Where is Moldova, anyway?

Thanks for bearing with me on my last post, and for the outpouring of emails and notes in support of what I wrote. While Peace Corps is a small part of our national budget, for those of us who are volunteers, it is our world. I was upset by what I read in the NY Times Editorial -- while I know Peace Corps has its flaws as an organization, it is something I, personally, am committed to, an organization I am proud to be a part of, and a body of volunteers whose work I see the results of every single day.

To follow up on what I wrote, I thought I'd post the official response of the National Peace Corps Association to this article. The National Peace Corps Association is an organization made up of returned peace corps volunteers, former staff and friends of the Peace Corps, dedicated to fostering peace through "service, education and advocacy."

The following is a statement by NPCA President Kevin Quigley (what appears in Bold, I put in bold myself):

Robert Strauss's January 9th "Too Many Innocents Abroad" op-ed is misguided in at least two ways: 1) there are not too many Peace Corps volunteers, and 2) they are not innocent.

Resulting from insufficient resources, there is unmet demand for the Peace Corps from more than 20 countries requesting programs and two out of three applicants who wish to serve.

Strauss myopically considers the Peace Corps's impact simply in development terms. However, the Peace Corps is not just a development program. Cross-cultural exchange constitutes two of its three goals. In addition to enhanced understanding of our country, his analysis misses the life-changing skills and attitudes volunteers bring back home.

Like any program, the Peace Corps could make improvements in training, placement, and more flexible programming, along with better use of technology. These improvements will enable Peace Corps to better tap into a broader and deeper recruitment pool. However, the answer is not fewer volunteers but More Peace Corps.

Kevin F. F. Quigley
President
National Peace Corps Association

------

The NY Times article has stirred up much talk both with volunteers and returned volunteers, Peace Corps fans and Peace Corps critics. Here are a few links to what I think are well thought out responses to the op-ed article. While I may not agree with all of them, it just goes to show, that many people care about the future of this organization enough to both criticize and defend it. (Thank you to those of you who sent me these links!) Keep in mind, some of these sites are formal essays, some are blogs, and some are comments to blogs. Enjoy the reading.

RPCV's Comment on "Too Many Innocents Abroad"
Helpful Abbreviations : RPCV = Returned Peace Corps Volunteer, ET = Early Terminate (when a Peace Corps Volunteer decides to return to America before the end of their 27 months of service)

Reconsidering the Peace Corps
Advocates greater Host Country (Host Country refers to whichever country the Peace Corps program is working in) ownership and examines the idea of reverse-volunteers, an idea I briefly brought up before - "If the primary mission shifts toward increasing mutual understanding through personal relationships, a logical result would be to reexamine the potential for placing volunteers from foreign countries in U.S. communities."

Why the Peace Corps Needs a Fourth Goal
“ To join with people of all societies in common cause to assure peace and survival for all.”

This entry was posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 at 7:35 AM.