It is strange how a quite random choice of reading material can resonate with other ideas you may be pursuing. At Bangalore Airport about three weeks ago, I was looking for something to read on the long journey home. I’d just finished the long ‘Mountain Shadow’ sequel Shantaram – the story of a life in Bombay’s slums and mafia life in the city. I wanted some thing a little lighter and perhaps shorter. I chanced upon ‘ Return of a King’ by William Dalrymple.

You probably think this must be something to do with the Lord of the Rings. I did! But no, this is about the struggle to govern Afghanistan in the 19th century. So not a lighter nor a shorter read then. But the reviews were so compelling, it found itself into the hand baggage. So why does it resonate with my other thoughts.

I’ve been thinking about the much ‘hackneyed’ phrase, ‘Education for 21st Century’ . What can this mean? I’d been re-reading Manifesto 15- a document produced at the start of this year and validated by many senior educational thinkers. It’s summarised in this image.

It’s the first point that the book made me think about. In detail it says:

“The future is already here – it’s just not very evenly distributed” (William Gibson in Gladstone, 1999). The field of education lags considerably behind most other industries largely from our tendency to look backward, but not forward. We teach the history of literature, for example, but not the future of writing. We teach historically important mathematical concepts, but do not engage in creating new maths needed to build the future. Moreover, everything “revolutionary” taking place in learning has already happened at different scales, in bits and pieces, at different places. The full impacts for ourselves and our organizations will be realized when we develop the courage to learn from each others’ experiences, and accept the risk and responsibility in applying a futures orientation in our praxis.”

So back to Afghanistan and the Return of a King. The Telegraph review sets the scene for the book.

“In April 1839 Britain invaded Afghanistan for the first time. When the British Army left in 1842, after first suffering and then avenging its worst military disaster of the 19th century, a contemporary wrote that it was “a war begun for no wise purpose… Not one benefit, political or military, has been acquired with this war. Our eventual evacuation of the country resembled the retreat of an army defeated.”
Britain had first cast a fearful eye towards Afghanistan when Napoleon threatened to cross Persia and descend through the Khyber Pass on British India, where vast, tenuously held territories had recently been conquered by the East India Company. Then the rapidly lengthening shadow of Tsarist Russia on the map of Central Asia caused the same terror among policymakers in London and Calcutta.
In 1838, a cabal of hawkish political officers managed to persuade Lord Auckland, the dilettante governor-general of India, to invade Afghanistan to replace the popular ruler, Dost Mohammed, who was allegedly leaning towards the Russians, with the luckless then-exiled Shah Shuja – the king of the book’s title. This flew in the face of advice from Alexander Burnes, the young and celebrated player of the Great Game, who unlike the hawks had travelled extensively in Afghanistan and knew the political landscape at first hand.”

This book was so well written that each chapter urged you onto the next like a thriller. Yet this is a very well researched and referenced history book. It was very disturbing reading and you cannot follow it without thinking of the present Afghanistan and the growth and impact of ISIS.

So in reading it  my reflections were:

• The British journey into Afghanistan in the 1830s was managed and directed by leaders who knew nothing about the local cultures, political make-up and even the basic geography of the country. Actually it based all its decisions on incorrect information about the intentions of  the Russians and the French and more ridiculously of those Afghani leaders who wanted to be British allies.
• Those who knew the country and its leaders and tribal factions were ignored because they were not regarded as senior enough or sufficiently establishment. As the battles proceeded the best leaders and soldiers were overlooked in favour  of position and order. With fatal consequences. The incompetence was astounding
• Local culture amongst the Afghan community was regularly offended by the actions of British soldiers and officers.
• There has been hardly any time in the past when Afghanistan has been really united as one county and one leader. We might call them warlords or tribal leaders, but our view of it as a country is oversimplified.
• One can only be appalled by the cruelty that the warlords dealt with their enemies, but this was equally met by the horrific response from the British.

It is very difficult to be proud of being British when you read such a book and look at the excesses of imperial power. And for what? After the slaughter of Afghans and British, after the cost that nearly broke the Treasury in India, and after the razed earth policy by the British as they left, the leader who they sought to remove, returned and we left.

You have to read this to understand the horror and intrigue.

You should read it so you can reflect on what is happening now both in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East. In his final notes, Dalrymple wrote…

“History never repeats itself exactly, and it is true that there are some important differences between what is happening in Afghanistan today and what took place in the 1840s…..

Nevertheless due to the continuities of the region’s topography, economy, religious aspirations and social fabric, the failures of 170 years ago still do have important warnings for us today. It is still not too late to learn from some of the mistakes of the British in 1942. Otherwise the West’s fourth war in the country looks certain to end with as few political gains as the first three, and like them end in an embarrassing withdrawal after a humiliating retreat…”

So back to Manifesto 15. Given the importance of the political situation from Turkey to Afghanistan, I wonder just how many school curricula include anything of the history of the region and our involvement both proud and obscene. In fact we seem more concerned with getting the chronology of English kings correct  than understanding such matters.

It might be argued that nothing threatens our communities more than the situation in the Middle East. Reading The Return of a King, makes you wonder if anything we could do would remove the entrenched views borne of past mistakes. But travelling forward with optimism, it has to start with a greater effort being made to recognise the facts of the countries, and their history. And then to use that imaginatively to move forward with reconciliation, humility and collaboration.

Is this too hard for students? Is the story too gory. Well there was nothing nice about the Middle Ages, or for that matter the Holocaust. There is nothing wrong with understanding the chronology of British history; it is so important to understand where we came from and the big decisions that have shaped our democracy. But we need to ensure young people know the facts about all our world involvement and above all have a chance to reflect on how we move forward into the future. This is illustration of what Manifesto 15 is saying. Some future thinking please!

But let’s not pretend any of this is easy. We may be where we are because of a whole host of  historical misjudgements; so students must have the facts. Only then can they debate and consider their position and views of a future way forward. We hear much about how young people are not motivated by politics. Our democracy is at risk because we do not give  the opportunity for informed debate about the future. It’s not about citizenship education and understanding the British constitution. It’s about giving them an opportunity to understand what is relevant to them and help them future-think!

We have just had a major debate about our involvement in bombing in Syria. I was impressed by the speech by Hilary Benn. If we showed that to our students, I am sure it would motivate debate. But it should also motivate a curiosity to understand the facts behind why we are where we are. It should also get them to think about what next!

You must read the book! ‘Return of a King’ William Dalrymple. It is worth the hard work.