« PreviousContinue »
When we say "open recruitment” we mean that anybody who has applied to the Peace Corps as a potential volunteer has a chance, an equal chance, with anybody else to be selected for a particular project, whether it is run by a specific university or by a specific religious denomination. In other words, our pool of trained manpower is not to be bypassed by religious organizations or universities or private voluntary agencies simply because they have some people of their own that they would like to use. Those people of their own have got to be put into our pool, and if they come out as best, that is fine. But they cannot be selected arbitrarily simply because they went to a particular school, because they are people of a particular race or of a particular religion.
In addition to that we maintain that we have the right to supervisory control over the training of any people who go overseas under the Peace Corps aegis, so if a particular university is running a program for us, such as the one I described this morning, the Associated Universities of Indiana, involving Chile, we reserve the right to have one of our people from our training division inspect the course, the curriculum, the faculty, the hours of training, physical conditioning, and so on, so that we ourselves are certain in every case that the training program lives up to the standards which we determine.
When the people go overseas, as I said earlier today, we do have a Peace Corps representative in every country in which we have a project, and we reserve to that man the right to inspect what is going on in that country, whether it is under direct government-to-government administration or under, for example, the aegis of CARE in Colombia.
Our Peace Corps representative in Colombia has a specified written right to inspect what is going on in the CARE-Colombia Peace Corps project, and to make objections, if anything is going, in his judgment, improperly.
He has the right to see to it, for example, that there is no proselytizing or propagandizing. He has the right to pull a Peace Corps person out of that project on his own motion, and so does the ambassador, if any Peace Corps person is performing in a way which would be inimical to the interests of the United States.
This can be done summarily by our Peace Corps representative or by the Ambassador no matter what project this Peace Corps person is working on. If it is a Quaker project, we can take them out just like that, and so can the Ambassador, if the volunteer were behaving in a manner which the Ambassador felt was prejudicial to the interests of the United States or for any other reason satisfactory to the Ambassador or our Peace Corps representative.
DESIRABILITY OF AVOIDANCE OF POLITICAL OR RELIGIOUS PROPAGANDIZING
In addition to that, of course, we say there can be no direct religious work done or political propagandizing done by our people overseas, and that is one reason again why. we have a Peace Corps representative there, to make sure that it is not done, and we feel quite certain if it starts that we will hear about it very promptly, because the kind of people that we will have as Peace Corps representatives in a country will be the kind that will be out with the volunteers, not waiting in an office for somebody to call them up on the telephone and tell him about something that has been going on.
Senator GORE. An illustration of how sensitive some nations are to possible political efforts on the part of any representative of the United States, or any other country, within their own country, is my recent talk with high executives of a country in Africa who were not at that moment very enthusiastic about the Peace Corps because they wondered why we called it the Peace Corps. They did not seem to be disturbed about the word "corps" but the word "peace. I suppose that is a testimonial to the extent to which the Soviets have prostituted the name "peace” to their own political purposes.
Mr. SHRIVER. I think you are right. We have run into that kind of a comment about the use of the word "peace"—that the Soviets have so used the word "peace" that it practically means war, and we have also heard it commented that the word "corps" in some places has a military connotation which some people do not like.
But those comments have been, I believe, Senator-certainly they have been in my experience-very much in the minority.
Senator GORE. Then it will be your purpose to take every reasonable precaution to prevent members of the Peace Corps from undertaking religious functions or trying to bring political influence to bear in the communities in which they work, and to see that they restrict themselves to the contribution of the services for which they have been trained and which they are directed to perform?
Mr. SHRIVER. That is exactly right; yes.
Mr. SHRIVER. I might point out, if I may, Senator, in all of our contracts these sentences appear:
Merit alone must determine admission to Peace Corps programs. Selection requirements must be clearly functional. A person must not be discriminated against because of race, religion, or other similar considerations. Political influence is not to be considered in selection.
That goes in all of our contracts, and we intend to supervise it and make sure that it is adhered to.
WHY IS THE PROGRAM TERMED THE "PEACE CORPS" ?
Senator CHURCH. Senator Capehart.
Senator CAPEHART. I do not want to go over any ground already covered. Unfortunately I could not be here this morning, but if I do start going over some question you have thoroughly covered before, why, feel free to say so.
I would like to talk a little about why you call it a Peace Corps. All the people are going to countries that we are not at war with and that we have not been at war with. Isn't there a better name than Peace Corps ?
Mr. SHRIVER. Did you say they were all going to countries we have been at war with?
Senator CAPEHART. That we have not been at war with.
Why is this called the Peace Corps? Is Peace Corps a good name? Maybe I will ask you the following question, and then we will get back to my first one.
OBJECTIVES OF THE PEACE CORPS
Exactly what is it that we are trying to do with this program?
Mr. SHRIVER. Well, in the first place, Senator, we are trying to make available to foreign countries which request our help the services of skilled Americans who are willing to serve under voluntary hardship conditions in jobs that are needed to be filled in foreign countries.
That is the No. 1 objective.
No. 2, we believe that through the Peace Corps we can make a great contribution to the education of a number of Americans and to their knowledge of the world and to their improvement as individual human beings.
We believe that when they return to this country, they will be better citizens of this country and perhaps go into our Government service, where they will render, perhaps, more distinctive, distinguished service than they would otherwise have been able to perform.
As section 2 of our bill stipulates:
It is the policy of the United States and the purpose of this act to promote world peace and friendship through a Peace Corps, which shall make available to interested countries and areas and to international organizations, men and women of United States, qualified for service abroad and willing to serve under conditions of hardship to help the peoples of such countries and areas in meeting their needs for manpower
Senator CAPEHART. What is to be gained by using the word “hardship"?
Mr. SHRIVER. Well, of course, because, Senator, in a large number of places, in order to reach the people, the ordinary people, of a number of these countries, it requires willingness to serve under conditions which to an average American are exceedingly difficult or hard. So we want to make it very clear at the beginning we are trying to reach the ordinary man in these countries, and that requires service under hardship conditions.
THE TANGANYIKAN PROJECT
Senator CAPEHART. Give me one example of just what the representative of this country would do in Africa or Asia, or Indonesia, or Chile, or Peru, or any country.
Mr. SHRIVER. Let us take one we have already announced. There are a number of others we could discuss, but let us take the one in Tanganyika. In Tanganyika, Senator, our Peace Corps volunteers are going there to serve as surveyors of a feeder road system for that country.
Senator CAPEHART. And then you are only going to send surveyors on that project?
Mr. SHRIVER. No, sir. We are sending 30 people.
Mr. SHRIVER. Twenty-eight people. Twenty of them will be surveyors, four will be geologists, and four will be civil engineers.
Senator CAPEHART. How long will they remain there? Mr. Shriver. They will enlist with us for a period of 2 years. About 3 months of their training will be in this country, followed by another month in that country and then they will serve in that country for the remainder of the 24 months.
Senator CAPEHART. And they will be required to be experienced surveyors ?
Mr. SHRIVER. Well, sir, we have announced the people who have been chosen for that work, and all of them have some competence for that work, and all of them have some competence in surveying.
I would like it to be clear though, Senator, that the training course in this country in Texas Western College, which is opening up on Monday, includes work to equip them even better than they already are for surveying in the conditions that they will face in Tanganyika. When they arrive there they will go to a training center which is being organized and staffed and equipped by the Tanganyikan Government. The training center on
Senator CAPEHART. Twenty-eight of them are going over there to survey roads in Tanganyika and
Mr. SHRIVER. And to do geological work and civil engineering work connected with it.
Senator CAPEHART. They will be experienced people?
THE CHILEAN PROJECT
Senator CAPEHART. Give us another example. I heard a minute ago you are sending a group to Chile? Mr. SHRIVER. Yes, sir. Senator CAPEHART. What are they going to do?
Mr. SHRIVER. They are going to work in village community rehabilitation work south of Santiago.
Senator CAPEHART. What kind of work?
Mr. SHRIVER. Village community redevelopment work, educational work, south of Santiago.
Senator CAPEHART. How many are going there?
Mr. SHRIVER. No, they are not intended to be primarily schoolteachers.
In the area south of Santiago there are about three-quarters of a million people, Senator. I think the illiteracy rate there is something like 80 percent. There is a shortage, I am told, of school buildings, for example, and that some of the most important work is to be done in things like ordinary hygiene, child care.
Senator CAPEHART. And are these experienced people, such as architects and engineers and nurses?
Mr. SHRIVER. Not in the Chile program, Senator. They are not architects or engineers, because those are not needed in this kind of work. These people are being selected by the universities in Indiana, according to our rules, including open recruitment. They will be trained in Indiana, and sent down there under the jurisdiction, under the supervision of the people from Indiana colleges, from the universities of Indiana, Purdue, Notre Dame, and the other colleges in Indiana. They are being selected by them, with our cooperation, for the specific work that is needed.
Now, there we do not need architects. We are not going down there to build buildings. We are going down there to work with the people in a very depressed part of Chile.
As you know, they are so poor, both in educational background and economic opportunities there, that it is not necessary to send down a certificated schoolteacher to teach things that are needed.
Senator CAPEHART. Let us take other examples. Do you have any other projects that have been approved ?
Mr. SHRIVER. Yes, we do. If you would like to hear for a moment about the Chile program, a representative project will include this is in Chileamong other things, practical demonstration on cultivation and horticulture, raising small animals, preventive animal vaccination, and other tasks to improve small agricultural undertakings. Volunteers will also provide assistance in rural carpentry, family education centered around the problems of rural living, recreation, and home economics.
Senator CAPEHART. How many people are you sending to Chile for this purpose ?
Mr. SHRIVER. Forty-five.
Senator CAPEHART. And are you going to find 45 people who are now experienced and qualified in all the things you have been listing?
Mr. SHRIVER. No, sir. Don't misunderstand, each person does not have to be qualified in all of these things.
Senator CAPEHART. I understand that.
Mr. SHRIVER. For example, there will be people who know a great deal about hygiene and child care and first aid and health education. These may well be women who won't know very much about horticulture and raising small animals. But there will be others who do, so that the group, as a whole, will have the people necessary with these skills.
I want to make it clear that in addition to having certain skills when they start, they go to our training program here where they learn other skills, and when they get to Chile they work under experts from Chile who know about these things and who can give them additional training in preparation for this type of rural work.
THE PHILIPPINES PROJECT
You asked whether we had other projects. Yes, we do. In the Philippines, there is a project which has been announced there to provide primary school teachers aids, particularly in the area of English instruction. These teachers would be working in the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades in the public school system of the Philippine Islands.
Why are they going there? They are going there because the Philippine Government is concerned, through its Minister of Education, with the deterioration in that country of English instruction. As you know, Tagalog, the only other major language there, is not a national language. It is only spoken in a very few parts of the Philippine Island Archipelago, and what they need, they think, is better instruction to improve the quality of English usage and expression in the Philippine Republic.
So they are asking us to supply teachers aids. These teachers aids will go and work in the classrooms of selected Philippine schools under principals who have been selected, superintendents who have been selected; and, as I say, their arrival there has been discussed with and cleared by the teachers' organizations, so that there is no question of our displacing qualified Philippine teachers.