The Peace Corps Reserves Problem

In early August, the media unearthed a seemingly dull detail in the US military's recruitment policies. A newly enlisted soldier can now serve two years as a Peace Corps volunteer in lieu of the eight year on-call period following active and reserve duty.
Here's a dramatic re-enactment of a recruiter's pitch after Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz) and Even Bayh (D-Ind) slipped a few lines of text into the 2002 defense budget:

"All right, one more time. You got your 15 months of active, two years Reserve or Guard, then you're on speed dial for eight years in case things get ugly. Hey why the sour face? Ok, you're right. Eight years is a long time, the world is an unstable place. You're an intellectual. I like that. What if I told you that instead, you could teach English in Nighmaristan for 27 months?"

"Where do I sign?" the imaginary recruit asks, the recruiter smiles, and next thing the poor kid knows he's being screamed at face down in a mud puddle somewhere in Mississippi.

Three years ago when this legislation was being drafted, Peace Corps' congressional affairs staffers were apparently busy playing minesweeper at their desks on 20th and L Streets.

Peace Corps has since admitted it DIDN'T KNOW about the legislation until after it passed. Granted, it was buried in a 306-page bill, but isn't that why you hire legislative affairs staff?

Let me belabor the enormity of this ineptitude even further. Legislation is being drafted formalizing a linkage between Peace Corps and the U.S. armed forces. It's the very type of linkage that Peace Corps has fought FIERCELY since it was founded 40 years ago as an independent agency...AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT!

Peace Corps Director Gaddi Vasquez, who signs my $150/month paycheck but receives precious little praise in this newsletter (resume summary: former cop, oversaw Orange County municipal debt default, Bush supporter), was put in a comically awkward spot when asked by the Washington Post's Alan Cooperman to describe Peace Corps' role in shaping the legislation in question:

"There might have been a discussion, there could have been some dialogue on this, but obviously that didn't happen."

To carry the minesweeper analogy further, I think that qualifies as clicking on a mine. Next game try the 9x9 grid, guys.

Let's try both sides of this issue. If you look at this new military recruiting policy as just that, a military policy, it technically has nothing to do with Peace Corps. Members of the armed forces will apply to Peace Corps like everyone else, with no preferential treatment, says a PC spokesperson.

So veterans will face the same system -- the same nice but short on details recruiters, the same condescending and self-serving placement officers who seem to relish putting people light-years away from their skills and experience -- as the rest of us. Why all the fuss?

What's the difference between this and any employer that uses fixed term contracts telling its employees under what conditions they can leave? (Lawyers, I'm getting out of my league here I realize...)

Well, for starters, the U.S. military is not just any employer. It happens to be an employer that is rather disliked (or misunderstood, at least) in many of the countries where Peace Corps operates.

Let's take Luke in Mauritania as an example. Occasionally people ask about my connection to the U.S. Government. I state that Peace Corps is an independent agency, with no connections to the CIA, the military, or the State Department. People nod politely, but often they don't believe you. Why should they? The legislation in question creates an admittedly tiny connection, but still, there it is. On paper. A soldier or sailor can fulfill part of their military service obligation by serving in the Peace Corps.

And it's worse than it sounds. That's because what sounds reasonable to anyone who can read and understand this article might not play in much of the developing world. In my experience, poor and uneducated people have a bigger appetite for conspiracy theories than people with money and diplomas. Reputation management is delicate in any context; in a country full of conspiracy nuts, it's impossible. Even the weakest link, real or imagined, between Peace Corps volunteers and other arms of the U.S. government could put volunteers at risk.

A recent guest on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews (Matthews was a PCV in Swaziland from '68-70) imagined a chilling scenario: a terrorist group learns that a veteran who served in Iraq is now living in a remote village in Uganda, or Morocco, or why not, Mauritania. And he's armed with a shovel and a watering can. It's not unreasonable to think that this volunteer could be targeted.

This is what political scientists call unintended consequences with big smiles on their faces. You want to help two honorable organizations, and instead they gain little and put people at risk.

I say they gain little, because the tactic does nothing to deal with the actual problem at hand -- the military not hitting its recruitment figures. (Note: This is not about Peace Corps recruiting. They get 12,000 applicants for 4,000 PCVs and are ready to expand if given the cash the President always promises) Think about the average recruit. Can you make a compelling argument that this person is interested in being a Peace Corps volunteer? Admittedly, veterans make excellent PCVs. After all, they have technical skills, a work ethic, and toughness. Contrast that with your average 23-year-old English Lit graduate... But how many of these folks thought about Peace Corps before they enlisted? Probably very few.

I have the utmost respect for Sen. McCain, for both his own service to the United States and his promotion of national service. But I think he made the wrong call on this bill, and while the authors were able to get what they wanted quietly, we were bound to find out eventually.

At the end of the day, I am not worried, though. The issue is too far in the weeds to ever be noticed by 99.9% of the people I encounter. And that 0.1%? I'll think about that later and keep my shovel by the bed.

What interests me more is another recruitment opportunity: Peace Corps legislative affairs staff. How do you enlist for that gig? Decent pay, great location, plenty of time for minesweeper, and you don't even need to track what's happening on the hill. In Peace Corps parlance we call that The Easiest Job You'll Ever Love.