Category: Animal Cruelty in Qatar

The notion of ‘multispecies ethnography’ as explored by Eduardo Kohn in How Forests Think offers a fresh perspective towards the topic of animal abuse and systematic justice, especially in the context of Qatar. Kohn’s article not only distinguishes the connection between human and non-human entities but moreover highlights the importance of recognizing the non-human as a counterpart to our species, rather than an inferior creature. Kohn’s assertions embrace the non-human and the human as a singular identity in an attempt to free the human mind of its own ‘mental enclosures’ fostered by the idea of human exclusivity (Kohn, 22). It is an interesting negation from posthumanist ideals that decree the human as a creature above all other forms of intelligences and life forms, and alternatively paints the human as one with animals and and every other non-human being. As of modern times, especially with capitalism at its peak, the reinforcement and intensification of human exclusivity and superiority has become a regular standard in a capitalist setting. The idea of reaching self-actualization has infiltrated our minds so much that we have become desensitized to other life forms that do not directly benefit us. Perhaps this is what Kohn is alluding to when referring to our ‘mental enclosures’ and the toxicity derived from the human ego.  To think of the animal as an equal is liberating in the eyes of Kohn, however, how does this idea fit in the modern narrative?

On the 10th of July 2022, 29 dogs situated in an industrial compound were killed by 4 Qatari men who opened fire and killed dogs at random (The Guardian, 2022). The suspected perpetrators remain unidentified till this day, and their assumed motives are not fully understood. As echoed in the article, some activists reported that the prime motive of these shooters, as articulated by one of the men to the security in the factory, was due to a dog biting the son of one of the angry men. Some activists even believe that their motives were baseless, and that their actions were due to the fact that Islam identifies dogs as ‘unclean’ and this provoked the inclination to harm them. Despite the outrage this scene causes, Qatari authorities failed to update the raging public on this case, and did not announce or confirm any legal proceedings taken against the four men. This brings us to our question of how would multispecies ethnography solve or approach this issue? Is it an effective appeal in a contemporary society? These questions highlight the evident hierarchy established between man and the animal in which man possesses epistemological, systematic, societal and general advantage. An animal can not revolt, nor can they speak, nor stage an uproar, nor take legal action, nor can they showcase calculated defiance. It is not enough to merely approach humankind with the appeal to look at animals as their equals, simply due to their lack of resources and advantages. This proves to be the prime cause of the dichotomy between animals and man, as witnessed in the case study presented, and why humans will never affirm their respect or complete solidarity with animals. If there were such a thing, the 29 dogs would’ve received some form of justice, equity or even an honoring. However, none were shown. 

Sources used:

Guardian News and Media. (2022, July 21). Outrage in Qatar over shooting of 29 dogs as it prepares for World Cup. The Guardian. Retrieved October 9, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/21/gunmen-kill-29-dogs-and-puppies-in-qatar 

As of modern times, the possession of exotic animals as ‘pets’ encompasses a contemporary example of how wealthy people showcase status and exclusivity in Qatar. It is an interesting notion considering the confinement of creatures otherwise known as notorious predators, kings of the jungle, and ultimately the epitome of wilderness. Val Plumwood’s ‘Being Prey’ demonstrates her horrific first hand encounter with a ferocious alligator. Her initial thoughts regarding the first sighting of the alligator was of great interest and inquisitivity, rather than sheer fear (p.34). However, unfiltered terror took over Plumwood’s body and mind as she grasped the alligator’s intentions to knock her over her canoe, and to attack her. The descriptions of the attack offered a very gruesome and a graphic clear view of the injuries Plumwood incurred from her deadly encounter with the wild animal. The beast ‘death rolled’ her, sunk its teeth into her bear flesh, suffocated her and more. Ultimately, Plumwood’s experience accentuates a wild predator’s innate nature to kill and to hunt. Moreover, the collision of human and wild animal depicts a very clear hierarchy that highlights the animal in possession of the ‘upper hand’. Plumwood escaped on the mere basis that the alligator simply tired out and chose to forgo its victim. Consequently, this encounter mechanizes as an exemplar as to why wild animals should not be within close vicinity of fragile human individuals. This brings to light the modern phenomenon of owning and flaunting exotic animals while simultaneously confining them to household environments and small areas of living.  This expresses the negation of natural conditions in which the wild animal is to roam freely in its habitat, undisturbed, unprovoked and posing no threat to any humans surrounding them. Therefore, the reality where the wealth is in ownership of these animals poses a series of fruitful questions: What is the prime motive of these people and how do they ensure their own safety and the safety of others? How do these owners facilitate the needs of wild animals in domesticated environments? Is the possession of wild animals a form of exclusivity, or is it a form of passion? Is it ethical if the animals’ prime needs are being ensured?  

Notoriously, niche groups of residents in Qatar, along with residents of other countries residing in the Gulf region, invest large sums of money on the informal domestication of entirely wild animals. This reality has repetitively proven to be entirely unethical considering the jeopardization of the overall safety of the surrounding community, and the owners themselves. In fact, in 2016, the Guardian released an article on an escaped tiger voyaging in between traffic and incoming cars. (The Guardian, 2016). The consensus surrounding where the tiger originally came from came down to it being an escaped pet. The article also touched on other escaped wild animals within the country, including a cheetah, and the uproar this has caused amongst concerned neighbors and civilians. Despite the unlawfulness of such actions, it remains to be ‘trendy’ and cool to have such animals and exoticism in one’s household, considering how pricey these animals are, and entirely exclusive they are meant to be. Val Plumwood’s traumatic experience underscores the hazards interweaved in human and wild animal relations, and how inherently unnatural this alliance proves to be. 

Sources used: Guardian News and Media. (2016, March 8). Escaped tiger spotted on busy road in Doha. The Guardian. Retrieved September 29, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/08/escaped-tiger-spotted-busy-road-doha-motorway-qatar

Upon my visit to the notorious ‘Pet Souq’ situated in the heart of Doha, Souq Waqif, I stumbled upon a phenomenon I defined as ‘the commercialization of sickly bodies’. The souk essentially specializes in the selling of domestic animals (from cats, to puppies, to birds, rabbits, chicks and more) to anticipated customers, as well as the retailing of pet supplies and food products. The inauguration of the pet souq remains to be unclear, however there is a consensus that it was initiated upon the renovation of the general Souq in 2006 according to the workers I interacted with. As for my initial impression of the pet souq after refusing to visit for years, the souq remained the same. The animals remain confined in extremely small and caged spaces while simultaneously exposed to the merciless heat of the desert weather. Even upon close inspection, I witnessed very peculiar behavioral patterns apparent in the animals, especially the younglings, that contradicted healthy functioning in kittens, puppies and more. The kittens especially appeared very lethargic, lacking physical stamina and further lacking any form of curiosity or excitement towards the towering customers.This reminded me of the myriad of concerns and speculations customers previously had regarding the welfare of these animals, where they theorized that the animals received tranquilization to remain calm in very minimal and crowded spaces. Moreover, some customers even complained of the animals unfortunately passing away shortly after their purchase, not having mentioned the myriad of health complications that customers additionally reported on. These health complications include the following: fleas, ringworms, worms in the stomach, patches of missing fur and more. Upon my visit, I also took notice of unnaturally neon-colored chicks that have had their feathers dyed for aesthetic purposes. Apparently, the workers informed me that the dye is merely temporary, and shall fade out once the chicks mature and enter their adult stages. However, it is important to note that these chicks have an unnaturally, very short life span, and will very much likely never get to reach their adult stages of life. This perhaps relates to the toxicity of the dye that consequently hinders the health of these chicks, considering the divergence from allowing the chicks to grow in their natural form. 

It is evident that the Pet Souq, despite being a focal point of controversy for years, stays standing due to the major commercial benefit it gains and the tourism fostered from this sole souq. The puppies are sold from anywhere between roughly 4,000 riyals and above, whereas some birds even are sold at 7,000 riyals and above. Despite the reputation of the souq, the place remains to be crowded, and many visitors end up leaving with a cage, a plastic bag of supplies and finally, the sickly animal. Although the commercialization is beneficial in the economic sense, it comes at the heavy expense of the welfare of said animals. Instead, an alternative approach is to commercialize a much more sustainable project that shall ensure the integration of human and animal relations without the human interference on the natural cycle of the animal being. This has been previously deemed as ‘interspecies diplomacy’ by Una Chaudhuri by using the case study of the Dolphin Dance Project initiated in 2009. The fully domesticated animals can be put in non-profit shelters, whereas the more relatively ‘wild’ animals, such as turtles, can be a part of these sustainable and commercial projects in which both the human and animal benefit to some extent. The animal enjoys the vastness of its natural, yet regulated, habitat, whereas the human will experience engagement with wild animals while simultaneously procuring economic gain by virtue of sightseers and investors. The projects could be instilled instead of the Pet Souq, as a form of reformation towards a much more sustainable and animal-cruelty free society.

For as long as the residents of Qatar can remember, the normalization and prevalence of animal cruelty within the country has always been a prominent issue. Notorious examples include the following: the ‘pet souk’ in Souq Waqif, mass killings of street cats subsidized or ensured fully by the government, the standardization of owning exotic pets, the lack of legal action towards animal persecutors and much more. It is also important to note the absence of animal shelters in Qatar, and the lack of governmental intervention in the preservation of animal welfare. The Qatari government moreover fails to subsidize the privately owned veterinary clinics and centers dispersed around the country, and therefore a simple trip to the vet can be financially debilitating for distressed pet owners. What this often leads to is the neglect of harmless animals that are then forced to withstand the merciless and scorching heat of Qatar’s desert weather. This large-scale neglect towards animal welfare, unfortunately, reinforces the notion that animals are merely inferior to humans and it is hence illegitimate to punish individuals for the ill-treatment of a ‘sub-human’. This reality poses a myriad of questions channeled towards the Qatari government in conversation with the theme of environmental humanities, morality, human and non human relations and the channeling of responsibility and blame. 

Qatar’s case study functions as an exemplar or a benchmark to study human and non human relations within the region. This is highly relevant to our course, the environmental humanities, as it depicts the inner human dialogue with other ‘lesser’ species. For example, what does the normalization of animal cruelty say about how we, as a society, feel about animals? Do we lack genuine empathy or a genuine interest in the particular case of animal cruelty? Why do governmental and authoritative bodies, especially the Ministry of Municipality and Environment’s Department of Animal Resources, lack the need to showcase solidarity or even compassion towards the animals residing within the country? What has been previously done in the past to minimize or completely terminate animal cruelty? These questions in their nature function to address systemic flaws and the whole rejection of categorizing animals as legitimate victims. Our current reality in which the pet souk remains to be in business, exotic pets remain to be the norm and moreover provide the owner with a status symbol, and veterinary clinics remain to be extremely pricey, ultimately illustrate the continual passivity governments demonstrate towards such horrid conditions. Is it merely due to the commercial benefits, or the lack of commercial losses, that the government gains that plays a role in this passivity? Or is it an issue that transcends into the spectrum of morality and moral obligations? With that said, do we lack morals due to our conscious apathy towards said issues? Are we, as the people of the country, or the government, as the legitimate establishment, to blame?