"... found 'total ruins' in education. The teachers are not dedicated and seem chiefly engaged in making money on the side. The creation of Pakistan was the destruction of its higher education; the students played a big role at the time and are now 'hooked' on their political significance. There is little hope for the public universities, state or federal. The Government does not care about the quality of education. It wants law and order. There is no support for those who care about quality. The students and Government are against anyone who tries ... etc. etc."

There is a large literature on the sources of such problems in the public universities of developing countries some of which the Harvard Committee used. It suggested that a private university like AKU could be less vulnerable to malfunctioning but only if certain conditions were met, the long history of student unrest in private colleges in India showing that private status alone is no assurance of peace and quiet. The quality of higher education from Indonesia to Africa was generally undermined by overcrowding of institutions, inadequate facilities, and the poor motivations denounced as vigorously in other countries as they were in Pakistan. Exceptional institutions were noted, like the Indian Institutes of Management or the Indian Institutes of Technology, where selective admissions and excellent job prospects make for serious study and solid achievement. But these were few and the Harvard Committee concluded that adding an AKU as an institution of integrity and educational quality would be valuable, particularly if it served as a model and was emulated.