Cambridge A Level History 9489 — 2021 May/June Paper 1 · Variant 3

This document has 8 pages. Any blank pages are indicated. Cambridge International AS & A Level DC (PQ/SW) 204312/2 © UCLES 2021 [Turn over * 7 0 4 5 2 4 2 3 1 6 * HISTORY 9489/13 Paper 1 Document Question May/June 2021 1 hour 15 minutes You must answer on the enclosed answer booklet. You will need: Answer booklet (enclosed) INSTRUCTIONS ● Answer one question from one section only. Section A: European option Section B: American option Section C: International option ● Follow the instructions on the front cover of the answer booklet. If you need additional answer paper, ask the invigilator for a continuation booklet. INFORMATION ● The total mark for this paper is 40. ● The number of marks for each question or part question is shown in brackets [ ].

2 9489/13/M/J/21 © UCLES 2021 Answer one question from one section only. Section A: European option Liberalism and nationalism in Germany, 1815–71 1 Read the sources and then answer both parts of the question. Source A The weakness of the current situation is that we have only a confederation instead of a federal state. Thus, we have 38 German states, just as many governments, almost as many princely courts and 38 different sets of laws and administrations instead of a single Germany. What an enormous saving it would be if all this was taken care of by a central government. What savings in money would result if Germany maintained a single army! But much worse than the current waste of expenditure is the way that, among 38 different states, just as many special interests are at work disadvantaging and quashing daily commerce down to the last detail. No mail can be sent quickly without new legal conventions. No railway can be proposed that won’t be kept in its own state for as long as possible. What help is it if the Confederal Act grants the freedom to move from one German state into another if this other state sternly turns away the poor emigrant? From an article published in a German newspaper, September 1843. Source B Their gloom-enveloped eyes are tearless, They sit at the spinning wheel, snarling, cheerless: ‘Germany, we weave your funeral shroud, A threefold curse be within it endowed. We’re weaving, we’re weaving! A curse on God to whom we knelt When hunger and winter’s cold we felt, To whom we flocked in vain and cried, Who mocked us, abused us and cast us aside. We’re weaving, we’re weaving! A curse on the king, the wealthy men’s chief, Who was not moved even by our grief, Who wrenched the last coin from our hand of need, And shot us, screaming like dogs in the street! We’re weaving, we’re weaving! A curse on this lying father-nation Where thrive only shame and degradation, Where every flower’s plucked ere its bloom And worms thrive in the dank rot and gloom. We’re weaving, we’re weaving!’ A German poem commemorating the revolt of the Silesian weavers in 1844. It was published widely throughout Germany and translated into English by Friedrich Engels.

3 9489/13/M/J/21 © UCLES 2021 [Turn over Source C Neither the King nor German society has any sense of impending revolt; not even the uprisings in Bohemia and Silesia have managed to arouse such feelings. In an unpolitical country like Germany it is not possible to represent the sporadic misery of the factory districts as a matter of universal concern, let alone as a disaster to the whole civilized world. As far as the Germans are concerned, these events belong in the same category as any local shortage of food or water. Accordingly, the King views it as a failure of the administration or of charitable institutions. For this reason, and because only a few troops were needed to deal with the feeble weavers, the destruction of factories and machines does not make the King and the authorities panic. Poverty and crimes are two great evils; who can provide a cure for them? The state and the authorities? By no means. From an article in a German publication called ‘Forwards!’, 1844. The magazine was edited by Karl Marx. Source D The most powerful force of the present, that of nationality, is the most dangerous weapon in the hands of the enemies of law and order. This fact must be appreciated if there is to be any insight into present events. Through all hearts flows this desire for a community to develop in Germany, powerful and respected abroad, elevated and in harmony within. This is the only thought that extends beyond parties, to which conflict of different classes, churches and political doctrines are subordinated. It is therefore the only principle on which a strong state system and society can be constructed. It is Prussia’s task, with the closest connection with the rest of Germany, to pick up the reins and, as a true moral authority, create the momentum towards a rebirth of Germany. From a memorandum by Radowitz, an adviser to the King of Prussia, on measures to be taken by the German Confederation, November 1847. Answer both parts of the question with reference to the sources. (a) Read Sources B and C. How far do these sources agree about what happened in Silesia in 1844? [15] (b) Read all of the sources. ‘Economic problems were the cause of demands for change in Germany by 1848.’ How far do these sources support this view? [25]

4 9489/13/M/J/21 © UCLES 2021 Section B: American option The origins of the Civil War, 1820–61 2 Read the sources and then answer both parts of the question. Source A You request from me an expression of opinion on the question of annexation. I have no hesitation in declaring that I am in favour of the immediate re-annexation of Texas. The proof is clear. From ratification of the Treaty of 1803 with France until the Treaty of 1819 with Spain, the territory now constituting the Republic of Texas belonged to the United States. In 1819, the Florida Treaty was concluded and the land now called Texas was most unwisely given away. The government and people of Texas, it is understood, are anxious to be reunited with the United States. If the application of Texas for a reunion is rejected, there is imminent danger that it will become a dependency of Great Britain. No American patriot, anxious for the safety and prosperity of the country, could permit this to occur without the most strenuous resistance. From a letter from James Polk to a group of Kentucky citizens, April 1844. At the time, Polk was hoping to become the Democratic party’s nominee for US vice-president. Source B The annexation of Texas was an important issue in the recent presidential election. It changed its whole aspect and caused both the nomination and election of Mr Polk. A majority of the people of the United States, by voting for Mr Polk, have already decided that this measure of annexation must be promptly carried out. We believe that a very large portion of the Whig Party support us on this occasion. Let it be viewed in its true light, as a great American question, essential to our peace, progress and prosperity, the accomplishment of which would be within the Constitution. Let us urge that, while it is vital to the South, it would not only inflict no injury upon the North and West but stimulate the products of one and foster the commerce of the other. It would make us emphatically a united people. From the ‘Richmond (Virginia) Enquirer’, December 1844. Source C Everyone can see the danger to our safety and future peace if Texas remains an independent state. Is there anyone among our citizens who would not prefer perpetual peace with Texas to occasional war? Is there anyone who would not prefer free trade with Texas rather than high duties on all our goods which cross its frontiers? Whatever is good or evil in the local institutions of Texas will remain their own, whether annexed to the United States or not. Upon the same principle that they would refuse to form a perpetual union with Texas because of her local institutions, our forefathers would have been prevented from forming our present Union. I shall, on the broad principle which formed the basis of our Constitution, and not in any narrow spirit of sectional policy, endeavour to carry out the expressed will of the people and government by the re-annexation of Texas to our Union at the earliest practicable period. From President Polk’s inaugural address, March 1845.

5 9489/13/M/J/21 © UCLES 2021 [Turn over Source D To the Senate and House of Representatives in Congress assembled, we do hereby solemnly protest against the annexation of Texas: 1. Because its main and boasted object is the extension and perpetuation of human slavery in its very worst forms and in a land where, by the Mexican Republic in 1829, it had been totally abolished. 2. Because this forcible seizure of Texas is definitely the latest in a series of conquests and oppression intended to overpower the free states by indefinitely extending the three-fifth clause of the Constitution. 3. Because several states have repeatedly, through their legislatures and by means of the public press and innumerable petitions, opposed any such innovation. We petition you to oppose by honourable means a measure which is unjust, unwise, unprecedented and unconstitutional. From a list of thirteen points published in the ‘New York Tribune’, December 1845. Answer both parts of the question with reference to the sources. (a) Read Sources A and C. Compare and contrast the arguments of James Polk concerning the annexation of Texas. [15] (b) Read all of the sources. ‘The annexation of Texas was in the national interest.’ How far do the sources support this view? [25]

6 9489/13/M/J/21 © UCLES 2021 Section C: International option The League of Nations and international relations in the 1930s 3 Read the sources and then answer both parts of the question. Source A As far as Germany itself is concerned, let there be no doubts on the following points: I consider Bolshevism the worst poison that can be given to a people. I demand from every German workman that he shall not have any relations with these international mischief-makers and he shall never see me befriending them. Moreover, any further treaty connections with the present Bolshevik Russia would be completely worthless for us. It is out of the question to think that National Socialist Germany should ever be bound to protect Bolshevism or that we, on our side, should ever agree to accept the assistance of a Bolshevik state. For I fear that the moment any nation should agree to accept such assistance, it would seal its own doom. From a speech to the German Reichstag, by Adolf Hitler, January 1937. Source B Cartoon published in a British newspaper, 29 June 1939. Ribbentrop is holding a file labelled ‘Proposals for a Nazi-Soviet Pact to dish the democracies’ while the office of M Molotov is ‘Engaged on talks for British-Soviet Pact’.

7 9489/13/M/J/21 © UCLES 2021 Source C It is true that Germany and the USSR, as a result of years of hostility in their respective world outlooks, today look at each other in distrust. However, even during this period the natural sympathy of the Germans for the Russians never disappeared. The Reich government and the Soviet government must count it as certain that the capitalist western democracies are the unforgiving enemies of both National Socialist Germany and of the USSR. They are trying again, by the conclusion of a military alliance, to drive the USSR into war against Germany. The crisis which has been produced in German-Polish relations by British policy, as well as British agitation for war and attempts at an alliance, make a speedy clarification of German-Soviet relations desirable. Otherwise these matters, without any German initiative, might take a turn which would deprive both governments of the possibility of restoring German-Soviet friendship and clearing up the territorial questions of Eastern Europe. From a telegram from the German Foreign Minister Ribbentrop to Molotov, 14 August 1939. Source D Berlin and Moscow announced that negotiations were likely to be concluded soon, for a non- aggression pact between those two countries. I do not attempt to conceal that announcement came to the government as a surprise, and a surprise of a very unpleasant character. For some time, there had been rumours about an impending change in the relations between Germany and the USSR, but no indication of that change had been conveyed either to us or to the French government by the Soviet government. On 31 July I remarked that we had engaged upon steps almost unprecedented in character. I said that we had shown a great amount of trust and a strong desire to bring the negotiations with the Soviet Union to a successful conclusion. From a speech by Chamberlain to the British parliament, 24 August 1939. Answer both parts of the question with reference to the sources. (a) Read Sources A and C. Compare and contrast Sources A and C on German attitudes to the USSR. [15] (b) Read all of the sources. How far do the sources support the view that the Nazi-Soviet Pact took the British government by surprise? [25]

8 9489/13/M/J/21 © UCLES 2021 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. BLANK PAGE

This document consists of 13 printed pages. © UCLES 2021 [Turn over Cambridge International AS & A Level HISTORY 9489/13 Paper 1 Document Question May/June 2021 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 2021 series for most Cambridge IGCSE™, Cambridge International A and AS Level components and some Cambridge O Level components.

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 2 of 13 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. 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.

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 3 of 13 Part (a) Generic Levels of Response: Marks Level 4 Makes a developed comparison • Makes a developed comparison between the two sources. • Explains why points of similarity and difference exist through contextual awareness and/or source evaluation. 12–15 Level 3 Compares views and identifies similarities and differences • Compares the views expressed in the two sources, identifying differences and similarities and supporting them with source content. 8–11 Level 2 Compares views and identifies similarities or differences • Identifies relevant similarities or differences between the two sources and the response may be one-sided with only one aspect explained. OR Compares views and identifies similarities and differences but these are asserted rather than supported from the sources • Identifies relevant similarities and differences between the two sources without supporting evidence from the sources. 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 creditable content. No engagement with source material. 0

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 4 of 13 Part (b) Generic Levels of Response: Marks Level 5 Evaluates the sources to reach a supported judgement • Answers are well focused, demonstrating a clear understanding of the sources and the question. • Reaches a supported judgement about the extent to which the sources support the statement and weighs the evidence in order to do this. 21–25 Level 4 Using evaluation of the sources to support and/or challenge the statement • Demonstrates a clear understanding of how the source content supports and challenges the statement. • Evaluates source material in context, this may be through considering the nature, origin and purpose of the sources in relation to the statement. 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. 11–15 Level 2 Uses the sources to support or challenge the statement • Makes valid points from the sources to either support the statement or to challenge it. 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 with little or no reference to the sources. 1–5 Level 0 No creditable content. No engagement with source material. 0

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 5 of 13 Question Answer Marks 1(a) Read Sources B and C. How far do these sources agree about what happened in Silesia in 1844? Indicative content Similarities: • Both sources agree that the weavers revolted. • Both sources agree that there is ‘misery in the factory districts’ (Source C), with Source B showing the weavers to be cold, hungry and penniless. • Both agree that the weavers’ revolt was put down using force. • Both agree that there is a sense of powerlessness about the weavers and that no one really cares what happens to them. In Source A the weavers have abandoned their religion and have been mistreated by the King and their country (the ‘lying Fatherland’). In Source B, the general German population doesn’t care about them either. Differences: • The weavers blame the king for neglecting them and making their situation worse. However, the writer of Source C says this is not the king’s fault and is just a local problem which local authorities should have dealt with. • Source C says the revolt is harmless and won’t have consequences as it didn’t take much effort to deal with it and the German people aren’t really interested. However, Source B seems to suggest that there is a wider impact. The weavers are cursing Germany and weaving her ‘funeral shroud’ which suggests that Germany will die because of the way it has treated the weavers. • Whether the revolt is political in nature (or impact) is a difference. Source C thinks not – Germany is an ‘unpolitical’ country, whereas there is a sense of political ideas in Source B which talks about inequality, poverty, the rich getting richer at the expense of the workers. Candidates may know the context of the weavers’ revolt and use this to explain the similarities / differences between the sources. They may also pick up on the reference to Engels. The poem was used as propaganda and the writer had an audience and purpose in mind. The context of Source C is two-fold. One is the reactionary writer who basically argues that it is up to the church and local authorities to sort out economic problems. The other context is that Marx published this for a reason. Accept any other valid responses. 15

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 6 of 13 Question Answer Marks 1(b) Read all the sources. ‘Economic problems were the cause of demands for change in Germany by 1848.’ How far do these sources support this assertion? Indicative content Support • Source A: Yes – there are savings to be made by having one state. There is a suggestion that economic growth is stunted by the Confederation with post and railways (both of which could encourage economic growth) being difficult and tied up in regulations. There is a reference to ‘poor emigrants’ trying to get work in different states and being turned away. • Source B: Yes – poverty and hunger have driven the weavers to revolt. They are weaving a funeral shroud for Germany and highlight the difference between their poverty and the wealth of the king and aristocracy. Challenge • Source B: There are political demands here as well as economic demands, the workers are being degraded and ill-treated by the state. The reaction of the state has turned the situation from merely an economic crisis to a political crisis. The source also suggests the weavers are turning their backs on the church which has been a force social stability. • Source C: No one in Germany is interested in the weavers and their economic problems. The revolt is just a local issue, which should have been sorted out by the local authorities or church, and it has been easily dealt with. The source goes so far as to say that there is no sense of impending revolt. That the author says this suggests that it is being discussed. While the author admits that poverty is a great ‘crime’, he does not see it leading to revolutionary thinking. Marx, publishing this, clearly had other ideas. • Source D: The desire for community and national strength is the main reason for calls for change. There needs to be a rebirth of Germany and Prussia should be at the head. There is a reference to class conflict which could be cross-referenced to Source B. 25

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 7 of 13 Question Answer Marks 1(b) Evaluation/Context • Source A: This source suggests issues are being widely discussed and promotes the idea of union for economic purposes. • Source B: Audience/purpose are important here. Issues about reliability might be discussed. However, the source is useful in the fact that it was written, published and widely disseminated. • Source C: Contextual understanding of Marx might help candidates to evaluate this source. Alternatively, they could use their knowledge of the reaction to the revolt to explain the attitude of the writer. • Source D: Contextual knowledge of Radowitz and what he was up to here would be helpful to evaluate this source. He was sent to Vienna in November 1847 to reconstruct the Confederation. Accept any other valid responses.

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 8 of 13 Question Answer Marks 2(a) Read Sources A and C. Compare and contrast the arguments of James Polk concerning the annexation of Texas. Similarities between Sources A and C • Both argue that Texas should be annexed by the USA. • Both see the annexation of Texas as a reunion, a ‘re-annexation’, rather than the annexation of a separate state. • Both argue that the annexation of Texas would benefit the USA. • Both consider the consequences if the USA rejects the request of Texas to join the USA. Differences between Sources A and C • Source A says if Texas remains independent it could turn to Britain for protection whereas Source C argues that Texas remaining independent would mean war and economic hardship. Thus, Source A focuses on the external consequences of rejection, whereas Source C focuses on the domestic consequences. • Source A considers the views of Texas, which is seen as being keen to be reunited with the USA, while Source C concentrates solely on the interests of Americans. Source A is a pre-election letter to a group of voters, presumably intended to gain their support. Source C is a post-election public speech to the US Congress and people, presumably intended to gain their support for the passage of a Bill to authorise the annexation of Texas. Thus, both are partisan and unreliable. Accept any other valid responses. 15

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 9 of 13 Question Answer Marks 2(b) Read all of the sources. ‘The annexation of Texas was in the national interest.’ How far do the sources support this view? Source A supports this assertion, though rather half-heatedly. Its main argument is that Texas should be re-annexed by the USA, thus reversing a historical wrong, for example, in 1819 Texas was ‘most unwisely given away’. Doing so would meet the wishes of the people of Texas. It would also prevent the UK from gaining influence over Texas. Nowhere does Polk identify the direct benefits of annexation for the USA. Source B supports this assertion more energetically. It argues that annexation would benefit the North as well as the South and that ‘it would make us a more united people’. The source makes no mention of re- annexation, for example, it is not looking backwards. Source C also supports the assertion. It argues that annexation will bring peace and prosperity to the USA; Texas remaining outside the USA would result in more conflict and less trade. It also argues that annexation would fit within ‘the broad principle’ of the US constitution. Source D strongly challenges the assertion. It argues that annexation would mean the extension of slavery, which in turn would upset the delicate constitutional balance within the USA between slave and free states. It also says that many states, presumably Northern free states, have opposed annexation. Evaluation/Context Source A is taken from a private letter from a politician hoping to run for federal government office which was (indirectly) elected, via the Electoral College. His description of the loss of Texas in 1819, though believed by many Americans at the time, was far from the truth Because this was an electioneering address and factually inaccurate, Source A is unreliable. Source B is published in a Southern newspaper soon after Polk had won the 1844 presidential election, and the annexation of Texas much closer. It asserts that the victory for Polk is a mandate for annexation. Sources A and C broadly support this assertion. The source also argues that the Whigs, seen as representing the North, also supported annexation. Source D, though not explicitly a Whig source, calls this assertion into question. Source B is a partisan source written soon after a partisan victory, so cannot be trusted. Source C is Polk’s inaugural address following his election victory some five months previously. Putting a reasoned argument for annexation, it is not obviously triumphalist, as might have been expected. Polk is using the presidency as a ‘bully pulpit’ to educate the American people to accept his arguments. The arguments remain partisan, however. Polk still talks of ‘re- annexation’. Source C cannot be trusted entirely. 25

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 10 of 13 Question Answer Marks 2(b) Source D comes from a public petition to the US Congress, published a year after the election of President Polk. It shows that the annexation of Texas remains a divisive issue, despite Polk’s best efforts as shown by Source C. As a statement of the opinions of a section of Northern society it is reliable, if unavoidably partisan. In its perspective on the issue of the annexation of Texas, it is an unreliable source. Accept any other valid responses.

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 11 of 13 Question Answer Marks 3(a) Compare and contrast Sources A and C on German attitudes to the USSR. Indicative content Differences between Source A and Source C • Source A shows great hostility to ‘Bolshevik Russia’, while Source C emphasises ‘the natural sympathy of the Germans for the Russians’. • Source A stresses that treaties with Soviet Union would be ‘completely worthless’ in contrast to Source C, which is proposing co-operation and identifying the real enemies as the ‘the capitalist western democracies’. Similarities between Source A and Source C • Source C briefly acknowledges the ‘years of hostility’ between the two nations, which is the focus of Source A. • Both Sources A and C indicate Nazi distrust of Communism. The differences between the sources can be explained by the different interests of Germany in 1939 as opposed to 1937. In Source A, Hitler is using the full force of his rhetoric to emphasise his hostility to the Soviet Union, in the context of their support for opposing sides in the Spanish Civil War, his anger at the Franco-Soviet Treaty of Mutual Assistance of 1936 and his need to justify the Anti-Comintern Pact, which had been signed November 1936. At this time, Hitler was still hoping to improve relations with Britain. By August 1939, as shown in the secret message Source C, Germany was preparing to invade Poland, and in the face of Britain and France’s pledge to declare war if this happened (‘British agitation for war and attempts at an alliance’), the support and resources of the Soviets became crucial and urgent. This explains the conciliatory language of Source C and previous hostility. Accept any other valid responses. 15

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 12 of 13 Question Answer Marks 3(b) Read all the sources. How far do all the sources support the view that the Nazi-Soviet Pact took the British government by surprise? Indicative content Source A supports the view, as the international audience would be aware of Hitler’s intense opposition to the ‘Bolshevik state’. In this source, Hitler specifically rules out any treaty arrangements as ‘out of the question’. Source B challenges the view. Low’s cartoon suggests that, as early as June 1939, there were at least rumours of talks between foreign ministers Ribbentrop and Molotov, and an awareness of the improved relations between the two powers. Source C can be used on both sides of the argument • Source C supports the view as it shows that the agreement was still not concluded as late as 14th August and concedes that the two countries even ‘today look at each other in distrust’. While this was a private communication, the British government was clearly aware of the conflict between outlooks to which Ribbentrop refers. • Source C challenges the view because it also explains some grounds for the pact, that were generally recognised. It sees Western policy as aiming ‘to drive the U.S.S.R. into the war against Germany’ and refers to the British guarantee to Poland. Source D supports the view. Chamberlain argues ‘that announcement came to the government as a surprise’ and they had been hoping ‘to bring the negotiations with the Soviet Union to a successful conclusion’. Source D can also be used to challenge the view as it says that there had been some rumours of a change in circumstances. Evaluation/Context • Source A is a reliable guide to the message Hitler wanted to deliver to the German people in early 1937, and it reflects the hatred of Communism he frequently showed. However, as with all his public speeches, he has a propaganda purpose which relates to the situation at that time, and which he would be willing to contradict completely as circumstances changed. • Source B is a remarkably accurate forecast, as the highly secret negotiations did not start until August, and even the more publicised economic agreement was only discussed in July. There was some earlier criticism of the slow progress made by Chamberlain, who was himself deeply suspicious of Communism in his attempts to make a deal with the Soviet Union. This is perhaps the main purpose of the cartoon. 25

9489/13 Cambridge International AS & A Level – Mark Scheme PUBLISHED May/June 2021 © UCLES 2021 Page 13 of 13 Question Answer Marks 3(b) • Source C was written by Ribbentrop, to persuade Molotov of the benefits of an agreement. He deploys strong arguments, referring to both countries’ interests in expansion and ‘clearing up the territorial questions of Eastern Europe’. By this time, the Soviet Union feared they would be left to face the armies of Nazi Germany unaided, so Ribbentrop’s pressure was effective. However, his promises of ‘German-Soviet friendship’ proved short-lived. • Source D shows that the British Prime minister needs to avoid the responsibility for allowing this ‘very unpleasant’ development to occur, by protesting how surprised and unjustified it was. His assertion that the British government had ‘shown a great amount of trust and a strong desire’ to conclude a treaty with the Soviet Union is therefore predictable, but questionable in the light of the way in which the negotiations had been conducted. The sources show there were some grounds for surprise, given the ideological hostility between Nazis and Soviets that is expressed in Source A. However, two factors which made the pact less of a surprise are indicated: common interests in carving up Poland (Source C) and suspicion towards the west, particularly as Chamberlain appeared to lack conviction in his negotiations with the Soviets (Sources B and D). Accept any other valid responses.