Don't Soften the Army, Harden the Peace Corps - and send them into Afghanistan and Iraq



Don't Soften the Army, Harden the Peace Corps - and send them into Afghanistan and Iraq

Don't Soften the Army, Harden the Peace Corps

Jay Bryant (archive)

July 25, 2003 | Print | Send

Post-war pacification in Afghanistan and Iraq is a tough job, but somebody's got to do it.

So the question is, who?

So far, it's been mostly the US Army, which may not be the best outfit for the task, good as it is at a lot of things. Not only that but our fighting forces are stretched mighty thin these days, with virtually all combat-ready brigades deployed. There's a real question as to whether it's wise to siphon off thousands of troops for humanitarian work.

You can say they're overqualified or underqualified, it doesn't matter because it adds up to the same thing. These brave and admirable young men and women didn't join up for that sort of duty, probably don't have a real aptitude for it and don't like to do it.

There are those who say we ought to leave the whole thing to the United Nations, and there may be some contributions the UN can make, but it has proven itself to be inept (and corrupt) at the task in Yugoslavia and elsewhere. If what's going on in Iraq is nation-building, ask yourself this: which will be better off, an Iraq built on the principles of the UN, or one built on the principles of the US.

Another possibility is to utilize units with special skills from other countries; this is already happening to some extent in Iraq, where Italian and Portuguese police officials are being sent in. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz has praised this approach, commenting that "a little bit of specialization is a wonderful thing." He's probably right, but it's also wise, one would think, to regard such units as supplementary, rather than primary.

Non-governmental organizations, including private charities, can contribute, too, and many are doing so right now, in important ways.

But in the end, there are likely to be major gaps in any system that relies on foreign governments and NGO's. There needs to be a US agency that can be assigned to the task.

Which brings us to the question of the Peace Corps. In recent weeks, there has been a bit of a buzz in Washington and elsewhere about the possibility of rethinking the mission of the forty-two-year-old agency. This sentiment, by no means universal among the close-knit network of returned volunteers, let alone the current leadership of the agency, found its way into print this week in an op-ed article in the New York Times, written by Avi Spiegel, who was a Peace Corps volunteer in Morocco from 1998 to 2000.

There aren't any Peace Corps volunteers in Morocco today, because the country is considered too dangerous, and that's precisely the point Spiegel and those who share his view want to make. Spiegel says we need "a more active, less gun-shy Peace Corps," that "should equip itself to enter regions it now deems too dangerous."

This move would drastically change the culture of the Peace Corps, so it is no surprise that many of the agency's stalwart veterans and friends are aghast at the idea. The Peace Corps has always considered itself independent of American foreign policy, and these people want it to stay that way.

They would rather see war zone humanitarian work done by the UN and international NGO's. But of course, that's a major contradiction, because those organizations – even more than the Peace Corps – are completely independent of American foreign policy, and that's the problem.

We need a force of humanitarian workers who will advance American foreign policy by performing genuine humanitarian service. There is no reason why there should be any conflict between the two. Siegel likens the relationship to that between wartime Iraqi military units and their embedded reporters. Both had jobs to do, and did them while establishing good working relationships that, in most cases, increased respect for each side among the other.

One interesting precedent for hardened, policy-driven humanitarian workers, explained to me by a retired US Army Colonel, comes from an unlikely place – Cuba.

The Cubans went into places like Angola with doctors and nurses, well-diggers, teachers, axes, shovels, raw lumber and construction equipment and actually did some good for people while measurably advancing the foreign policy objectives of their homeland.

On our side, something similar happened to a limited extent in Viet Nam, where the Army set up groups called Civic Action Teams; some veterans of that conflict report that only those villages that had CAT's really resisted the Viet Cong.

But the Viet Nam Army was a conscript Army; today's all-volunteer force is self- selected for different duty than humanitarian action. That's why a hardened, re-tooled Peace Corps is the best place for it.

In the end, the best security against guerilla and terrorist tactics such as those we are facing in post-war Iraq is preventive security. That means winning over the population so the people themselves provide both intelligence and deterrence before the act ever happens.

When you get to that point, you have peace. And that is what the Peace Corps ought to be about.

Veteran GOP media consultant Jay Bryant’s regular columns are available at www.theoptimate.com, and his commentaries may be heard on NPR’s “All Things Considered.”

©2003 Jay Bryant

By greg baker (cache-da08.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.208.12) on Sunday, December 28, 2003 - 5:38 pm: Edit Post

I served as a mobile advisory team leader in a village in late 68 in vietnam... first 6 months with first air cav division...
Peace corps with m-16's.. don't think so....it is a good idea but call it something else, the peace corps has a good role in educating mostly younger persons in the reality of the world and they have time and a chance to develop and influence future policy and attitudes,,
Some of us vets[of any war] may feel the need or hope to sorta try to balance the books and would make a good corps of older, experienced persons to do hard duty in places like Iraq and afganistan and whatever might follow...what odds are acceptable usually depends on the reward, a significant essential job means what? 50/50 or 1/1000 what would be comfortable to you and your family...?
I have been accepted for a winter assignment in the peace corps for this winter My biggest fear is that I won't be able to use my potential because of the false demand/hope of zero risk..
I have a positive attitude, follow the rules and do the very best you can at whatever task you are given,, "never say die" greg

By Jim Fox, RPCV (cache-ntc-aa03.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.26.8) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 4:30 am: Edit Post

As a Peace Corps Volunteer and Technical Advisor, I never saw any role for Peace Corps "advancing US Foreign Policy." The best Volunteers went as individual citizens in a cultural exchange program.

We went to live and work within, and to learn and understand a "foreign" culture. Our meager "subsistance-allowance" hardly made us "employees" of the US Government. My allegance was with my co-workers and neighbors where I was assigned and lived. I was never paid to "advance US Foreign Policy."

Especially now, when based in part on what I learned as a volunteer, US Foreign Policy is so misguided. US Foreign Policies have been twisted and exploited by a corrupt Administration, for it's own self-serving, neo-conservative goals of self-interest and world domination.

Fundamentalist extremists on both sides, in a symbiotic relationship, feed on each others terrorist atrocities, inflaming hatreds and violence, to their own ends. Unintelligent Foreign Policies are based on Neanderthalic principles of brute force, totally oblivious to any cultural sensitivity.

Calling on VOLUNTEERS to put their lives at risk to band-aid the fiasco that US foreign policy has become; no way. Let the chicken-hawks send their sons and daughters, or volunteer their own time.

Actually, once we have regime change here at home, and we make it clear to the world that we can live among others on the planet, without bombing and bullying all who disagree, Peace Corps may then have a role in helping others clean up the mess. It won't be easy, and it may take decades to heal the wounds and establish real lasting stability.

Until that time, there are well paid professional positions in the Foreign Service and the Military whose job description is to "advance US Foreign Policy." They live and work behind their fortress walls, in protected isolated compounds. Let them earn their hardship pay.

Don't even suggest that unarmed, minimally paid Volunteers, be expected to explain, justify and "advance US Foreign Policy" while living within destroyed cultures in a furious hostile world. It would be throwing sheep, to the wolves.

We must fundamentally change US Foreign Policy, before "Peace" has a chance.

Or, dare you suggest, that a REAL Peace Corps be created? A Corps, equal in funding and power to one of the Military Corps. One capable of really addressing the real problems of the world? One with a budget of Billions and Billions? One capable of intelligently solving the energy, employment, educational and health needs of the planet? One that can stand face to face with the military forces of Death and Destruction? One that can provide limitless profit for it's parasitic supporters? Is that what you propose? Let's see some details.

By PIYAR ALI (202.176.248.214) on Thursday, July 08, 2004 - 3:09 am: Edit Post

I M PIYAR ALI BELONGING FROM PAKISTAN .I PERSONALY VERY ENSPAIR WHT U PEOPLE R DOING IN AFGANISTAN , ALL WE KNOW THAT U WILL BRING PEACE IN AFGANISTAN AND THERE IS GREAT FUTURE OF AFGANISTAN WITH GREAT VISION , WE R THANK FUL TO THAT U HAVE FINISHED THE EXTRIMIST GOVT. THEIR.
NOW NEW CONSTRUCTION R GOING ON WE HOPE AFGAN BECOME A DEVELOPED COUNTRY OF THE WORLD BECOSE THEY HAVE A GREAT POTENTIAL TO GO FORWORD . U PEOPLE HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB . I WANT A JOB IN AFGANISTAN I M FRASH MASTER STUDENT FROM UNIVERSTY OF PESHAWAR IN MPA {HUMAN RESORCE}I HAVE KEEN DESIR TO WORK THERE FOR THAT PEOPLE

By PIYAR ALI (202.176.248.214) on Thursday, July 08, 2004 - 3:15 am: Edit Post

I M PIYAR ALI BELONGING FROM PAKISTAN .I PERSONALY VERY ENSPAIR WHT U PEOPLE R DOING IN AFGANISTAN , ALL WE KNOW THAT U WILL BRING PEACE IN AFGANISTAN AND THERE IS GREAT FUTURE OF AFGANISTAN WITH GREAT VISION , WE R THANK FUL TO THAT U HAVE FINISHED THE EXTRIMIST GOVT. THEIR.
NOW NEW CONSTRUCTION R GOING ON WE HOPE AFGAN BECOME A DEVELOPED COUNTRY OF THE WORLD BECOSE THEY HAVE A GREAT POTENTIAL TO GO FORWORD . U PEOPLE HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB . I WANT A JOB IN AFGANISTAN I M FRASH MASTER STUDENT FROM UNIVERSTY OF PESHAWAR IN MPA {HUMAN RESORCE}I HAVE KEEN DESIR TO WORK THERE FOR THAT PEOPLE