Abstract

The purpose of this research was to explore the patterns of violence in Pakistan and the possible causes of this. A total of 4,000 respondents were chosen using a combination of multi-stage stratified and convenience sampling for the general survey (GS). A thorough analysis of the findings was performed; interviews were conducted with intellectuals to foster cross-discussion. Various data analysis techniques were employed to analyze the collected data. The findings indicated the presence of both direct violence and structural violence in Pakistan. Additionally, the study revealed that structural violence serves as a primary catalyst for direct violence. The perpetration of violence involves religious-political leaders, political leaders, and clergy members. Extremists, their sympathizers, and donors continue to operate within the country, actively collecting funds. Furthermore, Education can play a vital role to mitigate violence in society.

Key Words

Dynamics, Terrorism, Sectarianism, Ethnicity, Inequality, Violence, Education

Introduction

In South Asia, many states have been facing militancy and violence. Pakistan is one of them known for armed conflict. Pakistan is a developing country who have many cultures and religions. It is facing many problems like sectarianism, social injustice, ethnic conflict, terrorism and economic differences (Ahmad, 2017). The main cause of these problems is Political instability. Political instability is the root cause of these problems (Daily Express, 2017, August 17).  Pakistan is a vast country with diversified ethnic and religious groups. Political violence can erupt due to long-standing ethnic and sectarian tensions, as different groups may vie for political power and resources (Dawn, 2014, September 7). Extremism and terrorism: Pakistan has faced significant challenges from extremist groups and terrorist organizations (Dawn, 2014, September 7). Political polarization and rivalries: Political parties in Pakistan often engage in intense rivalries and confrontations, leading to violence. Competition for power and influence can escalate tensions, leading to clashes between party supporters and even armed conflicts (Daily Express,2017, August 17).

Ethnic and religious, or Sectarian Tensions: Deep-rooted ethnic, religious, or sectarian divisions within a society can fuel political violence. When identity-based conflicts are politicized, they can escalate into violent clashes between different groups. In April 2006,  sectarian attack on Sunni Tehreek in Karachi, the killing of a Hazara brother in Baluchistan, the violent killing of many innocent people on 10th Murram-ul-Haramin November 2013 in Rawalpindi, and in March 2013 bomb blast incident in Abbas Town, Karachi is the worst incidents of sectarian killing in the history of Pakistan (Shah, 2014). According to the report of Gishkori (2012), more than 450 Shias were injured and more than four hundred(400 ) Shias lost their lives in 110 sectarian attacks during 2008- 2011. 

Pakistan has faced ethnic conflicts since its independence, resulting in its division in 1971. Factors such as provincialism, language, religion (sectarianism), and caste have destabilized Pakistan's political system. These issues have led communities like the Pashtoon, Balouch, Sindhi, and Punjabi to seek power based on ethnicity. These factors challenge the federal character of the country. Ethnic identities, encompassing language, territory, religion, and caste, have led to violent conflicts and weakened national integrity.

Dr Hassan Askari Rizvi identifies ethnicity as a key factor in creating conflicts in Pakistan. He asserts that the state has weakened due to domestic conflicts, hindering its ability to function effectively at the national and global levels. This situation hampers the state's ability to fulfil its obligations to its citizens and the international community. Ethnic violence and religious sectarianism are the two main challenges to stabilizing Pakistan's political, societal, and economic position.

Since the 1980s, the Mohajir community, consisting of Urdu-speaking migrants who arrived from India during partition, has mobilized along ethnic lines in Sindh to protect its rights and interests. Similar non-violent assertions have been observed in the southern areas of Punjab. All ethnic groups in Pakistan have politically mobilized to assert their rights and promote their ethnic identity.

The ruling elite, comprising both civil and military leaders, often claim devotion and loyalty while labelling others as corrupt. The military holds significant power and interferes in political affairs. Wealth in Pakistan is concentrated in the hands of feudal landowners who maintain their control through participation in politics. 

Access to education in Pakistan is unequal, leading to frustration among the population and the potential for future conflicts. Democratic states typically provide opportunities for economic growth, good health, and quality education based on individuals' merits and training. Pakistan's unequal access to education fuels frustration and may lead to future violence.

During the 1980s, militant groups in Pakistan were manipulated into engaging in "Jihad" against Russia, with financial support from the US, Saudi Arabia, and other foreign entities. When the US and its allies abandoned these groups after the defeat of Russia in Afghanistan, they turned to terrorism due to their financial resources, political influence, and weapons. Corruption, political instability, economic inequality, and social injustice further fueled terrorism. The events of 9/11 and the subsequent "war on terror" forced Pakistan to cooperate with the US, leading to strained relations between the regime and religious organizations. Religious violence transformed into terrorism, resulting in suicide attacks and creating a climate of fear and terror in Pakistan. Approximately 70,000 Pakistanis have lost their lives to terrorism.

The problem statement revolves around the observation that democratic and developed states tend to be more peaceful than autocratic or authoritarian states and developing countries. Pakistan, being a developing country, has been striving to establish peace but has faced challenges. The researcher aims to identify the dynamics of violence in the country through this study.

Conclusion

This comprehensive review highlights the transformative potential of education in mitigating violence. It emphasizes the importance of inclusive and equitable education systems, the integration of peace education, and the need for collaboration among stakeholders to leverage education as a catalyst for peace. While challenges persist, harnessing the power of education offers promising avenues for creating more peaceful and resilient societies.

Objectives of the Study

These are the following research objectives:

1. To identify dynamics which are the root cause of violence in Pakistan.

2. To investigate the relationship among dynamics of violence.

3. To measure the impact of different components of violence on accumulative violence.

Research Questions

These are the following research questions to meet up objectives and demands:

1. What are the dynamics of violence in Pakistan?

2. Is there a significant relationship between the dynamics of violence?

3. Is there a significant impact of different components of violence on accumulative violence?

(a) Is structural violence a cause of direct violence?

Conceptual Framework

A conceptual framework for the study of political violence encompasses various dimensions and factors that contribute to the occurrence, dynamics, and consequences of political violence. Start by clarifying the definition of political violence and develop typologies to categorize different forms of political violence. Explore the underlying causes and motivations behind political violence. This could involve examining structural factors (e.g., socioeconomic inequalities, political exclusion), ideological or religious factors (e.g., extremism, separatism), or grievances arising from identity-based conflicts (e.g., ethnic or religious tensions). Analyze the actors involved in political violence, including state actors (government, security forces), non-state actors (insurgent groups, militias), and external actors (foreign governments, transnational organizations). Investigate the dynamics and processes through which political violence unfolds. Assess the short-term and long-term consequences of political violence at individual, communal, and societal levels.

Methodology

The aim of this research endeavour was to highlight the dynamics of violence in Pakistan. Four thousand Pakistani such as educators, medics, solicitors, university scholars and others (Traders, NGO representatives, engineers, bank officers etc.) were nominated by convenience sampling from sixteen districts (Lahore, Faisalabad, Rawalpindi, D G Khan, Karachi, Sukkar, Hyderabad, Khairpur, Quetta, Sibi, Khuzdar, Zhob, Peshawar, D I Khan, Mardan, and Bannu), four districts from each province. 

However, the response rate was 75% (n=3000). Interviews with eight (8) intellectuals from four provinces were conducted to get more information about the causes of violence in the country. A mixed method, convergent parallel research design was used in this study. A Likert-type general survey scale was constructed to collect quantitative data, and interviews with intellectuals were conducted to collect qualitative data for the study. Before the final administration of the survey, the survey scale was pilot tested and it gained high reliability of 0.84 on Cronbach Alpha.  Lisrel 8.8 was run to make a confirmatory factor analysis. Lisrel converged 27 items into seven subscales with more than .40 factors loading.

Descriptive statistic methods were mean, and standard deviation whereas inferential statistics like correlation, and regression were applied to analyze quantitative data and thematic analysis was done to analyze qualitative data. 

Analysis and Interpretation of Data and Results 

It is necessary to describe the major variables of the GSS to understand this study easily. There seven major variables with psychometric properties have been presented in the table below:

Description of Major Variables of General Survey Scale

Table 1

S. No	Variable	n	M	SD	Range		Skew
					Potential	Actual
a)	Terrorism	3000	3.91	.59	1-5           1.0-5.0		0.78
b)	Sectarianism	3000	3.81	.92	1-5           1.0-5.0		0.74
c)	Ethnicity	3000	4.01	.79	1-5           1.0-5.0		0.91
d)	SI	3000	3.99	.83	1-5           1.0-5.0		0.85
e)	EI	3000	3.98	.80	1-5           1.0-5.0		0.90
f)	PI	3000	3.92	.69	1-5           1.0-5.0		0.79
g)	UAE	3000	4.15	.72	1-5           1.0-5.0		0.95
h)	T+S+E+SI+EI+PI+UAE = Accumulative violence	3000	3.96	.68	1-5           1.0-5.0		0.92

Table 1 presents the key variables of the general survey scale (GSS), including the number of participants, mean values, standard deviations, potential and actual ranges of the mean scores, as well as information regarding the normality of the data.

Dynamics of Violence in Pakistan

To answer the research question, what are the dynamics of violence in Pakistan, data were analyzed and results were presented in the table. 

Table 2

S. No	Dynamics of Violence	n	M	Mode	SD
a)	Terrorism	3000	3.92	4.00	.59
b)	Sectarianism	3000	3.82	4.00	.92
c)	Ethnicity	3000	4.02	4.67	.79
d)	Social Injustice	3000	3.98	4.00	.83
e)	Economic Inequality	3000	3.99	4.00	.80
f)	Political Instability	3000	3.93	4.00	.69
g)	Unequal  Access to Education	3000	4.16	5.00	.72

 The dynamics of violence in Pakistan are described in the table provided. The table displays various variables related to violence, including terrorism, sectarianism, ethnicity, social injustice, economic inequality, political instability, and unequal access to education. The data is based on a sample size of 3,232 participants. For each variable, the table presents the mean score (M), the mode value, and the standard deviation (SD).

According to the findings, terrorism was reported with a mean score of 3.92, a mode of 4.00, and a standard deviation of 0.59. Sectarianism had a mean score of 3.82, a mode of 4.00, and a standard deviation of 0.92. Ethnicity received a mean score of 4.02, a mode of 4.67, and a standard deviation of 0.79. Social injustice obtained a mean score of 3.98, a mode of 4.00, and a standard deviation of 0.83. Economic inequality had a mean score of 3.99, a mode of 4.00, and a standard deviation of 0.80. Political instability was reported with a mean score of 3.93, a mode of 4.00, and a standard deviation of 0.69. Lastly, unequal access to education received a mean score of 4.16, a mode of 5.00, and a standard deviation of 0.72.

These findings were obtained from the General Survey of Pakistan, indicating the varying degrees of each violence dynamic based on the responses of the participants.

Relationship among Dynamics of Violence

To address the research question, is there a relationship among dynamics of violence, data were analyzed applying Pearson Correlation and results were demonstrated in the table.

Table 3

	Terrorism	Sectarianism	Ethnicity	SI	EI	PI	UAE
Terrorism	1
Sectarianism	.54**	1
Ethnicity	.28**	.25**	1
SI	.38**	.27**	.34**	1
EI	.54**	.31**	.29**	.29**	1
PI	43**	.22**	.22**	.25**	.61**	1
UAE	.53**	.37**	.24**	.28**	.59**	.71**	1

 The findings reveal several noteworthy correlations. Firstly, terrorism displays significant positive correlations with sectarianism (r = 0.54**), ethnicity (r = 0.28**), social injustice (r = 0.38**), economic inequality (r = 0.54**), political instability (r = 0.43**), and unequal access to education (r = 0.53**). Similarly, sectarianism is significantly positively correlated with terrorism (r = 0.54**), ethnicity (r = 0.25**), social injustice (r = 0.27**), economic inequality (r = 0.31**), and unequal access to education (r = 0.37**). Moreover, ethnicity demonstrates significant positive correlations with terrorism (r = 0.28**), sectarianism (r = 0.25**), social injustice (r = 0.34**), economic inequality (r = 0.29**), and unequal access to education (r = 0.24**).

Furthermore, social injustice is significantly positively correlated with terrorism (r = 0.38**), sectarianism (r = 0.27**), ethnicity (r = 0.34**), economic inequality (r = 0.29**), and political 

instability (r = 0.22**). Similarly, economic inequality shows significant positive correlations with terrorism (r = 0.54**), sectarianism (r = 0.31**), ethnicity (r = 0.29**), social injustice (r = 0.29**), and political instability (r = 0.61**). Moreover, political instability exhibits significant positive correlations with terrorism (r = 0.43**), sectarianism (r = 0.22**), ethnicity (r = 0.22**), social injustice (r = 0.25**), economic inequality (r = 0.61**), and unequal access to education (r = 0.71**). Lastly, unequal access to education demonstrates significant positive correlations with terrorism (r = 0.53**), sectarianism (r = 0.37**), ethnicity (r = 0.24**), social injustice (r = 0.28**), economic inequality (r = 0.59**), and political instability (r = 0.71**).

Overall, the correlations highlighted in Table 4 shed light on the interconnections among different forms of violence in Pakistan. The results suggest that these variables are intertwined and influence each other. Understanding these relationships can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of violence in the country.

Impact of Different Components of Violence on Accumulative Violence

To measure the impact of Terrorism, Sectarianism, Ethnicity, SI, EI, PI, and UAE on accumulative violence in the country, multiple regressions were applied and results were presented in the table.

Table 4

Predictors	Model 1 B	t-value	95%CI
Constant	0.030***	11.40***	[.0300 , .043]
Terrorism	0.170***	186.50***	[.173 ,  .174]
Sectarianism	0.150**	312.75***	[.162 ,  .164]
Ethnicity	0.140***	297.26***	[.162 , .163]
SI	0.120***	225.80***	[.118 , .120]
EI	0.110***	164.76***	[.113 , .115]
PI	0.130***	155.50***	[.134 ,  .136]
UAE	0.120*	146.24***	[.125 , .127]
R2	0.940***
F	245110.00***
Adjusted R2	0.910
F change	245110.0

 In Table 4, a multiple regression analysis was conducted to assess the impact of various factors, including terrorism, sectarianism, ethnicity, social injustice (SI), economic inequality (EI), political instability (PI), and unequal access to education (UAE), on accumulative violence. The table presents the regression coefficients (B), t-values, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each predictor. The results indicate that all predictors significantly contribute to accumulative violence. Specifically, terrorism shows a strong positive impact (B = 0.17, t = 186.53), followed by sectarianism (B = 0.15, t = 312.76), ethnicity (B = 0.14, t = 297.25), social injustice (B = 0.12, t = 225.82), economic inequality (B = 0.11, t = 164.75), political instability (B = 0.13, t = 155.48), and unequal access to education (B = 0.12, t = 146.23).

The overall model demonstrates a high level of explanatory power, with an R-squared value of 0.94. This indicates that approximately 94% of the variance in accumulative violence can be accounted for by the combination of these predictors. The F-test is highly significant (F = 245111.0), further supporting the overall model's significance. The adjusted R-squared value of 0.91 suggests that around 91% of the variance in accumulative violence is explained by the predictors, adjusting for the number of predictors in the model.

In summary, the multiple regression analysis reveals that terrorism, sectarianism, ethnicity, social injustice, economic inequality, political instability, and unequal access to education all have substantial impacts on accumulative violence. These findings emphasize the importance of addressing these factors to mitigate and prevent violence in the studied context.

Direct Violence is due to Structural Violence

To trace the answer to the research question is the structural violence cause of direct violence; data were analyzed by applying simple regression and results were presented in the table.

Table 5

Predictor	Model1 B	t-value	95%CI
Constant	1.63***	27.39***	[1.51, 1.74]
Structural violence	.56***	38.90***	[.514, .599].
R2	.51
F	1513.68***
Adjusted R2	.50
F change	1513.68

 In the simple regression analysis presented in Table 6, the focus is on determining the cause of direct violence, with structural violence as the predictor variable. The table provides the regression coefficient (B), t-value, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the predictor. The results indicate that structural violence has a significant positive impact on direct violence. The regression coefficient is 0.56, indicating that for every unit increase in structural violence, there is a corresponding increase in direct violence. The t-value of 38.90 is highly significant, suggesting a strong relationship between the two variables. The model accounts for 51% of the variance in direct violence, as indicated by the R-squared value of 0.51. This implies that approximately 51% of the variation in direct violence can be explained by the presence of structural violence. The F-test is highly significant (F = 1513.68), indicating the overall significance of the model. The adjusted R-squared value of 0.50 suggests that 50% of the variance in direct violence is explained by the model, taking into account the number of predictors.

In conclusion, the simple regression

analysis demonstrates that structural violence plays a significant role in explaining direct violence. These findings highlight the importance of addressing and mitigating structural violence as a means to reduce direct violence in the context under study.

Thematic Analysis of Interviews of Intellectuals Conducted on Current Position of Pakistan

Thematic analysis was done by using the following procedure:

"The process of organizing, general sense-making, coding, drawing themes, and, finally, interpreting and making meaning out of the collected data" (Cresswell, 2003 as cited in Bagum, 2012, p.31) was followed in analyzing interviews. 

Thematic analysis is a method used to identify, analyze, and report patterns or themes within qualitative data. While I cannot directly analyze specific interviews conducted on the current position of Pakistan regarding political violence. Both English and Urdu languages are used for interviews.

Causes of Violence /Factors behind Terrorism and who are Involved in Terrorism?

Table 6

Nature of Questions	Responses	Repeated Words	Theme
What are the factors behind terrorism and who are involved in terrorism?	Sectarianism, social injustice, political instability, unequal access to education, ethnicity, economic inequalities and poverty. Clergymen and religo-political leaders, educated and uneducated are involved in terrorism. negative role of Madaris,	Sectarianism, terrorism, social injustice, economic inequalities Clergymen, religo-political leaders, religious extremists	Sectarianism, ethnicity, social injustice, poverty, unequal access to education, political instability, and economic inequality are the causes of violence. Religo-political, political leaders, Clergymen, and educated and uneducated people are involved in terrorism,
What are the hurdles in the establishment of peace in Pakistan?	religious extremists and their links with political leaders, absence of strong political will to fight against terrorists and clergymen and extremists religious organizations.Poverty, illiteracy, Economic issues, external involvement, lack of uniform implementation of the law, political influence on institutions and delay in punishment of criminals	Extremists, sympathizers, donators, Poverty, Social, economic and political issues,  Poverty, illiteracy, Economic issues, absence of a strong political will, punishment of criminals	Religious extremists and their followers are strong and have links with political leaders, sympathizers and donators are still present, Absence of strong political will to fight violence creators,  Poverty, illiteracy, Economic and social issues, militancy, lack of uniform implementation of the law, Political pressure on institutions and delay in punishment of criminals

 Table 6 depicts The presence of terrorism, sectarianism, ethnicity, social injustice, economic inequality, political instability, and unequal access to education has been identified as the underlying causes of violence in the country. Various individuals, including religiopolitical leaders, political figures, clergy members, as well as both educated and uneducated individuals, are involved in perpetuating violence.

In a world marred by violence and terrorism, it is crucial to delve into the underlying causes and factors that contribute to these destructive acts. Understanding the roots of violence is essential for establishing lasting peace. This developed theme will explore the multifaceted aspects that fuel violence, including the factors behind terrorism, and highlight the barriers that impede the establishment of peace.

Religious extremism and its intersection with political leaders can have significant consequences, including the potential for political violence. It's important to note that most religious followers are peaceful and do not engage in violent activities. The relationship between religious extremists and political leaders can vary. In some instances, political leaders may exploit religious sentiments to further their own agendas or consolidate power.

Sectarianism, ethnic conflicts, and extremism in political violence have been longstanding issues in Pakistan, posing significant challenges to the government and society. The government of Pakistan has implemented various measures to address these problems like Sectarianism, Ethnic conflicts, social justice, and Extremism in political violence.

National Education Policy addressing violence in Pakistan is crucial. Education plays a vital role in shaping society, promoting tolerance, and preventing violence. The National Education Policy provides a framework for guiding educational institutions and stakeholders to address various issues, including violence, within the education system. The govt. take different initiatives like promoting peace and tolerance, Safe learning environments, Teacher training, Awareness and prevention programs and Collaboration with stakeholders.

Conclusions

In conclusion, this general survey reveals that

terrorism, sectarianism, ethnicity, social injustice, economic inequality, political instability, and unequal access to education are the dynamics driving violence in Pakistan. While there is no one-size-fits-all solution, the following are key points to consider in formulating a conclusion to tackle political violence.

Strengthening Democratic Institutions

Pakistan should focus on enhancing the strength and effectiveness of its democratic institutions, such as the judiciary, electoral system, and legislature. This involves ensuring the independence and impartiality of these institutions, promoting transparency, and combating corruption.

Promoting Political Inclusivity

It is crucial to promote inclusivity and provide opportunities for marginalized groups, including ethnic and religious minorities, to participate in the political process. Encouraging dialogue and creating avenues for the peaceful expression of dissenting opinions can help prevent violence arising from political exclusion and frustration.

Ensuring the Rule of Law and Justice

A functioning and impartial judicial system that upholds the rule of law is essential for curbing political violence. Ensuring swift and fair trials for those involved in political violence, irrespective of their affiliations, sends a strong message that violence will not be tolerated. 

Socioeconomic Development

Addressing the underlying socioeconomic grievances can contribute significantly to reducing political violence. The government should prioritize investment in education, healthcare, infrastructure, and job creation to uplift.

Combating Extremism and Terrorism

Pakistan needs to continue its efforts in combating extremism and terrorism. Strengthening intelligence agencies, improving border security, and enhancing international cooperation in counterterrorism efforts are crucial.

Media Responsibility 

The media plays a significant role in shaping public opinion and perceptions. Encouraging responsible and unbiased journalism can contribute to reducing polarization and promoting peaceful dialogue.

Role of Education

Education plays a vital role in promoting peace and stability in societies. It equips individuals with knowledge, critical thinking skills, and a broader understanding of diverse cultures and perspectives. When people have access to quality education, they are more likely to make informed decisions, engage in peaceful dialogue, and resolve conflicts through peaceful means. Education fosters empathy, tolerance, and respect for others, reducing prejudice and discrimination. It empowers individuals to challenge inequalities and work towards social justice. Numerous studies have highlighted the positive correlation between education and peace, emphasizing how investing in education can contribute to the prevention of violence, extremism, and the promotion of long-term peace (Galtung, 1969; UNESCO, 2020).

References

• Ahmed, Z. S. (2017). Peace education in Pakistan [Special report].
  https://www.usip.org/publications/2017/03/peace-education-pakistan
• Azad, A. (2016, June 12). Social injustice in Pakistan. Dawn, p.9
  https://www.jworldtimes.com/old-site/others/general/social-injustice-in-pakistan/
• Ashraf, Z. (2016). Top 30 Essays for CSS, PMS. Lahore: Jahangirs World Time Publications.
  https://englishberg.com/top-30-essays-css-pms-free-download
• Begum, A. (2012). The concept and perception of peace education in Gilgit Baltistan Pakistan: A comparative case study. The Peace and Conflict Review, 7(1), 25-39.
  https://ecommons.aku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=pakistan_ied_pdcn
• Bukhari, G. (2017, August 27). Denial, defiance and shrugged, The Nation, 6.
  https://www.nation.com.pk/27-Aug-2017/denial-defiance-and-shruggery
• Cheema, A. (20147, September,7). Political instability in Pakistan. Dawn, 8.
• Creswell, J. W. (2003).Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, mixed method approaches (2nd ed.). California: Sage publication.
• Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of Peace Research, 6(3), 167-191.
• Gishkori, Z. (2012).Over 400 Killed in Balochistan sectarian violence: Report. Retrieved from
  http://tribune.com.pk/story/401826/over-400-killed-in-balochistan-sectarian-violence-report/
• Javid, H. (2017, August 27). The U.S., Pakistan and Afghanistan. The Nation, p.7.
• Khalid, H. (2017, August 27). Thoughts of an intellectual, Dr. Khaleel Ahmad. Daily Express, p. 16.
• Khan, S.A. (2016). Governance in Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford University Press
• Majeed, G. (n.d.). Ethnicity and ethnic conflict in Pakistan.Journal of Political Studies, 1(2), 51-63.
• Memon, A.P., Memon, K.S., Shaikh, S.,& Memon, F.(n.d). Political instability: A case study of Pakistan. Journal of Political Studies, 18(1), 31-43
• Munir, F. (2013). Understanding the role of education in promoting violence and terrorism in Pakistan. Unpublished master thesis, Arctic University of Norway.
• Mushtaq, M. (2009). Managing ethnic diversity and federalism in Pakistan. European Journal of Scientific Research, 33(2), 279-294
• Ministry of Education. (2009).National education policy 2009. Islamabad: Govt. of Pakistan
• PILDAT. (2011). Ethnic conflict in Sind, background paper, Pakistan: Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (PILDAT), October 2011: 20-21.
• Shah, M. N. (2014). Evolution of sectarianism in Pakistan: A threat to the state and society. A Research Journal of South Asian Studies, 29(2), 441-459.
  http://journals.pu.edu.pk/journals/index.php/IJSAS/article/view/2958
• Sahika, T. (2003). Perceptions of students, teachers and parents regarding English- medium instruction at secondary education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.