Attacks on education cause lifelong harm

The recent bombing of a girls’ school in Iran, killing at least 165 schoolgirls, is a stark reminder of how brutally war affects children. Schools are meant to be safe places for learning, development and hope for the future. When they become battlefields, it is not only buildings and the learning environment that are destroyed – the futures of the children who should have been sitting in those classrooms are also at risk.

A growing global problem

Attacks on education are far from isolated incidents. According to the latest report from the Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack, more than 6,000 attacks on students, educators, schools and universities, and incidents of military use of schools and universities were reported for the years 2022 and 2023. This represents an increase of nearly 20 percent compared with the previous two-year period. More than 10,000 students and educators were reportedly killed, injured, abducted, arrested or otherwise harmed during this time.

These attacks occur across the world and take different forms. Some are indirect, when schools are damaged because they are located near military targets or close to battlefields. Other attacks are deliberate, when armed actors intentionally target schools, students or teachers. As one of the United Nations’s six “grave violations against children in armed conflict,” attacks on education rarely occur in isolation. When schools are attacked or occupied, children are not only pushed out of classrooms, but also exposed to violence, recruitment, abduction and sexual abuse. Prominent examples can be found across regions: from Ukraine to Myanmar, and from Colombia to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, schools have been bombed, occupied and turned into sites of violence rather than learning.

Lasting consequences

At PRIO, we are working on a research project ‘EdAttack’, which maps attacks on education in sub-Saharan Africa over the past decades. Our aim is to better understand the scope of these types of attacks and their short- and longer-term consequences for children’s life opportunities.

We recently conducted fieldwork in Northern Uganda, where we interviewed students, teachers, community members, policymakers and aid organisations about their experiences with attacks on education during the conflict in the region. Many of the stories we heard dated back to the 1990s and early 2000s. During that time, the Lord’s Resistance Army frequently targeted civilian infrastructure, including schools, which were attacked, looted and at times occupied. Schools also became sites of abduction, with children taken from classrooms or dormitories. As a result, education was repeatedly disrupted, and access to schooling became highly unstable in affected areas.

Our interviews made clear that these types of attacks had a profound impact on those involved, even years after such events. “After the attacks, many parents no longer dared to send their children to school,” a teacher we met in Gulu told us. A former student at St. Mary’s College Aboke, where 139 girls were abducted by the Lord’s Resistance Army in 1996, said that even decades after the infamous attack on the school, the fear that something similar could happen was “still in the walls.” Some former abductees we met in Atiak told us that after returning from the bush, the stigma they faced in the local community was so strong that they were unable to remain in school.

The lack of schooling continues to shape the lives of affected children – and their children – in the form of fewer job opportunities, lower incomes, and a reduced ability to support the next generation through education. We also heard a broader sense that education is valued less, as returns are perceived to be lower and people focus more on survival. Attacks on schools can therefore create ripple effects that last for generations.

What can be done?

During and especially after the war, both the government and international aid agencies played key roles in rebuilding Northern Uganda. While the government focused primarily on restoring security, many aid organisations invested heavily in the education sector, rebuilding schools and other infrastructure. Despite these efforts, the region is still recovering. Enrollment and completion rates also remain lower in Northern Uganda than in other parts of the country. Community members, whether they were witnesses, victims or perpetrators, continue to carry vivid memories of the violence and often struggle with its psychological consequences.

Children might not want to go back to school, and parents may be afraid to send their children back to school after attacks. Restoring education in conflict-affected areas requires more than new schools and textbooks. Those who are affected – children, teachers, parents or entire communities – also need psychosocial support, safe learning environments and long-term follow-up. Without this, many children may never return to school – even when the schools are rebuilt.

Our findings from Northern Uganda underscore the need for a longer-term, holistic approach to post-war recovery – one that combines security, psychosocial support, school reconstruction, and the involvement of parents and communities to address stigma and related social challenges. This should be accompanied by better coordination between government and civil society actors and between the different aid organisations to ensure that interventions remain sustainable after development aid has ended.

From commitment to action

At the same time, recovery efforts must be complemented by stronger national and international measures to prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place. One important example is the Safe Schools Declaration, an international political commitment through which states pledge to protect students, teachers, and schools during armed conflict and to refrain from using schools for military purposes. Norway played a key role in launching the declaration in 2015, and to date 123 countries have endorsed it. Yet many countries have not committed to this declaration, including Uganda.

Crucially, endorsement alone is not enough – commitments must be translated into concrete changes in policy and accountability. Countries should both endorse the Safe Schools Declaration, and implement its guidelines into policy and military training and doctrine.

Education in crises must be funded far more adequately than it is today. In many humanitarian responses, it receives only a small share of funding, despite being critical not only for children’s safety and psychosocial wellbeing, but also for their long-term opportunities. This comes at a time when aid to the world’s poorest countries is being cut, with several major donors reducing their development budgets. When resources shrink, children’s schooling is often among the first casualties.

Norway can play an important role. The country has long been an international champion of education in crisis and conflict settings and a key driver behind the Safe Schools Declaration. This leadership comes with responsibility – and it must be sustained through strengthened diplomacy, development assistance and clear political commitment.

This is not just a policy choice; it is a necessity. A world that fails to protect children’s education in war is not only failing those children – it is also undermining the foundations of future peace.