imperative to consider the measures we can take for both our present and future generations.
Engaging the people of Sindh is a vital step in addressing this important issue. Proposals should be solicited from academicians, writers, and representatives of civil society, particularly through meetings at the government level. Additionally, public input should be gathered via print, electronic, and social media platforms. Following this outreach, a committee comprised of prominent individuals from Sindh, including government officials and educational experts, should finalise recommendations. These recommendations would form the foundation for developing a new and improved curriculum.