A military occupation in the guise of education. How would the impoverished country distinguish between feeling invaded or educated? Children being taught by the barrell of a gun? Eric Claus' article makes me feel very uneasy. Surely there are more positive ways to assist than through military rule?

One of the first things many governments do when they get into power is to boost the military, and all the money goes in that direction. Eventually it leads to an arms race. Why encourage it.

Maybe a civil corp. is necessary in many countries, for providing education and establishing civil infrastructure, but I wouldn’t like to see any weaponry involved.

An army of educators seems to have had little effect on certain parts of the world.
After 150 - 200 years of colonialisation and the establishment social institutions (including schools and colleges and constitutions), followed by 50 years of self government (and the erradication of schools and colleges and constitutions), most of Africa's "educated elite" who obtained power are now denying to their fellow Africans the primary education we in the first world take for granted.
At some point in time someone will realise you can either "colonise" for the common good or leave places to "develop" (HA) in their own way.
I guess colonialisation might have me merits - for instance I sometimes wonder just how much better off PNG might be if, as well as supplying development aid we "manned" the PNG social institutions - like parliament.

Ringtail, Timkins - Where in the world did you get the idea that I wanted guns involved? Why do you call sending teachers to a country - Military rule? There would be no reason to have any guns. I imagine there would be countries that said "No, we don't trust you western industrialised colonialists." In those cases the Education Army would just stay away. As with any teaching, the students have to want to learn or everybodies time is wasted.

The idea is to offer aid that really helps people in poor countries. All I see is money being thrown at them and that has not worked very well. Provide low interest rate loans and then forgive those loans. How many times should we do that, before trying something new. Is there any way we can throw some ideas, hope and (dare I say it) Love as well as money?

Thanks very much for your comments. I can see that just the word 'army' has many negative connotations. Please let me know any of your other ideas.

Hi Eric,

My thoughts were that you wanted to convert sections of the armed forces into teachers (eg “Soldiers would not have to be turned into teachers, but many soldiers are very well suited to teaching, as they are already experienced trainers. If the core of the new Education Army was from the existing armed forces, the organisation would be set, and there would be a body of people who knew how to train people, who understood bureaucracies and who were used to living overseas in uncomfortable places.”)

There are many causes of poverty, but a common reason would be internal government corruption, and too much of the country's national wealth being spent on arms. Events occurring in several African countries would attest to this. Also Iraq where I understand the population is generally well educated, but of course many of the people have been plunged into great poverty and suffering because of reasons beyond their immediate control.

While education is important, I think the country would have to be politically stable, with only a nominal amount of money being spent on armed forces for education programs to have any great positive affect. How to produce political stability and reduce the world wide arm's race is of course a very complex problem.

Eric .. all well meaning liberal democratic thoughtfullness will always come up against entrenched tribal interests. No matter how good the intention, if it is perceived (and it will) as favoring one group,or in any way constituting a threat to exisiting status, prestige and power, it will be resisted in the strongest possible way.
When we westerners think of education, we think of it in terms of our broad multicultural view but such a view is not compatable with mixed race 3rd world countries generally.

I speak as one who has lived/worked/served in such a country and so I've seen it all.