The Essence of Critical Inquiry into the Political History of Education in Afghanistan
One of the significant challenges in the political history of education in Afghanistan is the shortcomings of current literature. Research into the dynamics influencing educational politics and policy has often been marginalized, typically treated as a minor aspect with insufficient analytical depth. Even among a few dedicated authors, the emphasis has largely been on the timeline of educational development, providing a descriptive overview of events rather than examining the underlying factors that have influenced them. As a result, critical elements—such as the impact of religion, tribalism, and external interventions, including colonial influences—have been largely overlooked in discussions about the politicization of education and the construction of policy narratives.
This oversight has simplified the study of Afghan education, detaching it from its complex relationship with politics. The intersection of educational politics and policy—especially as shaped by evolving narratives—remains a largely unexplored area. Where such research has occurred, it often suffers from oversimplification, leading to conceptual misunderstandings and analytical misinterpretations. These scholarly gaps have had lasting effects, contributing to ongoing challenges within Afghanistan’s educational policy landscape, the repercussions of which are still felt today.
Many Afghan scholars have approached the history of education with noticeable bias, influenced by their connections to and involvement with the political regimes of their time. Their works often exhibit partisanship, praising governmental policies while rationalizing shortcomings and engaging in critical analysis only through justifications. For example, Zohir & Elmi (1960), professors at Kabul University with access to intellectual resources, failed to adopt a critical perspective in their History of Education in Afghanistan, leaving key questions unanswered. Others, even without a direct link to a regime, followed suit, echoing scholars like Rafi (1988), Kamgar (1998), and Samady (2001). While their works are valuable for documenting the chronological development of modern education, they often marginalize or overlook critical discussions of the structural and political dynamics that have influenced Afghanistan’s educational path. It is these dynamics—religion, tribal structures, state power, and external interventions—that are essential to any serious examination of the history of modern education in Afghanistan.
A clear example of this issue can be seen in the policies of Amir Abdur Rahman Khan (r. 1880–1901). Unlike his predecessor, Amir Sher Ali Khan (r. 1863–1866; 1868–1879), who made efforts to introduce modern education and invited foreign instructors to Afghanistan, Abdur Rahman not only failed to build on these initiatives but also showed open hostility toward the expansion of modern public education. His approach was contradictory; while he restricted access to modern education for the general population, he simultaneously supported and facilitated such opportunities for his own family, the children of his advisors and senior officials, and members of the ruling elite. This selective patronage often took the form of private tutoring or arrangements for training abroad, highlighting the exclusivity of educational advancement during his rule and reinforcing the existing social and political hierarchies of the time.
The inconsistency between policy and practice warrants objective examination and thorough analysis. Unfortunately, it has often been justified by the claim that the Amir was focused on national unification and did not have the time to prioritize modern education. This oversimplification does not stand up to scholarly scrutiny and leaves significant questions unanswered. Scholars should have directly addressed this issue and investigated the critical question: why, during a period when Muslim-majority countries like Turkey and Egypt were advancing public education and incorporating modern methods into traditional systems—particularly in the latter half of the nineteenth century— did Abdur Rahman reverse the modernization efforts of his predecessor, hinder the expansion of public education, and foster an anti-modern education narrative in Afghanistan?
This failure of leadership is often justified by some Afghan scholars as an unfortunate but understandable outcome of the Amir’s busy reign—marked by internal revolts and the challenge of consolidating state power. They argue that the Amir was too preoccupied with quelling uprisings, such as the Hazara uprisings (1891–1893), and other ethnic resistance, to focus on developing a modern educational infrastructure. While these incidents were real, such justifications overlook the deeper ideological resistance embedded in his policies and fail to hold the leadership accountable for missing a historic opportunity.
This kind of biased reasoning reflects an intellectual reliance on the dominant formal narratives of the time. The resulting flaw in analysis has led to a body of affirmative literature produced by some scholars that has contributed to Afghans losing touch with the critical threads of their own educational history.
To be fair, this lack of critical literature is understandable to a degree. Many theses and manuscripts were developed during the 20th century under significant constraints on academic freedom—whether during the period of monarchic censorship under King Zahir Shah — except for some freedom during the decade of democracy (1963-1973) — or throughout the ideologically charged environment of the communist regimes (1978–1992) and the violent civil war that followed (1992–2001). Dissent was not only discouraged but often silenced altogether.
However, acknowledging these limitations should not translate into accepting flawed literature as a reliable foundation for public knowledge, political discourse, or policymaking. On the contrary, it is precisely because of these constraints that we must revisit such works with a critical and analytical lens. If we fail to do so, we risk perpetuating historical inaccuracies and misdirection—as is already evident today.
Shifting our focus from Afghan scholars to those from abroad, another category emerges: foreign scholars from various regions of the world. Many of these scholars have made important contributions by incorporating critical methodologies and analytical frameworks into their studies—often elevating the scholarly value of their work compared to that of some Afghan authors. For instance, historians such as Louis Dupree have offered deep archival insights and institutional critiques, which stand as exemplary models of scholarly inquiry.
Nevertheless, not all foreign scholars have attained the same level of depth and contextual understanding. Unlike Louis Dupree—who worked extensively in Afghanistan and cultivated a nuanced grasp of its cultural and institutional fabric—many external researchers exhibit shortcomings comparable to those found in the work of local scholars. Chief among these is an overreliance on official state records, the perspectives of court-linked elites, and secondary literature lacking scholarly rigor. Such limitations diminish the analytical quality of their work and undermine efforts to produce truly critical, context-sensitive scholarship.
Another criticism is the insufficient engagement with the concept of educational equality—namely, the right to equal access and opportunities in education for all. While it is understandable that some research may not focus primarily on gender or educational equality, any serious assessment of the educational system's overall condition and political dynamics must treat educational equality with appropriate attention, even if not in great depth. As a foundational and cross-cutting theme, it is essential to include this dimension to fully understand the structural barriers and ideological forces that have shaped Afghanistan's educational landscape.
Today, more than at any previous moment in Afghanistan’s history, there is an urgent need for impartial, interdisciplinary, and critically grounded inquiry into the political history of education. The stakes are profound, and the moment is decisive.
Afghans now stand at a crossroads. They must choose whether to continue accepting the constructed narrative—with all of the flaws discussed above—and maintain the prevailing understanding of educational politics, or to adopt a new, evidence-based lens that seeks to uncover a fuller truth. This new approach must be founded on scientific methods, critical theory, and a strong commitment to scholarly independence. Such a shift would greatly deepen Afghans' understanding of the roots and trajectory of modern education in their country.
A critical inquiry of this nature would illuminate the role education has played in Afghanistan—both as a tool of progress and as a target of opposition. It would unpack the ideological foundations of resistance to education, and explore why rulers failed to establish an inclusive system of modern learning. Why did Afghanistan experience more than half a century of delay in establishing modern education, especially when countries like Egypt, Iran, and the Ottoman Empire had initiated reforms in the 1860s and 1870s? Why did the expansion of education remain so slow and exclusionary? And what explains the continued resistance to educational equality, particularly for girls?
Who were the people behind this resistance? What were their hidden agendas? Why does this resistance persist today, particularly against modern and inclusive education? These and other pressing questions merit serious, cross-disciplinary investigation. Not to reopen wounds in a society already fractured by decades of authoritarianism, conflict, and structural suppression, but to build a common understanding of the past as a foundation for designing a more equitable and unified future.
All of these questions will remain unanswered unless the inquiry itself meets the essential criteria of impartiality, critical rigor, and scientific integrity. Without such a commitment, we risk not only misunderstanding the past, but also compromising the future of education in Afghanistan.
References
Kamgar, J. al-R. (1998). Tārīkh-i maʿārif-i Afghānestān (1747–1992) [تاریخ معارف افغانستان (١٧٤٧–١٩٩٢)]. Peshawar: Saba Library, Markaz-i Nashrāti-yi Miyund.
Samady, S. R. (2001). Education and Afghan society in the twentieth century (ED.2001/WS/41). UNESCO.
Rafi, H. (1988). The emergence and development of modern education in Afghanistan [په افغانستان کې د عصري بڼو زېږېدنې او روزنې پیل او پرمختیا]. Peshawar: Center for Afghanistan Studies.
Zohir, P. M., & Elmi, S. M. Y. (1960). History of education in Afghanistan [د افغانستان د معارف تاریخ]. Kabul: Ministry of Education.