Kuno, canine war hero or cannon fodder.

Heroes or unwitting participants.

Kuno, a British military dog, has recently joined a long list of those that have been injured or killed in action in the line of duty and was awarded a PDSA Dickens medal for bravery as a “hero“.

Kuno, a young 3 year old Belgian Malinois, took part in a military operation in Afghanistan in 2019 and was seriously injured when helping his comrades who were pinned down from machine gun and grenade fire. He was sent in under a hail of bullets wearing night vision goggles to attack the al-Qaeda extremists.

It sounds like a storyline from one of the animated movies we are all so fond of where the heroes are animals doing great deeds, particularly the part of wearing night vision goggles. Unfortunately, this was real life and our hero was shot and suffered a multitude of injuries resulting in part amputation of his back legs. He now has the accolade of being the first UK military working dog to be fitted with custom prosthetic limbs and must contend with these injuries for the rest of his life.

“The great care the UK armed forces provide to animals”

The UK Defence Secretary stated that Kuno had changed the course of the mission by saving British soldiers lives but also added that the story showed “the great care that the UK armed forces provide to the animals that serve alongside them.” But it seems rather illogical to view sending a dog through a hail of bullets as providing great care of them.

Kuno miliatry dog and Dickens Medal for bravery
Heros or cannon fodder. [Photo credit:PDSA/TIMES PHOTOGRAPHER RICHARD POHLE]

Is it a betrayal of the trust they obviously form with their handlers to send dogs like Kuno to their deaths.

Surely to be a hero you need to have a fair idea of what you are doing at the time. Dogs have many attributes but understanding the dangers of charging into machine gun fire is not one of them. When we describe and fete them as heroes we are obviously humanising them and giving them the ability to process and acknowledge the risks and dangers they are getting themselves into, but this is against scientific doctrine and understanding.

Dogs will always try to cope with anything we demand of them and mostly treat everything as a game, so following a command regardless of its intentions is an act of trust and faith on their part and perhaps a betrayal of this trust on ours.

Are we doing them an injustice by giving them medals?

It is unclear what charities like the PDSA are trying to achieve by giving them medals unless it is to alleviate some of our guilt of putting them at risk in the first place. Although it is a poignant gesture, particularly when it is posthumous, and expresses our animal loving instincts the dogs possibly deserve better from us instead.

I have not thank god been in such a situation as Kuno and his comrades found themselves but I hope there was great heart searching when making the decision to sacrifice Kuno’s well-being to save their own. The story illustrates that these dogs are merely extra weaponry or ‘kit’ and are expendable in these situations and any consideration of their rights or welfare is not viable. But can we seriously call these dogs genuine heroes and glorify these enforced acts of so called bravery, when they have not ‘volunteered’ their services and are obviously unaware of what they are doing. At best they are just unwitting ones.

Related articles:

Japanese Whaling Fleet Returns in Triumph With 223 Whales

The Japanese whaling fleet triumphantly returned this month (June 2020) from its first three month commercial hunt, with almost a full quota of 223 whales caught, amounting to 1,430 tons of frozen meat which costs $140 per kilo to buy. Bolstered by the success the Japanese government wants to spend $48 million to support more hunts even though the eating of whale meat is not as popular.

The ban on commercial whaling is just a gentleman’s agreement.

Japan announced its decision to begin whaling again after 31 years on the 1st. July, 2019 causing  worldwide outrage, because most people were under the misapprehension that whaling had been made illegal. But tragically the so called moratorium was only ever a gentleman’s agreement and a trade bargain which any country could withdraw from at any time if they followed the withdrawal procedure under the Convention.

Why did Japan do it? Well they never really stopped and used the loophole that all countries have of catching whales under the umbrella of “scientific purposes”. Japan also allegedly caught more than its allowed quota of Minke whales for years and tried to persuade member countries to help overturn the moratorium by supporting a vote on their proposal of “small type commercial whaling” (STCW) using small whaling ships in territorial waters. When this didn’t happen they decided to go their own way and hunt in their own waters.

Whaling, illegal whaling, IWC,Commercial whaling ban,whaling moratorium

Any member country of the Convention can just opt out

In 1946 the  Convention for the Regulation of Whaling was signed by the major whaling nations when it was realised that whales were in imminent danger of becoming extinct, but it was done to“provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry in the future not for the benefit of the whales.

The International Whaling Commission (IWC) was set up under the  Convention and the members meet every two years to decide which species can be hunted, how many and by who and various other policy issues. Any country can join regardless of whether they want to hunt whales or not and each member has voting rights.

The right to withdraw

Article XI of the Convention allows any member Government to withdraw from the agreement on the 30th. June of any year by giving notice before the 1st. January of the same year. Although not morally responsible it is legal. There was a worry that other countries would follow Japan’s lead and pull out, but thankfully this does not appear to be happening at the moment.

Many countries claim an exemption and receive a quota for their “aboriginal” inhabitants to hunt small numbers of small whales for their own needs, but many of these now want to increase their hunting to sell the by-products. Countries which presently hunt whales in one form or another are Japan, Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Russia, USA, St. Vincent and Grenadines, South Korea and Greenland.

Unfortunately it would be foolish to believe that the future of the planet’s whales is totally safeguarded.