Talk:Iranian famine of 1942–1943

Why did you remove the most important parts from this article?

For example, why did you remove this part: Mohammad Gholi Majd, on the other hand, concluded that three to four million Iranians died of disease and starvation during the Allied occupation.

This article is based on Mohammad Gholi Majd's book. It is cited in sources in the current article. Majd, Mohammad Gholi (2016). Iran Under Allied Occupation In World War II: The Bridge to Victory & A Land of Famine. University Press of America. ISBN 978-0761867388.

Why did you remove his conclusion from this article?

Please can someone put it back in, and make sure whoever was responsible for removing it will never be allowed to touch this article again. A lot of stuff has been removed from this article to white-wash this British-led genocide against the Iranian people.

I'd also like to know who tried to delete this article in December 2019.

A Factual Check of O Grada's Claim on WWII Iran Famine's Death Toll

In the current WP article it is stated that according to Cormac O Grada, the number of people who died in the WWII Iran famine in unknown, but it was "probably modest." The source appears to be a 2019 working paper by O Grada. [1] In his working paper O Grada cites Julian Bharier's 1968 article (p. 277) as his source. [2]

There is nothing in Bharier's article to justify O Grada to cite it as a source for his claim that the Iran death toll was "probably modest." Bharier's article does not contain anything on the WWI and WWII Iran famines, not even a mention. Moreover, the article is marred by some gross factual inaccuracies, such as the claim that the period 1921-1925 was one of "civil war and famine," a totally inaccurate claim. In short, neither Bharier nor O Grada can be considered a reliable source and should be dropped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moretonian (talk • contribs) 16:38, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Bharier isn't the easiest read, to be sure, but the antecedent for "These years were years of civil war, famine and little evidence of industrial, transportation or agricultural progress. There is no reason to believe, therefore, that the rate of population growth made any substantial increase in these years." is actually 1919-1925: Bharier refers to "the growth rate of 0.75% estimated by the widely-travelled Schindler for the years 1875-1910, and extended to 1919 on the basis of a British government study" and states that "the gap 1920–25 is plugged by extending Schindler's growth rate [0.75% for 1919] to the latter date [i.e., 1925]." Bharier's statement that there is "little evidence of industrial, transportation or agricultural progress" during these years is not controversial and further supported by the observation that "1926 is the year in which trucks were first used to transport agricultural crops from surplus areas to famine regions." While Bharier does not directly address the impact of World War II on Iran except in footnote 20 ("1946 is the first year after World War II when Iran began to find its feet again after the Allied occupation, and with the Allied funds accumulated during the war."), Ó Gráda may have inferred that excess deaths were likely modest based on the 2% population growth rate for 1942–1945 posited by Iran's Civil Registration Office (C.R.O.), which (if accepted) is higher than the average population growth rate for the period 1926–1946 estimated by Amani: "Amani has suggested a rate of 1.5% between 1926 and 1946—a rate which is in conformity with knowledge of the population structure in 1956. The C.R.O. rate of 2.0% for 1942–45 does not, of course, invalidate Amani's rate, which is an average ... " In any case, the main problem with this article is that few, if any, reliable sources substantiate the core claim that "The Iranian famine of 1942–1943 refers to a period of major starvation that took place in Iran ... "; reliable sources tend to briefly allude to World War II imposing additional hardships on Iran's population in passing, without suggesting any sort of estimate, whereas a single unreliable self-published source known for wild exaggerations (Majd) has made sweeping claims that there was "a period of major starvation" resulting in millions of deaths (amounting to more than a fifth of Iran's 1942 population as estimated by Bharier). If anything, this article should probably be deleted due to a lack of sourcing.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 20:08, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Sir--Your long quote from Bharier's 1968 article and subsequent outburst about Majd does not change the fact that there is nothing about the World War I and World War II famines in Bharier's article--not even a mention. Bharier seems to be totally unaware of the fact that in the span of some 27 years (1917-1944), Iran suffered two devastating famines that took millions of lives. Moreover, while unaware of the actual famines, he also claims that Iran experienced civil war and famine during 1919-1925, a remarkable display of (an inexcusable) ignorance of Iranian history. Bharier has written an article about Iran's demographic developments during 1900-1966 with no clue, let alone analysis and assessment, of the two principal demographic events of the period, the famines and epidemics of World War I and World War II. No wonder some of the population figures given in State Department records are so different from Bharier's. In the magical world of Bharier, Iran's population grew continuously, and seemingly smoothly during long stretches, famines or no famines.

Nothing in Bharier's article justifies its citation by O Grada as a source for his baseless claim that Iran's WWII famine death toll was "probably moderate." Given the 2019 date of O Grada's working paper, it was reckless of him to do so. The State Department archives, and in particular the excellent reporting of Louis G. Dreyfus, Jr, the American Minister in Tehran, and the declassified reports of the American military and intelligence agencies paint a very different picture from what O Grada (and you) would have us believe. The lamentable situation in Iran was a major source of discord and acrimony between the US and UK governments. I wonder why your "reliable sources" don't "suggest any kind of estimate". You apparently take an incomplete source for a reliable source.

Finally, there are no "wild exaggerations" or "sweeping claims" on the number of Iranian victims. The 1940 population of Iran is stated at 15 million in State Department records. The 1944 population of Iran is given at 12 million in US State Department records, while the British figure for 1944 reported in the State Department records is only 10 million. Sticking to the higher American figure for 1944, the obvious conclusion drawn by Majd is that 3-4 million Iranians perished to famine and disease during WWII, a calamity of major proportions. Moretonian (talk) 03:19, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

"the obvious conclusion drawn by Majd ... " If it's that obvious, hopefully more reliable sources will catch on soon and we can update the article accordingly!TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 06:31, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Sir--Permit me to remind you that the issue at hand, to put it politely, is Professor O Grada's unjustified and inappropriate citation of Bharier's 1968 article to support his claim that the WWII Iran famine death toll was "probably modest", and what should be done about it. Moreover, as O Grada's 2007 "Working Paper" and 2009 book are also cited as sources for the Wiki articles on the 1869-1873 and 1917-1919 Iran famines, what assurance is there that they are devoid of similar "inaccuracies"?

You have repeatedly deleted my revisions to the 1917-1919 and 1869-1873 famines, and purged any mention of Majd's 2017 book on the 1869-1873 famine [3], alleging that the book is "self-published", it had not been "fact checked" and was "unreliable", even though it had received a very favorable review in the Recent Publications section of the Middle East Journal.[4]. You also purged any reference to Majd's 2021 article printed in a refereed journal published by the University of Tabriz, Journal of Iranian Islamic Period History [5], claiming that "the journal's reliability is in question". Ironically, two of the staunchest critics of Majd, Willem Floor and Professor Rudi Matthee, as well as other international scholars are on the journal's editorial board! While zealously enforcing the so-called "unreliability" in Majd's case, so far you haven't done anything about O Grada. There obviously is a double standard.

O Grada's 2019 "working paper" had not been fact checked and upon scrutiny it is found to be unreliable. Consequently, the statement that the WWII Iran famine death toll was "probably modest" is not supported by a reliable source and, according to rules, both the statement and its alleged source need to be purged from the current Wiki article on the 1942-1944 Iran famine. Moretonian (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

I disagree with your suggestion that you or I are qualified to fact-check Ó Gráda, who cites a source showing that Iran's population growth may have actually increased during the years coinciding with this putative famine, but yes, Ó Gráda's passing mention and Majd's non-peer-reviewed book are both low-quality sources. Removing just one low-quality source in order to present a single perspective backed by the low-quality source that you happen to prefer would not improve the article or comply with Wikipedia policy, however. As an alternative, I would certainly support removing the poorly-sourced "Death toll" section entirely.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 18:57, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

You have previously stated that you were not qualified to fact check documents and sources. Please speak for yourself and don't presume others are also as unqualified as you are. I didn't know there was such a thing as a "putative famine," and some users will doubtless find the term offensive.

The Office of the Historian at the State Department has been publishing online a few of the documents concerning, again to use your words, "this putative famine", nearly all of which are included in Majd's "low-quality" book.[6] While of no value or interest to you, they will be of interest to other users. Moretonian (talk) 23:51, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedians should not be doing the work of historians (or, indeed, challenging the conclusions of historians) based on our own analysis of primary source documents such as those published online by the U.S. Department of State. That is not my opinion, but a core Wikipedia policy called No original research. If you are Majd or someone else who has published (or is aspiring to publish) on this topic, Wikipedia can only use your research once it has been published in a reputable (preferably peer-reviewed) outlet. You might also consider not making the edit yourself but rather suggesting it on the talk page if you have a conflict of interest. Regards,TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 22:58, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

On the Severity of the 1942-1944 Iran Famine

TheTimesAreAChanging. Your false characterization of the WWII Iran famine as "putative" needs to be refuted. For instance, in the WP article the following is stated: "During the final months of 1942 and in 1943, the streets of Kermanshah were full of semi-naked and hungry people with fifteen death attributed to hunger and poverty occurring every day. In February 1943, typhus broke out in the city and the hospital closed down because of widespread infection among doctors and staff." The cited source is Iran Press Digest, 1985. Majd (2016, p. 554) [7] also quotes from a British intelligence report on conditions in Kermanshah for the week of March 13-20, 1943: "The streets of the town have been full of hungry and half-naked beggars of whom about 15 die each day of starvation and typhus cases among the people have been numerous." The book's review in Middle Eastern Studies, a refereed, peer reviewed journal, might also be of interest.[8]

Alarmed at the lamentable conditions in Iran, in the fall of 1943 The White House had dispatched to Iran Lieutenant-General Patrick J. Hurley, an advisor to President Franklin Roosevelt. Upon his return, Hurley had called on Assistant Secretary of State, Adolph Berle, on October 5, 1943. Berle's report, given in Majd (608-609), includes the following:

General Patrick Hurley came to see me today by reference from the Secretary's Office. He gave me orally the substance of a report he had made to the President on conditions in Iran. He said that he had been over the ground thoroughly, had seen and talked to the people, British and Russian and American, and his conclusions were considered. General Hurley said British policy towards Iran was "cruel and avaricious." They had first entered the country; then commandeered its railroad without compensation; then seized all of the Iranian trucks; then commandeered what food they could get hold of; then insisted on the Iranian Government's printing currency to be used for the pay of the British troops, causing inflation. The result of all this has been literal starvation in a number of areas. This was not, General Hurley said, hyperbole. He had seen the corpses in the streets and had heard the women and children crying over their dead. Worse, he said, this was a considered policy of the British representatives. He had seen and obtained a copy of Bullard's report, who had stated that hunger was an excellent way of controlling the country.

Sir Reader Bullard was the British Minister in Tehran. Berle's report on his meeting with General Patrick Hurley includes the following statement (Majd, 609-610):

Unfortunately, our own reports bear out Pat's statement as to the results of the British-Russian policy in Iran. In the last war, 25 percent of the entire population of that unhappy country starved to death as the result of the German activity there. This time, it looks as though the Allied occupation might produce about the same results.

The claim that German activity had caused famine in WWI is obviously false. But his prediction about the famine death toll in WWII proved to be accurate: 3-4 million, about a quarter of Iran's 1940 population perished to starvation and disease. (Majd, 689-690) The WP article's statement that "The Iranian Famine of 1942-1943 refers to a period of major starvation that took place in Iran," is, contrary to your claim, completely justified. Moretonian (talk) 18:11, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Notability of Majd's claims

Majd's claims of 3-4 million fatalities have been repeatedly removed from the article for reasons like "not been reliably published". I have no horse in this race and if anything agree that figure sounds implausible, but Mohammad Gholi Majd is clearly notable enough a historian to have his own page and the Journal of Iranian Islamic Period History is also an actual journal published by the University of Tabriz, not some random blog, so IMHO this passes WP:RS. It would be nice to see some other estimates of the death toll though for comparison, to avoid giving this undue weight. Jpatokal (talk) 06:19, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

No one is removing Majd from the body of the article; however, his highly-controversial claims, which have not been corroborated by any other academic source, and which other academics appear to be quite skeptical of (to say the least!), are not appropriate for inclusion in the lede infobox per WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE, which explains that the infobox is intended "to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article ... The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance." Majd's estimates do not satisfy this criteria because they are not uncontroversial, "key facts" to be presented without qualification.

Additionally, while I concede that Majd's journal article published through the University of Tabriz deserves more WP:WEIGHT than his full-length book Iran Under Allied Occupation in World War II: The Bridge to Victory & A Land of Famine, which was essentially self-published through a print on demand model, as previously discussed in this ANI thread, there are still broader concerns about the state of academic freedom in Iran and the lack of a clear academic consensus regarding the extent of this famine that should preclude inclusion in the lede infobox.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 12:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

"Iran under Allied Occupation in World War II: Bridge to Victory & Land of Famine" (University Press of America, 2016), according to Worldcat.org, is held by 1070 academic libraries worldwide, including Library of Congress. Library of Congress does not carry "self-published" works. As to being "print on demand", today practically all academic books fall under that category. With new printing technology, publishers can set their printing to actual demand instead of printing a large initial batch and carrying it for an extended period. They save money on printing and storage costs. University Press of America (UPA) according to its Wiki page "was an academic imprint of the Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group that specialized in the publication of scholarly works." It was established in 1975 and published nearly 10,000 titles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.89.114 (talk) 16:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

In addition to over 1000 academic libraries, including Library of Congress, Majd's "Iran under Allied occupation in World War II: Bridge to Victory & Land of Famine," and three other books by the author are cataloged and held by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum Library. Obviously, the Museum does not share the concerns expressed by user TheTimesAreAChanging about the reliability of books (nearly 10,000 works) published by University Press of America. Moreover, as indicated in the previous post, the claims about works published by "print on demand" indicate the user's lack of familiarity with the world of book publishing and the fact that practically every academic book is now printed on demand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1210:4485:CD00:C598:319B:37E1:39D1 (talk) 06:57, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Problems with O'Grada and Bharier Articles

O'Grada's article was checked. O'Grada mentions Bharier's article as (Bharier 1968: 277). But, oddly, Bharier is NOT included in the article's list of references. In other words, Bharier is mentioned in the text but he is NOT cited. Consequently, the claim in the section on the Death Toll that O'Grada was "citing Bharier as a reference" is false and should be removed.

In any case, Bharier is not a valid source as below outlined:

"Julian Bharier (1941-2017) used retrogression, also known as backward progression, method and the 1956 census as base to estimate the population of Iran during 1900-1966 (Bharier, 1968: 273-79). Applying Schindler’s 0.75% growth to 1900-25, and declaring his findings “the nearest one can get to the truth”, he placed the 1900 population at 9.86 million, and that of 1914 at 10.89 million (Bharier, 1968: 275). But there is no mention of the World War I and World War II famines. Bharier cites works in which World War I famine is discussed (Balfour, 1922; Fateh, 1926), and he briefly acknowledges (in a footnote) that “some publications” had reported a large decline in population, but he dismisses them because they “give the usual Malthusian reasons for sudden declines in population” (Bharier, 1968: 279)."

Source: MAJD, M. G. Historiography and Death Toll of World War I and World War II Famines in Iran. Preprints 2024, 2024031562. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.1562.v2.

It is very clear that Bharier was aware of the World War I famine but chose to disregard it in his deliberations. Nor is there any mention of World War II famine.

There is no "dispute" on the WWII famine death toll. Bharier makes no mention of the famine and O'Grada does not cite Bharier as a reference. The claim is completely without basis. There is no scholarship disputing Majd's 4 million estimate. Moreover, since it is established that the famine had lasted for five years (1940-44), Majd's revised estimate of 5.5 million casualties should be used.

Subject to consensus, the section on Death Toll needs to be revised. 129.2.89.238 (talk) 17:52, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

For context, the source cited by the above IP, Mohammad Gholi Majd, is an Iranian author with a PhD in agricultural economics who has published several books through a print on demand model, including The Great Famine & Genocide in Iran: 1917-1919 (2013), Iran Under Allied Occupation in World War II: The Bridge to Victory & A Land of Famine (2016), and A Victorian Holocaust: Iran in the Great Famine of 1869–1873 (2017). Majd's books make WP:REDFLAG claims that Iran suffered more casualties than any other country during World War I and World War II and suffered consecutive British-led genocides far surpassing the Holocaust, among other dubious assertions not found in mainstream scholarship. Academic experts who have paid any attention to Majd's writings have been almost uniformly critical. To give just one example, in reference to Majd's book on the World War I famine, Willem Floor "appropriately relegates Mohammad Gholi Majd's overblown, conspiracy-filled book on the epidemic and the number of 8-10 million (or almost the country's entire population) given by him, to a footnote."

Majd's books were published under the now-defunct University Press of America (UPA) label and its successor Hamilton Books, after "UPA was renamed Hamilton Books in 2017" according to Moretonian, a single-purpose account that was blocked indefinitely at ANI for conflict of interest editing related to Majd. Both UPA and Hamilton Books are imprints of Rowman & Littlefield that were designed to allow authors to publish as soon as an order is made, without the editorial oversight or fact-checking of traditional publishing models. For example, Rowman & Littlefield's website explains that "Hamilton Books publishes ... using an innovative model that combines the best features of self-publishing ... with the benefit of publishing with an established publishing house that will typeset, print, and market your book. ... Hamilton reviews proposals and makes decisions within 3-4 weeks of receipt and publish new titles faster than most presses, usually 4-6 months after the author delivers a final manuscript and places the prepublication order."

Based on the previous ANI discussion, which found that Majd's Iran Under Allied Occupation in World War II: The Bridge to Victory & A Land of Famine (2016) was essentially self-published, without peer review, and was added to our article by an account later blocked indefinitely for conflict of interest editing related to Majd, one could argue that this source should be excised as unreliable or WP:FRINGE, but thus far editors have retained it in the interest of article stability. In addition to Majd 2016, Iranian famine of 1942–1943#Death toll cites a 2021 journal article authored by Majd and published in Iran's Journal of Iranian Islamic Period History, but, given the state of academic freedom in Iran, the reliability of Majd 2021 is also open to question.

Finally, IP 129.2.89.238 introduced a third citation to Majd (above) for criticism of Bharier 1968 and for a "revised estimate of 5.5 million casualties"; however, Majd 2024 is a preprint, and there is a disclaimer at the top of the article stating: "This version is not peer-reviewed". On a related note, Majd's abstract cites remarks by Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, as providing the impetus to reevaluate the "famine's historiography and toll," which creates an appearance of partisanship. Unless (or until) Majd 2024 is reliably published, it cannot be used as a source on Wikipedia.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 23:10, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

User: TheTimesAreAChanging. Your lengthy post on the works of an Iranian writer Mohammad Gholi Majd belongs in the previous section on "Notability of Majd's Claims" and not in the section on "Problems with O'Grada and Bharier Articles." IP 129.2.89.238 raises legitimate issues about the works by O'Grada and Bharier, and your long post makes no attempt to address the matter at hand.

I also looked at O'Grada's piece. It is not an article. It is a "working paper" without even a doi. When you included it in the article text, you obviously were not concerned about its lack of "peer review" or any review. But now all of a sudden, you are greatly concerned by the lack of peer review of Majd's 2024 article published in preprints.org, a moderated, prize winning and most widely read server of its kind.

In addition, when you inserted O'Grada's working paper in the article, you must have noted that O'Grada had mentioned Bharier in the text without citing him in the references. Nevertheless, you claimed that O'Grada was "citing Bharier as a reference."

I viewed Mohammad Gholi Majd wikipage. I saw about a dozen books published by University Press of America, University Press of Florida, and Hamilton Books. I also saw a few articles published in peer reviewed journals. Next, I checked the history of the edits to the page and noted that you had excised 8-9 of his articles published in peer reviewed journals and dozens of reviews of his works in scholarly journals. Having removed his peer reviewed works and the favorable reviews of his works, you then claim Majd's works are not peer reviewed or have received poor reviews.

From the section on "Notability of Majd's Claims" I noted that University Press of America (UPA) had published 10,000 works during its nearly half a century of operation. By alleging that Majd's works published by UPA are unreliable, you also impugn the integrity of 10,000 other works. According to its wikipage Rowman & Littlefield, the parent company of UPA, has now been acquired by Bloomsbury Publishing. The new owner and some of the nearly 10,000 slandered authors may not look kindly on your allegations.