Source: Peace Corps
On December 21 2011, the U.S. Peace Corps released a statement declaring that it would be pulling out 158 active volunteers from Honduras in January 2012 as a result of the ongoing violence there perpetrated by organized criminal gangs. Furthermore, the Peace Corps intends to reevaluate the safety situation for volunteers serving in other Central American countries – Guatemala and El Salvador, and have canceled the upcoming 2012 training sessions that were to be held in the aforementioned countries. This security measure was not unprecedented in the past, since, according to the New York Times article, according to a Peace Corps spokesperson, Kristina Edmunson, speaking from her Washington D.C. office, said that “from time to time, the corps withdraws or restricts work in the 75 countries in which it has volunteers.” It has been reported that dozens of current Peace Corps volunteers have been injured after being caught in the line of fire amidst the violence that has plagued the Central American nations with the rise of illicit drug trafficking.
The situations in Honduras and in El Salvador have struck a particularly ominous chord with the Peace Corps as they have been deemed the most violent countries in the world due to presently having “the highest homicide rates in the world with 82.1 and 66 per 100,000 inhabitants, respectively, in 2010,” as compared with Guatemala which “had a rate of 41 per 100,000 last year” according to a recent report released by the United Nations. One must wonder why all three countries have “more than double the homicide rate of 18 per 100,000 in Mexico, where drug violence has drawn world attention.” For Honduras, it could be the result of the unstable political environment that has generated pandemonium and violence since 2009 when leftist President Manuel Zelaya was ousted in a controversial coup, resulting in the killing of numerous journalists, labor activists, and gays at a disturbing rate for a country that did not share the typical Central American penchant for violence.
“Due to ongoing security concerns, the agency is enhancing operational support to currently serving volunteers in these countries” as, in a public statement made by Director Aaron Williams, “The safety and security of all Peace Corps volunteers is the agency’s highest priority.”
However, this sentiment does not address the question of contentious Peace Corps security measures, or lack thereof, in the past, particularly regarding the issue of the rape of volunteers around the globe. In an ABC News’ 20/20 interview, Karestan Koenen, came forward about being raped during her Niger 1991 service, where, upon her return, was told by the Peace Corps that it was fundamentally her fault. Tragically, the situation has not changed much today, with multiple women coming forward about similar traumas associated in their lives. According to the 20/20 reports, “more than 1,000 young American women have been raped or sexually assaulted in the last decade while serving as Peace Corps volunteers in foreign countries with little or no support from the Peace Corps organization. Sexual assault is not the only area in which the organization has not done much for their victimized volunteers; Kate Puzey was killed due to the release of her identity within the Peace Corps. Puzey had made a complaint to the organization after hearing that a former volunteer in her village was sexually assaulting students. This case should also be looked at as an issue of security, with volatile information being leaked within the Peace Corps’ bureaucracy, a master breach of privacy which ended up in a volunteer’s death.
Why has the Peace Corps neglected to properly address these issues, and not give them the same attention as they are now doing with respect to gang-related drug violence?
It is important that the Peace Corps examine all situations that threaten the security of its personnel and not abandon them in their time of greatest need if they want to continue President Kennedy’s vision. Peace Corps managers have much to discuss concerning issues of personnel and curriculum, but no issues have a more urgent location on its agenda than the sexual safety of volunteers. Peace Corps needs to end their “blame the victim” approach and focus on the recovery of their volunteers.
In a recent Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) email inquiry about sexual safety matters, a Peace Corps representative reiterated that safety is their number one priority and attached a link to the “Commitment to Sexual Assault Victims.” This document appears to be more like a collection of general ideals rather than a detailed and concrete set of policies, actions, and objectives. Although no one can foresee all possible crises, one can learn from past mistakes.
Are you unaware that the Kate Puzey Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act was passed in November? "The act, which passed earlier this month in Congress, is designed to protect Peace Corps whistleblowers and improve the treatment of victims of violence and sexual assault."
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/obama-sign-kate-puz…
"For Honduras, it could be the result of the unstable political environment that has generated pandemonium and violence since 2009 when leftist President Manuel Zelaya was ousted in a controversial coup, resulting in the killing of numerous journalists, labor activists, and gays at a disturbing rate for a country that did not share the typical Central American penchant for violence."
Where do you get your ideas? Honduras has been very violent since the mid-'90s. It pretty much typifies the "Central American penchant for violence". A penchant which, BTW, has more to do with our "War on Drugs" than anything else.
Dear Kirk,
I don't think the author was trying to say that Honduras has only been violent since the 2009 coup against Zelaya, but that things there have, unfortunately, been getting worse. I could just as easily argue that you are wrong and that violence has gotten worse not because of the "War on Drugs" but the proliferation of the Mara gangs throughout Central America.
I think you missed the point of the article.
This is a reall hack-job of an article. Poor research and weak analysis. Surely COHA can do better than this.
As a current volunteer in Guatemala, I can tell you there is a mountain of support from the staff, especially our PCVLs, our Safety and Security officer, and above all, the medical staff. I know the PC needs to learn from past mistakes, but others viewing the situation need to allow that perhaps the PC has, and not simply judge it on its legacy.
We are placed in the safest sites possible, but have to take risks in our everyday lives. And if we do not feel safe, there are people with whom we have the confianza to talk to about those tough issues. And for those staff members who are below the level where they have to deal with the politics of host organizations, PC image and all that, their first and only goal is keeping us safe and happy. There is a scary history, and it is easy to see those numbers and present a horror story, but I spent three months in training where every day we were inundated with the message that our safety is paramount. And I believe that.
Or your can believe the chisme and think that this is really financially motivated. Country posts are shutting down in Central Asia as well, and this may just be an excuse to cut costs.
Either way, this article has no inside perspective on what actually happens in the Peace Corps, the training and sincere efforts that are taken to keep us safe, and as such, I find it to be a completely inaccurate and sloppy rendering of the current situation of PC posts in the Americas.
My daughter is coming home after only six months with Peace Corp in El Sal due to security. She has option of returning to a different country.
Even if they take your safety seriously, they still botched the larger issue of support in my case. I served in Honduras in 05-06. My site had to be moved due to sexual harassment. I was pulled into the central office 3 months later and told I was required to see a counselor. Shortly there after I found out that my counter-part had not been told that her husband (the man I felt threatened by) was the reason I left. Supporting volunteers means doing more than just moving them when there is a threat.
I am a RPCV of Honduras 80-82. The main reason for the violent take over of society by drug money in Honduras can be traced back to the counter insurgency tactics of militaries in Central America taught to them by the U.S. in the 80's and 90's. Many people fled that atmosphere of war to the U.S. and Mexico. Most were persona non grata and deported back into ravaged economies of their home countries, Honduras among them. A volunteer is responsible for themselves and is at the mercy of the host country's law enforcement. i can see the breakdown of society in my beloved Honduras is rapidly happening. I never dealt with gangs during my service, but I can see how they originated.
As for being knowledgable about safety, we as PCV's know the dangers. It is a third world country- not a country club.
As a potential PCV filling out an application I am more worried how the policy changed in how the agency treats the victims. I am full aware of the possible consequences of serving, but I am wondering if they still try the blame the victim or if they provide support required for someone who is the victim of assault? I have a great therapist I could see here in the event of something like that. Having dealt with victims shame and overcome it, I know what I need. But will it be provided? Being told safety is a first concern and actually telling me what happens if I am not safe or something happens is different. Can any of the PCVs comment on that? I would love to know. If I had therapy afterwards that told me it was probably my fault I was raped, I would be just as upset as the victims coming forward. I want to know if this has changed.