Cambridge A Level History 9389 — 2019 May/June Paper 1 · Variant 3

This document consists of 7 printed pages, 1 blank page and 1 Insert. DC (PQ/TP) 175774/3 © UCLES 2019 [Turn over Cambridge Assessment International Education Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level * 1 3 2 3 6 3 2 3 3 4 * HISTORY 9389/13 Paper 1 Document Question May/June 2019 1 hour No Additional Materials are required. READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS FIRST An answer booklet is provided inside this question paper. You should follow the instructions on the front cover of the answer booklet. If you need additional answer paper ask the invigilator for a continuation booklet. This paper contains three sections: Section A: European Option Section B: American Option Section C: International Option Answer both parts of the question from one section only. The marks are given in brackets [ ] at the end of each part question.

2 9389/13/M/J/19 © UCLES 2019 Section A: European Option Liberalism and Nationalism in Italy and Germany, 1815–1871 King Victor Emmanuel and Cavour 1 Read the sources and then answer both parts of the question. Source A I am indifferent to the loss of this statesman. Cavour’s death is very fortunate for Italy. He was rich, aristocratic, cunning, with no moral restraint, greedy and insatiable for power. He had wide-ranging ideas, was great at intrigue and plotting, prepared to go to any lengths to defeat his opponents. He used Secret Service funds, illegally, to corrupt the electorate and the press, deceived public opinion and was for ten years the complete master of the country. He treated Sardinia as badly as he possibly could and he waged a ruthless war against revolution which alone could bring independence, greatness and liberty to Italy. His death is a stroke of good luck. G Asproni, a Sardinian Deputy, writing in his Diary, on hearing, incorrectly, that Cavour was dead, 1860. Source B It would be unfair to represent Victor Emmanuel as a sovereign of no merit. He has the acute shrewdness inherent in the Italian race and he is not wanting in wit. He has tremendous courage carried to the point of rashness. He is lazy and ill-informed and he hates attending Cabinet and coming to decisions. Cavour does his best to spare the King from these occupations. The King recognises the superiority of the Prime Minister, but he does not forgive him for it. He submits to Cavour while hating him with all his heart. Like all mediocre men the King is jealous and quick to hate. He loathed how Garibaldi gained so much prestige and he seemed pleased with the possibility that Garibaldi might be captured and hanged. His primary interests are hunting and womanising and he will disappear for weeks at critical times to chase both. After the Queen died and the King wished to marry his mistress secretly, it was Cavour, after a stormy argument which came close to having him dismissed, that prevented this action which would have severely damaged the monarchy and the cause of unity. From the Diary of a French Diplomat in Turin, 1861. Source C There must be no more criticisms of our revelations about the merits of Cavour. We must praise that glorious man who should be respected as he raised us out of slavery. Cavour achieved this supreme end by preserving the authority of the King and prevented the direction of our national movement from falling into the hands of any radical party. If he had given way to the plots and demands of Garibaldi and Mazzini, the House of Savoy would have been dragged into revolution. The rule of law would have gone. We would have been abandoned by England and savagely attacked by France and Austria. N Bianchi, an Italian historian, writing in 1863.

3 9389/13/M/J/19 © UCLES 2019 [Turn over Source D The Italian Revolution triumphed not through the actions of the people but through the clever tactics of a small minority, aided by foreign events and coincidences. The mass of the people remained passive. The rebellion of 1848 had shown the senselessness of all the revolutionary schemes. After that, the monarchy of Piedmont was accepted as having the intelligence and the money to bring about the independence and unity of the country. The Piedmontese monarchy made the republican heroism of Mazzini and Garibaldi unnecessary. Cavour was the genius of the period. It was he, with the erratic support of the King, that made unity possible. With the achievement of national unification, Cavour carried out the most amazing miracle of politics in the nineteenth century. Alfredo Oriani, an Italian writer, 1889. Answer both parts of the question with reference to the sources. (a) Compare and contrast the attitudes towards the Piedmontese monarchy in Sources B and D. [15] (b) ‘Cavour played the decisive role in the struggle for Italian unity.’ How far do Sources A to D support this view? [25]

4 9389/13/M/J/19 © UCLES 2019 Section B: American Option The Origins of the Civil War, 1846–1861 The consequences of the Kansas–Nebraska Act 2 Read the sources and then answer both parts of the question. Source A The crime is committed. The wall erected to guard the domain of Liberty is flung down by an American Congress, and Slavery crawls, like a slimy reptile over the ruins. They tell us that the North will not submit. We hope it will not. But we have seen this same North crouch lower each year under the whip of the slave driver, until it is hard to tell what it will not submit to. Who, seven years ago, would have believed that Congress could enact the kidnapping of free citizens, without judge or jury? Who would have believed that it could enact that white people have a right to hold black people in slavery? It was fitting that the Kansas Bill should be passed as it was. It was in accordance with its spirit that it should be conceived in treachery, sprung upon the House by a fraud, and forced through it by a Parliamentary lie. We cannot predict what will be the consequences of this most fatal blow to Liberty. But we can see what the duty of Freemen is, and we mean it shall be through no fault of ours if it is left undone. From the ‘Evening Journal’, (New York), a Whig newspaper, May 1854. Source B Douglas Buchanan Pierce Cass A cartoon published in ‘Harper’s Weekly’, a Northern magazine, 1856.

5 9389/13/M/J/19 © UCLES 2019 [Turn over Source C The secret Missouri societies were known by different names, such as ‘Blue Lodge’, and ‘The Sons of the South’. Their members were bound together by secret oaths, and they had passwords. The different lodges were connected together by an effective organisation. They included great numbers of the citizens of Missouri, and extended into Kansas. Their purpose was not only to extend slavery into Kansas, but also into other territory of the United States, and to form a union of all the friends of slavery. They organised and sent men to vote at the elections in the territory and encouraged pro-slavery men to emigrate into the territory. These dangerous societies were controlled by men whose purpose was to extend slavery into the territory at all costs, and were altogether the most effective instrument in organising the subsequent armed invasions. From ‘Report of the Congressional Special Committee Appointed to Investigate the Troubles in Kansas’, 1856. The committee was chaired by W A Howard who was a Republican member of the House of Representatives. Source D When the Kansas Bill passed the people of the South expected to take possession of the territory. They urged those on the border to move right over and take their slaves with them. They said that two thousand slaves settled in Kansas would make it a slave state. But the Southern people did not have the courage of their convictions. There were never more than a handful of slaves in Kansas. But Southern people were determined to take possession of Kansas and as soon as the Bill was passed the men in the border counties of Missouri began to rush over, and stake claims. They marked off the land, drove a stake down, wrote their name upon it and went back home. This was not legal but they agreed among themselves to shoot any man who interfered with them. When the real settlers came they found if they attempted to claim a piece of unoccupied land, it had already been claimed by somebody in Missouri who had a gun and a knife. From Richard Cordley’s ‘A History of Lawrence, Kansas’, published in 1895. Richard Cordley moved to Kansas in 1857 and was a minister in the Congregational Church and a strong abolitionist. Answer both parts of the question with reference to the sources. (a) To what extent do Sources C and D agree about the issue that was causing conflict in Kansas? [15] (b) How far do Sources A to D support the view that it was politicians in Washington DC who were responsible for the trouble in Kansas following the Kansas–Nebraska Act? [25]

6 9389/13/M/J/19 © UCLES 2019 Section C: International Option The Search for International Peace and Security, 1919–1945 The League and the Japanese invasion of Manchuria 3 Read the sources and then answer both parts of the question. Source A The situation in Manchuria is becoming more serious every day. On the day when the Council of the League met, Japan advanced its troops further into Manchuria. The League not only failed to take any measures against this further consolidation of the Japanese occupation but, on the contrary, met Japan halfway. The League intends to send a commission to investigate the situation in Manchuria. Japan wishes to make this commission a research institute to study the reasons for civil war in China and the weakness of the central government. There is no talk of the withdrawal of Japanese troops. The League is unable to accept the fact that military actions are taking place in Manchuria, because if it did it would have to ask who is the culprit and would have to draw conclusions on the basis of the Covenant. From ‘Izvestia’, a newspaper which expressed the official views of the Soviet government, November 1931. Source B The Lytton Report is an admirable survey of the whole situation, and there is nothing of any substance which I feel able to criticise. From the point of view of reaching a settlement, it is a valuable document. To the impartial reader the Report goes far to support Japan, although it must expect some blame. There is material in the report for apportioning blame to China. It is not certain that everyone will read the Report in this sense but I think there are good reasons for hoping that no one will oppose a settlement which gives Japan satisfaction. There are indications that the Japanese, who are not anxious to leave the League, will accept some criticism. There are grounds for hope that Japan will not be unreasonable in relation to the League. Discussions between China and Japan will be more difficult as the Japanese government recently declared that no solution would be tolerable which upheld any form of Chinese authority in Manchuria. A report written by an official in the British Foreign Office, October 1932.

7 9389/13/M/J/19 © UCLES 2019 Source C It was no surprise when the newspapers of Japan burst into a chorus of dissatisfaction when the Lytton Report became known. For any unbiased person it was a foregone conclusion that the Report would deny that the Manchukuo state was the spontaneous wish of the people of Manchuria. More justifiable criticism of the Report is that too favourable a view is taken of the present conditions and the future prospects of China. No one here is in favour of recognising the sovereignty of China over those provinces and everyone is determined to uphold the independence of Manchukuo. Those, outside the army, who direct Japanese policy look with apprehension at the possible results of a breach with the League. They fear the stigma which the disapproval of the League would inflict on Japan and the material results of Japanese isolation. From a report written by the British Ambassador in Japan to the British government, October 1932. Source D The Report by the League contains gross errors both of fact and in the conclusions drawn. In asserting that the action of the Japanese army did not fall within the limits of self-defence, the Report came to an arbitrary conclusion. By refusing to acknowledge the actual circumstances that led to the foundation of Manchukuo, and by challenging the position taken by Japan in recognising the new state, the League cuts away the ground for the stabilisation of the situation in the Far East. Because of the profound differences in opinion existing between Japan and the League in their interpretation of the Covenant, the Japanese government gives notice of the intention of Japan to withdraw from the League of Nations. From a telegram from the Japanese government to the Secretary General of the League of Nations, March 1933. Answer both parts of the question with reference to the sources. (a) To what extent do Sources B and C agree about the Lytton Report? [15] (b) How far do Sources A to D support the view that Japan was concerned about the League? [25]

8 9389/13/M/J/19 © UCLES 2019 BLANK PAGE Permission to reproduce items where third-party owned material protected by copyright is included has been sought and cleared where possible. Every reasonable effort has been made by the publisher (UCLES) to trace copyright holders, but if any items requiring clearance have unwittingly been included, the publisher will be pleased to make amends at the earliest possible opportunity. To avoid the issue of disclosure of answer-related information to candidates, all copyright acknowledgements are reproduced online in the Cambridge Assessment International Education Copyright Acknowledgements Booklet. This is produced for each series of examinations and is freely available to download at www.cambridgeinternational.org after the live examination series. Cambridge Assessment International Education is part of the Cambridge Assessment Group. Cambridge Assessment is the brand name of the University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate (UCLES), which itself is a department of the University of Cambridge.

This document consists of 14 printed pages. © UCLES 2019 [Turn over Cambridge Assessment International Education Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level HISTORY 9389/13 Paper 1 May/June 2019 MARK SCHEME Maximum Mark: 40 Published This mark scheme is published as an aid to teachers and candidates, to indicate the requirements of the examination. It shows the basis on which Examiners were instructed to award marks. It does not indicate the details of the discussions that took place at an Examiners’ meeting before marking began, which would have considered the acceptability of alternative answers. Mark schemes should be read in conjunction with the question paper and the Principal Examiner Report for Teachers. Cambridge International will not enter into discussions about these mark schemes. Cambridge International is publishing the mark schemes for the May/June 2019 series for most Cambridge IGCSE™, Cambridge International A and AS Level and Cambridge Pre-U components, and some Cambridge O Level components.

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 2 of 14 Generic Marking Principles These general marking principles must be applied by all examiners when marking candidate answers. They should be applied alongside the specific content of the mark scheme or generic level descriptors for a question. Each question paper and mark scheme will also comply with these marking principles. GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 1: Marks must be awarded in line with: • the specific content of the mark scheme or the generic level descriptors for the question • the specific skills defined in the mark scheme or in the generic level descriptors for the question • the standard of response required by a candidate as exemplified by the standardisation scripts. GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 2: Marks awarded are always whole marks (not half marks, or other fractions). GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 3: Marks must be awarded positively: • marks are awarded for correct/valid answers, as defined in the mark scheme. However, credit is given for valid answers which go beyond the scope of the syllabus and mark scheme, referring to your Team Leader as appropriate • marks are awarded when candidates clearly demonstrate what they know and can do • marks are not deducted for errors • marks are not deducted for omissions • answers should only be judged on the quality of spelling, punctuation and grammar when these features are specifically assessed by the question as indicated by the mark scheme. The meaning, however, should be unambiguous. GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 4: Rules must be applied consistently e.g. in situations where candidates have not followed instructions or in the application of generic level descriptors.

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 3 of 14 GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 5: Marks should be awarded using the full range of marks defined in the mark scheme for the question (however; the use of the full mark range may be limited according to the quality of the candidate responses seen). GENERIC MARKING PRINCIPLE 6: Marks awarded are based solely on the requirements as defined in the mark scheme. Marks should not be awarded with grade thresholds or grade descriptors in mind.

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 4 of 14 Part(a) Generic Levels of Response: Marks Level 4: Makes a developed comparison Makes a developed comparison between the two sources, recognising points of similarity and difference. Uses knowledge to evaluate the sources and shows good contextual awareness. 12–15 Level 3: Compares views and identifies similarities and differences Compares the views expressed in the sources, identifying differences and similarities. Begins to explain and evaluate the views using the sources and knowledge. 8–11 Level 2: Compares views and identifies similarities and/or differences Identifies relevant similarities or differences between views/sources and the response may be one-sided with only one aspect explained. Alternatively, both similarities and differences may be mentioned but both aspects lack development. 4–7 Level 1: Describes content of each source Describes or paraphrases the content of the two sources. Very simple comparisons may be made (e.g. one is from a letter and the other is from a speech) but these are not developed. 1–3 Level 0: No relevant comment on the sources or the issue 0

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 5 of 14 Part(b) Generic Levels of Response: Marks Level 5: Evaluates the sources to reach a sustained judgement Answers are well focused, demonstrating a clear understanding of the sources and the question. Reaches a sustained judgement about the extent to which the sources support the statement and weighs the evidence in order to do this. 21–25 Level 4: Evaluates the sources Demonstrates a clear understanding of the sources and the question. Begins to evaluate the material in context, considering the nature, origin and purpose of the sources in relation to the statement. At the top of this level candidates may begin to reach a judgement but this is not sustained. 16–20 Level 3: Uses the sources to support and challenge the statement Makes valid points from the sources to both challenge and support the statement in the question. These comments may be derived from source content or may be about the provenance/nature of the sources. 11–15 Level 2: Uses the sources to support or challenge the statement Makes valid points from the sources to either support the statement in the question or to challenge it. These comments may be derived from source content or may be about the provenance/nature of the sources. 6–10 Level 1: Does not make valid use of the sources Describes the content of the sources with little attempt to link the material to the question. Alternatively, candidates may write an essay about the question without reference to the sources. 1–5 Level 0: No relevant comment on the sources or the issue 0

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 6 of 14 Question Answer Marks Guidance 1(a) Compare and contrast the attitudes towards the Piedmontese monarchy in Sources B and D. Differences: Source B is largely critical of the King. It refers to him as being lazy and ill- informed. He disliked taking decisions and actually doing business such as Cabinet meetings. Source B refers to him as being ‘mediocre’, whereas Source D speaks more positively about the King, but interestingly refers more to the monarchy than the King himself. Source B describes the King as recognising the superiority of the Prime Minister whereas in Source D, Cavour only has the ‘erratic support of the King’. Similarities: Source B suggests the monarchy needs safeguarding by others, so the King does not damage it by his hunting and womanising at critical moments. Source D also suggests that ‘Cavour was the genius of the period’. Source B suggests that ‘he is not a sovereign of no merit’ and Source D refers to his intelligence. Both suggest he is not a reliable ruler – Source B says he is lazy and ill- informed and Source D talks about his erratic support of Cavour. Source B is written by a French diplomat working in Turin at the time. It is reasonably well-balanced and he might be in a position to know what is going on. Source D is written after the major events of the unification process when the passions have settled and has the advantage of hindsight. It seems to adopt a more balanced perspective. 15

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 7 of 14 Question Answer Marks Guidance 1(b) ‘Cavour played the decisive role in the struggle for Italian unity.’ How far do Sources A to D support this view? Source A challenges the statement and is highly critical of Cavour who is seen as a real obstacle to Italian unity and independence. The Source suggests Cavour is more concerned with defeating his opponents and used illegal methods to attain his ends. His skills seem to be mainly intrigue and plotting. The suggestion that he waged ‘a ruthless war against revolution’ is very strong criticism. Source A is clearly written by a very strong opponent of Cavour, frightened enough to cancel his loathing until he had heard that Cavour was dead. The fact that he came from Sardinia which he may have felt had been neglected by the ‘mainland’ needs to be taken into account. It sounds like the comment of a frustrated rival. It does seem like an angry rant and should be treated with caution. Source B supports the statement. It recognises that he is ‘superior’ to the King. He stresses how important Cavour was in preventing the King from marrying his mistress secretly, which would damage not only the monarchy, but also the cause of Italian unity. The source does stress that Cavour is important to the cause and its success, but perhaps not decisively so. Source B obviously has some merit, being written by a diplomat present in Turin at a critical moment in the unification process. Source C supports the statement and praises Cavour very highly. He also mentions Cavour’s important work in preserving the monarchy’s authority and avoiding too radical an approach which would have alienated the British and led to attacks from Austrian and France. Of the three sources this is the one that best supports the argument that his role was decisive. Source C was written by an Italian historian quite soon after the death of Cavour, when perhaps eulogies were more the order of the day than attacks. The opening sentence does give the impression that he is arguing a case against the critics of Cavour, so this needs to be borne in mind. 25

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 8 of 14 Question Answer Marks Guidance 1(b) Source D supports the statement by emphasising Cavour’s importance, perhaps he is a member of the ‘small minority’ mentioned in the opening sentence. The source also mentions that Cavour was the ‘genius’ of the period, and that with the erratic support of the King, made unity possible. With the final sentence referring to the ‘amazing miracle of politics’ achieved by Cavour, this source could also be used to support the ‘decisive’ argument. There is also an element of challenge as other factors such as ‘foreign events and coincidences’ as well as the Piedmontese monarchy are also given some credit. Source D is written a generation after Cavour’s death, when a more balanced view could be taken. Contextual knowledge might suggest that this is a balanced and intelligent view. On balance, the sources suggest that Cavour’s role as crucial to Italian unity was decisive. Sources B, C and D all give him credit and even when the effusive nature of C is taken into account this evidence remains strong thanks to the more balanced views of B and D. A is perhaps the least useful source although it is a useful mirror to Source C to reflect the extreme and partial views held about Cavour.

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 9 of 14 Question Answer Marks Guidance 2(a) To what extent do Sources C and D agree about the issue that was causing conflict in Kansas? Differences: Source D sees land ownership as the main issue, while Source C has no doubt that it is slavery. Source D states that although Southerners were urged to move slaves into Kansas, very few were taken. Source C, on the other hand, makes it clear that slavery was the main issue. It says that the Missouri secret societies were trying to extend slavery into Kansas and elsewhere. Source C suggests that it is a wider project to develop a ‘union of all the friends of slavery’, whereas Source D concentrates on Kansas. Source C suggests that actions in Kansas were organised by secret societies, whereas Source D concentrates on the actions of individuals. Similarities: Source B does agree with Source C in that it recognises slavery as an issue. It says that some Southerners urged people in Missouri to take their slaves with them into Kansas and this fits in with the claim in B that their aim was to extend slavery into Kansas. Both link the issue of slavery in Kansas with events and expansion from Missouri. 15

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 10 of 14 Question Answer Marks Guidance 2(b) How far do Sources A to D support the view that it was politicians in Washington DC who were responsible for the trouble in Kansas following the Kansas-Nebraska Act? Evidence supporting the assertion includes Sources A and B. Source A claims that Congress is responsible by passing the Act and thus damaging liberty and allowing slavery to spread. It asserts that the Act got through by lies and treachery and that Congress is responsible for kidnappings. It suggests that the future will not be good because liberty had been weakened and it predicts that Freemen will act. Thus, it is implying that there will be trouble. Source A is from a New York Whig newspaper and Northern Whigs were strongly opposed to the Democrats and the Act. This means the accusations made in Source A have to be treated with care. Some of its language, e.g. ‘Slavery crawls, like a slimy reptile’ shows the strength of its feelings. Source B blames leading Democratic politicians such as Douglas who proposed the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, agreed to repeal the Missouri Compromise and forced the legislation through. Other Democrats are blamed such as President Pierce. They are shown as forcing slavery on the freesoilers in Kansas by passing the Act and thus causing the trouble in Kansas. This will encourage Southerners to extend slavery into Kansas and upset abolitionists. Source B is from a Northern publication and so is likely to be against the Democrats, the Act and its consequences, especially in terms of the threat of slavery in Kansas. (Harper’s Weekly was pro-abolition). Evidence challenging the assertion includes Sources C and D. Source C blames Southerners who organised secret societies with the aim of encouraging pro-slavery men to emigrate into Kansas with the aim of extending slavery into the territory. They also sent men from Missouri to vote in elections to get pro-slavery candidates elected and were responsible for armed invasions of the territory. 25

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 11 of 14 Question Answer Marks Guidance 2(b) Source C strongly criticises pro-slavers from Missouri. It is a report from a Congressional committee and so is unlikely to blame politicians in Washington. The committee was chaired by a Republican who would be anti-slavery. This means the report of the committee might only blame those from the South. While there is evidence that supports the claims made against these societies, the report is one-sided in that it makes no mention of the violence committed by abolitionists such as John Brown. Source D claims that Southerners from Missouri came across the border and illegally staked claims for land which they defended with violence. This caused trouble with settlers from the North who arrived looking for land and found the Southerners had already claimed it. Source D is written by an abolitionist which means that the claims he makes about Southerners taking over all the land need to be considered carefully. He was living in Kansas in 1857 so he saw events with his own eyes. However, the fact that he arrived in 1857 suggests that he might be one of settlers from the North arriving to fight the anti-slavery battle. On balance, the sources are clearly split according to where they originate from. Sources A and B give a national perspective on the issue prioritising the actions of leading politicians, whereas the more local sources (C and D) see this as an issue originating from Missouri and Kansas.

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 12 of 14 Question Answer Marks Guidance 3(a) To what extent do Sources B and C agree about the Lytton Report? Differences: • Source B says the report is admirable and valuable, cannot be criticised and could form the basis of a settlement. Source C, on the other hand, does find some criticism of the report justifiable – that it takes too favourable a view of the future of China. • Source B suggests it exonerates Japan and that there are hopes for a settlement that Japan will be happy with. Source C describes Japan’s unhappiness with the report, suggesting that Japan at least does not feel it has been exonerated. This is backed up by the fact that the Report has rejected Japanese claims about Manchukuo. Similarities: • Both Sources imply that there is some blame of Japan in the Report. Source B says ‘Japan must expect some blame’, while Source C implies the Report blames Japan by mentioning the dissatisfaction in Japan over the Report and the fact that the Report has denied Japanese claims about Manchukuo. • Both sources suggest that Japan would not be in favour of any Chinese sovereignty. Source B is written by an official in the British foreign office and is very supportive of the Lytton Report, stating that ‘there is nothing of any substance which I feel able to criticise’. However, Source C, written in the same month by the British Ambassador in Japan, writes of how the Japanese press are dissatisfied with the report and that he believes that justifiable criticism of the report is that ‘too favourable view is taken of the present conditions and future prospects of China’. The official of the British foreign office is likely to be supportive of the government and not keen to offer any criticism, whereas the Japanese Ambassador was able to see first hand the reactions of the Japanese to the report and is portraying the reaction of the Japanese people rather than his own view. 15

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 13 of 14 Question Answer Marks Guidance 3(b) How far do Sources A to D support the view that Japan was concerned about the League? Evidence supporting the assertion includes Sources B. Source B suggests that Japan is concerned about the League. It states that Japan might well accept some of the criticisms made by the League and that it does not want to leave the League. Source B is from an official in the British foreign office and therefore will take an optimistic view of Japan and its possible reactions. Britain did not want to push Japan too far because it did not want to weaken its civilian government and strengthen the hand of the military in Japan. The British also knew that the League could do little without US action, which was not forthcoming. Source C suggests that Japan was concerned enough about the League to be upset by the Commission’s findings. It also explains that the civilian government in Japan was concerned about the League. It did not want a conflict with the League because it was worried about the possible consequences. They also felt that leaving the League would damage Japan’s international standing. Source C is written by the British Ambassador in Japan. This is useful in the sense that he should have a good understanding of the situation inside Japan and the attitudes of different groups in the country, particularly the military and the civilian government. However, as someone who works in Japan, he does show some sympathy towards Japan and he is keen to press the idea that Japan is not keen to leave the League. 25

9389/13 Cambridge International AS/A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2019 © UCLES 2019 Page 14 of 14 Question Answer Marks Guidance 3(b) Evidence for challenging the assertion includes Sources A and D. Source A makes clear that Japan was not concerned about the League. It mentions that even when the Council was meeting, the Japanese advanced further, and that there was no prospect of Japan withdrawing its troops. It is keen stress that Japan was ignoring the League and that the League was powerless. Source A is a report from an official Soviet newspaper. The USSR had been refused membership of the League (it joined in 1934) and was critical of it for this reason and because it saw it as a capitalistic club. This means that some of the criticism of the League in this source has to be treated with care. The Soviets were extremely concerned about a strong Japanese presence in northern China and may be reflecting on their history of conflict with Japan. Source D totally rejects the report and the League to such an extent that it states it is leaving the League. This displays contempt for the League. It cares so little about the League that it is ready to leave and is prepared to be highly critical of the League. Source D is from a Japanese telegram from the Japanese to the League announcing its withdrawal. The very fact that it is withdrawing shows this source to be useful evidence about Japan’s lack of interest in the League. However, the telegram is making the case for leaving and therefore some of the criticisms made of the League need to be considered with caution. On balance, the sources suggest that Japan’s primary concern was to maintain their position in Manchuria (Source A, B, C and D). If this could have been achieved whilst also retaining membership of the League (B and C particularly) this would have been the ideal scenario. However, given a choice the former aim was always going to be the priority and trump any concerns they had about the League (Sources A and D).