Whatever became of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam?
Amrita Narlikar and Gulshan Sachdeva explore the contradictions between India's international image and domestic animal rights policies.
A famous story from the Mahabharat still forms the living traditions of India today: Yudhishthir – the son of Dharma (justice and duty)– willingly rejects the prospect of heaven, rather than leave a stray dog behind. The story is read by some as an allegory. But at its simplest and loveliest, it is a tale of the remarkable bond shared by humans and dogs.
The story shows our “argumentative Indian” at his best as he debates with Indra, the king of the gods, insisting that there can be no worse sin than abandoning one who is defenceless and has sought refuge. In his argumentation, Yudhishthir makes no distinction between the dignity and rights that should be accorded to humans and more-than-humans. For his compassion, Yudhishthir is welcomed with celestial fanfare, and driven to heaven in Indra’s own chariot.
Yudhishthir’s willingness to reject heaven in order to protect a stray dog stands in tragic contrast to the events of last week: the Supreme Court has come up with a ruling which, if implemented, will dispatch millions of stray dogs to a living hell. It reverses the trans-species kindness and peaceful coexistence that the 2023 ruling had tried to establish. Its tone is severe, requiring local authorities to round up stray dogs “at the earliest”, demanding that there is “no lethargy or compromise” and warning of the “strictest of actions” against anyone who resists. The reason given is the “larger public interest”: the protection especially of infants, children and the aged against rabies.
The dogs are to be taken to shelters and detained there, with no prospect of being returned to their home territories. A brief spark of hope is raised by the mention of CCTV, only to be swiftly extinguished: security cameras are to be placed not to ensure the welfare of the dogs, but “to ensure that no dogs are released or taken out”.
Rounding up street dogs due to the rabies risk they pose is akin to pre-emptively incarcerating large numbers of healthy humans due to the risk they could potentially pose of infecting others with some deadly disease, one day in the future. It is also not so different from imprisoning patients with a contagious disease – wrong in itself (for the patient should receive medical treatment and kindness, not punishment), but doubly so if the disease has occurred due to the failures of state authorities to provide the patients with timely vaccinations.
Rabies is indeed a terrible and fatal disease for humans to get, but it is also not a walk in the park for the afflicted dogs. It is avoidable – and this situation too could have been avoided – had the authorities done their due diligence of the ABC and vaccination programmes, as prescribed by previous court rulings. Indiscriminate punishment of innocent dogs for human policy failures is not justice.
Animal rights’ activists and dog lovers across the country are rightly pointing out that the state does not have the capacity to implement the draconian ruling: there are just not enough shelters to home the large number of dogs to be incarcerated, let alone shelters that would allow these dogs to lead healthy, safe and happy lives. Besides, the dogs belong to specific territories; dumping them together in crowded spaces will result in injury, disease and death. The emotional distress that these highly sentient beings will face is unimaginable. They have lived with their humans for millennia as their protectors and playmates. If hazardous health and safety conditions in the shelters do not kill them, their grief will.
The world’s fourth-largest economy with a hugely successful Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), can surely find the resources and technical solutions to care for its bezubaan (voiceless) citizens of Delhi and beyond. The first step towards finding a solution may be a proper counting and tagging of dogs in Delhi NCR, as well as administration of vaccines and medical treatment. The Pashu Aadhaar technology, currently used in many parts of the country for livestock, can be suitably modified for stray dogs as well. If successful in Delhi, it can then be implemented nationwide and perhaps also in many countries in the Global South.
The vilification narrative that has come into play will also need to be consciously and mindfully changed. Prime Minister Modi has reminded us of the pride that we should feel for our “desi”/ Indie breeds. Each one of us can do our part in recognizing and rewarding the guardians who have stood by us since the ancient past. Let us adopt, not shop (for foreign breeds, often bred under conditions of great cruelty), whenever possible. And when the state fails, we can still – as communities – work together for the health and safety of our best friends.
India’s theme for its G20 Presidency was “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam”: the entire earth (meaning not just peoples, but all the many wonderful beings with whom we share this planet) is one family. Through its attention to planetary rights and the concept of LiFE (lifestyle for the environment), India has garnered global influence. The latest Supreme Court ruling on street dogs will be a serious geopolitical mis-step, undermining India’s credibility as a civilizational global leader.
Amrita Narlikar is Distinguished Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation and Honorary Fellow of Darwin College, University of Cambridge.
Gulshan Sachdeva is Professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University.
Photo by Tushar Kadam
An abridged version of this article was first published in The Indian Express.
