Additional exposure of this op-ed
The Baltimore Sun
To win the peace, restore the corps
By Arthur S. Obermayer and Kevin F. F. Quigley
The United States can win any war on the battlefield, but we have not learned how to win the peace. We are losing the fight to win over the people we are trying to help. But there is a way to right our course for the future - by looking to our past.
Overwhelming military superiority is not the key, because its use wreaks havoc and destroys lives. Moreover, our traditional public diplomacy efforts have not worked, with Karen Hughes the most recent government PR chief to resign after accomplishing very little.
The decline of the U.S. in world opinion demands that we find more effective ways to regain a leadership role. Primarily, we should aim to help people achieve better health, education, housing and jobs in countries that need it the most.
On that front, our nation has achieved some successes: the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe after World War II, recovery efforts following the Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004, and aid in the wake of Pakistan's devastating earthquake two years ago (making Pakistan one of the very few nations where approval of the U.S. has risen in recent years). Now, however, only our military has the means to such ends.
U.S. foreign aid is primarily structured along impersonal, government-to-government lines, and most government agencies have proved ineffective working on a people-to-people level. The one government entity with a positive record in this area is the Peace Corps. But despite the Peace Corps' success since its inception in 1961, its budget has remained small.
President John F. Kennedy wanted 100,000 volunteers overseas within 10 years. Today - although 20 additional nations are seeking Peace Corps help and three times as many volunteers apply as can be accommodated - budgetary limitations have kept the number of volunteers down to 8,000. However, there are 190,000 alumni, represented by the National Peace Corps Association. They yearn for continuing involvement in a mission that has transformed not only their lives and those of people they have helped but also their perspectives on the world.
Among the alumni is Connecticut Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, who served as a volunteer in the Dominican Republic. Based on that experience, he is sponsoring a bill to double the size of the Peace Corps. In the months after 9/11, Sen. John McCain of Arizona and President Bush both advocated major growth of the Peace Corps. Unfortunately, there was little follow-up.
Like Mr. Dodd, other alumni want to help now, and their expertise is invaluable. Most are mature leaders in business, education, government and the nonprofit world. Many are primed for a new career challenge that a managerial role in the Peace Corps could offer. They have the motivation to resist outside influences and to distinguish an expanded role for the Peace Corps from the political and bureaucratic vagaries of government agencies.
To have a significant impact, the Peace Corps needs to be at least 10 to 20 times larger. But even with renewed alumni participation, it cannot grow quickly enough on its own. Through its separate, distinct operation, it must enlist the vast array of nonprofits doing grass-roots work abroad. They fall into three major categories: nongovernmental organizations, non-proselytizing faith-based groups, and universities. In addition to growing its own operations, the Peace Corps could also help fund these nonprofit efforts. There are thousands of American philanthropic initiatives from which it could select programs for expansion grants.
The time is right politically to broaden the scope and impact of the Peace Corps. The millions who donate to such charities represent a powerful constituency who would back the move. Its objectives are nonpartisan and should be supported by Republicans and Democrats.
In the media every day, everywhere, we are witness to suffering. As we see the conventional, military-based approach to conflict resolution failing, we must seek alternative means to ending wars and winning the peace. The cost of an expanded Peace Corps would be roughly 1 percent of our current military budget. Can we afford not to act promptly?
Copyright © 2007, The Baltimore Sun
After its publication in the Baltimore Sun, the op-ed was sent out by the Los Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service (reaches more than 300 media outlets in the US and over 600 worldwide), and based only on online searches, was selected and published in The Christian Science Monitor, Sacramento Bee, San Jose Mercury News, Modesto Bee, Arizona Daily Sun, Buffalo News, The Repository (Canton, OH), Cincinnati Post, Orlando Sentinel. The Day (Connecticut), The Press of Atlantic City, the North Jersey Record and Herald, and the Newport News Daily Press. Based on email responses from readers, we know it also appeared in the Columbia (Washington state), Syracuse Post Standard, and the Atlanta Constitution. It has had a lot of further coverage through media summaries, blogs, and links from organizations as diverse as The Network of Spiritual Progressives and Spotlight on Military News and International Affairs. Some of the others are the Early Bird (military), SWJ (Small Wars Journal), Blogrunner, U. So.Cal. (John Brown's Public Diplomacy Review), and Center for Strategic and International Studies Commission on Smart Power. It has also generated a lot of comments on brogs, for example, Topix alone had 19 in response to the original op-ed.