Friday, August 12, 2005

Putting the War Back Into Peace Corps

There's a controversial new proposal on the table to give US soldiers the option to serve in the Peace Corps as part of their service. I served (briefly) in the Peace Corps in Guyana back in 2001, and a bunch of my Peace Corps buddies are dismayed by this new idea. Their arguments:

1. Many Host Country Nationals (HCNs) suspect Americans as being in the CIA or doing some kind of secret ops - why else would some rich white person live in a hut with no running water, internet or McDonald's? The feeling is that this "wolf in sheep's clothing" perception only be exacerbated by sticking admitted soldiers in the field, even if they are there to do only good things.

2. There are also concerns that military servicemembers who join the Peace Corps aren't in it for the right reasons and that they're basically doing it to avoid being shot at (an excellent reason in my book). In their view, this subverts the real intention of the Peace Corps (which I learned was basically to do pro-US public relations).

But I've gotta say, I'd rather our soldiers build schools and help kids to read good than kill and destroy any day of the week. Like any institution the Peace Corps ios resisting change, but I think this is an idea worth examining.

1 Comments:

At 3:33 PM, Blogger Amy Ruiz Fritz said...

What does non-active duty mean? Apparently, that's the part they can waive to go into the Peace Corps. It would seem to me that non-active duty would be some sort of desk job stateside.

Seems like strange bedfellows to me.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home