The Goat Life

Never before have I personally witnessed a global uproar as profound as the one that followed the killing of Saudi-American journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi embassy in Turkey, and the release of the Indian film The Goat Life. Both events exemplify the overwhelming power of "soft power"—capable of shaping perceptions by subtly conveying messages about the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia, mixed with a dose of propaganda. What more could a writer, an observer, whether resentful, affected, sarcastic, or serious, contribute to the debate surrounding The Life of Goats, a film that has sparked such extensive commentary that it's almost impossible to contain?

In early 2021, before the world learned about the kidnapping of a young Indian man, a slim religious scholar on Saudi Arabia’s Al-Majd TV recounted the true story as it had been told to him by a Saudi city governor (whose name he withheld) and the relatives of a Saudi man who had kidnapped the real-life Indian protagonist in 1993 from an airport in Saudi Arabia. According to his account, the Saudi sponsor (kafeel) abducted the Indian man, who had just arrived from his village, unfamiliar with the country and its language, and took him from the airport straight into the desert to herd goats.

Only after some time did the man realize he had been kidnapped. He was without a salary, and his sponsor refused to let him go, send him home, or even take him to the city. Desperate, the Indian man killed his sponsor. This critical part of the story, however, was omitted from the film for some reason. The murdered sponsor received little sympathy from his fellow citizens. The Indian man, who was about to be executed, was instead granted clemency, receiving 170,000 Saudi riyals in compensation for his ten years of labor—a sum raised by Saudis to liberate him.
As he prepared to leave Saudi Arabia, the man, moved by the reactions of the sponsor’s family who forgave him and by the generosity of the Saudis who donated for him, converted to Islam. He said that the man he killed lacked the moral qualities he later saw in the Saudi people who had forgiven him. This version of events was narrated by Sheikh Abdul Rahman Al-Du'ailij on Al-Majd TV under the title, "An Indian Kidnapped from the Airport and Sent to Herd Goats." It was an accurate account, untainted by the debate surrounding the film, yet it didn’t address the troubling aspects of the kafala (sponsorship) system, whose practices often amount to exploitation and enslavement.

When we look at “The Goat Life”, a film with a budget of approximately $10 million, released in mid-2024—nearly three decades after the incident—it was lengthy enough to portray the Saudi villain in a highly negative light. The film perpetuates the stereotype often cast by the West: backward, dirty, and oppressive. While oppression exists even in the most advanced European countries, the director succeeded in passing on these negative messages, while ignoring the brighter side of the story. This brighter side involved the pardon granted by the victim’s family and the generous donations that allowed the Indian man to return home safely from Saudi Arabia.

Human Rights Watch organization entered the fray, stating that the violations portrayed in the film remain far more widespread than Saudi critics are willing to admit. The organization acknowledged that some elements of the protagonist Najeeb’s story were exaggerated for cinematic purposes. The film caused a massive stir following its release, with Saudi citizens calling for a boycott of Netflix on social media, arguing that the film grossly exaggerated a rare instance of labor abuse and reinforced outdated and false stereotypes about Saudi treatment of foreign workers.

While the film’s creators drew on a harrowing story that highlighted many issues within the Saudi labor system, it’s essential not to overlook the context of its production. Notably, the film was released after a series of Saudi reforms in several sectors, including labor, despite the decades of indifference that followed the crime. Its production and release occurred amid the UAE’s efforts to challenge Saudi Arabia’s reform trajectory and Western attempts to counter Saudi Arabia’s growing ties with China, using human rights as a tool for pressure and blackmail. The film painted an extremely bleak picture, detached from any of the positive steps or reforms, as any objective analysis should strive to present both the negatives and positives in a balanced manner.

Regardless of who was behind the production and release of The Goat Life, or their motivations and goals, the film's distorted impact on Saudi Arabia’s global image cannot be ignored. This impact can only be countered by further reform in the labor sector, addressing all forms of abuse against foreign workers at the root. Reforms should start with the kafala system, addressing issues related to labor contracts, wages, working hours, operations, leave entitlements, allowances, health insurance, social security, payment mechanisms, residency regulations, property ownership, leasing, investment, and illegal forms of taxation.

Saudi Arabia’s new generation of leaders say they are steering the kingdom toward a new era under Vision 2030. If they are serious about comprehensive reform and achieving a historic transformation in the kingdom, this film should serve as a motivation to confront their human rights challenges head-on and resolve them with courage. Not only would this be a moral and ethical obligation, but it would also preempt any attempts at exploitation or external pressure from any party, whether in times of crisis or calm.