Dog Walking Is a Form of Quiet Rebellion

Iran's Leash Tightens: Dog Walking Bans Spread as a New Front in a Cultural War

A prohibition against walking dogs in public has been dramatically expanded by Iranian officials, spreading the controversial rule to numerous cities across the nation. This action represents a major escalation in the government's persistent campaign against keeping canines, a practice officials depict as a danger to civic order and a sign of Western societal sway. The broadened policy follows a 2019 directive that initially made the activity illegal in Tehran, the capital. Now, it impacts a minimum of 25 urban areas, including Isfahan, Kerman, and Hamedan. It is also now against the law to move canines inside a car.

This recent clampdown is an element of a larger drive to impose the Islamic Republic's stringent societal norms. A fiery discussion has erupted, placing the government’s view of religious immaculacy and cultural genuineness in opposition to the individual liberties of an expanding segment of the population. For a great number of people, especially younger citizens, keeping a dog has evolved into a silent yet powerful emblem of resistance against an increasingly repressive government. The application of these prohibitions is often irregular, but the state's official position remains firm.

A Widening Net of Prohibitions

The recent implementation of these prohibitions has been rapid and expansive. After the first 2019 order affecting Tehran, other cities in various provinces adopted the policy. Over the last seven days, local governments in places like Ilam, Kermanshah, Boroujerd, and Kashmar have enacted comparable constraints. City officials have offered several reasons, from protecting community wellness and security to maintaining "physical and psychological safety." Abbas Najafi, the prosecutor for Hamedan, plainly informed a state-run newspaper that taking canines for a walk represents a danger to community health, tranquility, and well-being.

The legal foundation for these bans is unclear. The country does not have a statute that openly prohibits canine ownership. Instead, regional prosecutors and judicial bodies create directives, which police officers then implement. These orders frequently allude to general articles in the penal code about dangers to community wellness and violations of "public morality"—the very same legal reasoning applied to uphold compulsory veiling rules. The consequences for non-compliance are just as inconsistent, extending from financial penalties to vehicle confiscation and, occasionally, the detention of the owner and seizure of the animal.

Image Credit - Freepik

The Roots of Official Disapproval

The Islamic Republic's hostility towards dogs can be traced to the 1979 revolution. Government figures have persistently characterized canine companionship as a foreign practice, a "blind imitation of the West" that clashes with an Islamic lifestyle. Numerous religious academics in the government believe canines are "najis," which means they are ceremonially unclean, making contact with them—especially their saliva—a polluting experience. This viewpoint, however, does not have universal acceptance within Islam; jurists from the Sunni Maliki and Hanafi schools, for example, have more moderate opinions.

The current animosity in Iran seems to stem more from political and cultural apprehension than from a consistent religious principle. The supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has labeled canine ownership for reasons beyond herding, hunting, or protection as an "unacceptable" act. In 2021, 75 legislators took a harder line, denouncing the habit as a damaging societal issue with the potential to slowly alter the Iranian and Islamic lifestyle. This governmental position has led to different kinds of repression, such as a 2010 prohibition on media promotions for pets or items related to them.

A Symbol of Silent Defiance

Despite years of official opposition, owning a pet, and particularly a dog, is becoming more common in Iran. This pattern is most visible within the nation's substantial youth demographic. For many young Iranians, raised with constrained social liberties, keeping a dog is a method of personal expression and a mode of passive opposition. It is one of several techniques young people use to silently challenge the religious authorities, in addition to flouting compulsory veiling edicts, enjoying Western music, and going to clandestine gatherings.

The growing acceptance of dogs as companions is interpreted by officials as a direct affront to their cultural dominance. The image of a young individual taking a dog through a public park is more than a private decision; it is a political declaration. It signifies an acceptance of a way of life the administration has diligently worked to quash. This situation has transformed pets into a new front in the continuing cultural conflict between a controlling state and a public longing for more individual freedom.

Image Credit - Freepik

Inconsistent Enforcement and Public Response

In the past, the application of anti-dog rules has been inconsistent and sporadic. A great number of canine keepers in Tehran and elsewhere have kept taking their animals out, frequently adjusting their schedules to escape notice. Some people opt to take their canines to remote locations late in the evening, while others just transport them in their vehicles. The newest declarations, however, point to a stronger resolve for enforcement. Officials in Ilam have cautioned of "legal action" for non-compliance, and in Mashhad, the prosecutor has labeled walking a dog a "clear crime."

The public's reaction to the expanded prohibitions has been divided, especially on the internet. While some agree with the government's stance, many have expressed disagreement and challenged the state's list of priorities. Critics argue police capacity should be focused on guaranteeing public security instead of pursuing people who own pets. One social media user pointed out the absurdity of the situation, mentioning the more than two million stray dogs in the country while the government concentrates on household pets. Animal welfare advocates have also lodged complaints.

A Cultural War on Multiple Fronts

The crackdown on keeping canines is not an isolated event. It is an element of a wider government campaign to control public areas and impose its idea of an Islamic society. This encompasses a renewed effort against women who resist mandatory veiling, a policy that has become more intense since the nationwide "Woman, Life, Freedom" demonstrations in late 2022. The authorities have utilized new surveillance methods and enacted severe laws, including the "Protection of the Family through Promoting the Culture of Hijab and Chastity" law, which sets harsh punishments for defiance.

The government's moves betray a profound fear of losing authority over a youthful, interconnected, and increasingly resistant populace. The internet and social media have created pathways for Iranians to find alternative cultural viewpoints and to coordinate and voice opposition, weakening the state's control over information. The official reaction has been to intensify repressive measures, aiming not only at overt political activism but also at personal lifestyle decisions the government sees as a danger to the current system.

Image Credit - Freepik

The Contradictory Views Within Islam

While Iranian state representatives frequently use Islamic teachings to support their anti-dog regulations, the religion's position on canines is multifaceted and not uniformly negative. The Quran itself makes no direct condemnation of dogs. A significant part of the unfavourable view originates from the Hadith, which are compilations of the sayings and actions of the Prophet Muhammad. Certain Hadith imply that touching a dog, especially its saliva, makes an individual ritually impure. However, other Islamic accounts offer a more favourable image, such as the tale of a dog named Kitmir who was granted entry to paradise.

This historical and theological nuance is frequently ignored in Iran's current political environment. The regime's rigid interpretation supports its political goal of opposing what it considers cultural invasion from the West. By concentrating on dogs as "unclean" and as a sign of "Western-toxification," the officials can present their restrictive measures as a defence of religious and national identity, even when this reading is not universally shared among Muslims.

The Uncertain Future for Pet Owners

The outlook for people with dogs in Iran looks increasingly insecure. A 2014 bill that suggested fining and even flogging people walking dogs was not approved, and a 2021 legislative attempt to make keeping pets a crime also did not succeed. Despite these legislative failures, officials are using regional orders and current laws to accomplish similar goals. The shutting down of unlicenced veterinary practices and pet supply stores in some urban centres, like Isfahan, is another strategy employed to complicate pet ownership.

Despite the intimidation and the clampdown, the strong connection between many Iranians and their animal companions will likely not be easily severed. A veterinarian in Tehran observed the increase in pet ownership, suggesting that pets are now a core part of Iranian family life, even in observant households. He doubted the government's ability to remove the millions of pets from the country. For the time being, Iran's canine keepers and their four-legged friends are at the forefront of a silent but intensely personal fight for individual liberty and the very essence of Iranian identity.