Cambridge A Level History 9489 — 2024 Oct/Nov Paper 4 · Variant 1

1 ‘Mussolini’s foreign policy was largely unsuccessful.’ Discuss. [30]

Mark scheme: Question Answer Marks 1 ‘Mussolini’s foreign policy was largely unsuccessful.’ Discuss. 30 Candidates might examine Corfu, the acquisition of Fiume, the Locarno Treaty, Albania, the Stresa Front, attempted Anschluss by Germany in 1934, the Abyssinian Crisis, involvement in the Spanish Civil War, the Rome-Berlin Tokyo Axis, the Munich meetings, the Pact of Steel as examples. Aims could include Mussolini’s desire to create a strong man image, to recreate the Roman Empire and to gain international prestige for Italy. He hoped that Italy might become the dominant power in the Mediterranean and Balkans and also expand its colonial presence in Africa. The role of foreign policy as a propaganda tool to bolster support from the Italian people, particularly when domestic policies were less than successful might also be discussed. By 1940 it could be argued there had been success in foreign policy. As a result of the war in Abyssinia, the empire in Africa had been expanded, Albania was under Italian control, fascism had spread to Spain with Italian military and financial support, both Britain and France had demonstrated that they saw Italy as a major power. Foreign policy success was certainly used for propaganda purposes and had arguably led to greater public support for the regime in the 1930s. However, in order to agree with the statement, attention could be drawn to the unrealistic nature of Mussolini’s ambitions, particularly given Italy’s economic and military limitations and, despite Italy’s enhanced role in international diplomacy, Mussolini failed to establish the nation as a powerbroker and was unable to make Italy a balancing power between Britain and France on one side and Nazi Germany on the other. Ultimately, Mussolini’s policy led Italy to a disastrous war which the country was not prepared to fight, to allied occupation and the fall of the fascist regime, which will probably outweigh any achievements.

More questions on How did the rise of extremism affect international relations?

2 Analyse the impact of Stalin’s propaganda and personality cult on the Russian people from 1929. [30]

Mark scheme: 2 Analyse the impact of Stalin’s propaganda and personality cult on the 30 Russian people from 1929. Responses might discuss how culture and the media were used to extol Stalin’s virtues at every opportunity, including the role of Socialist Realist art and official newspapers such as Pravda and Isvestiya. There could be discussion of the celebrations for Stalin’s birthday and the re-writing of history in books like the Short Course might also feature in discussions of the cult. It is also reasonable for candidates to make the point that determining genuine enthusiasm in any totalitarian society is difficult and that the context of the Soviet Union in the 1930s make this even more apparent. However, historians have ventured opinions on the degree of adulation that Stalin received. There are interpretations that there was a wide-spread belief that Stalin was personally responsible for the improvements in their lives and was seen as a benefactor and as a traditional defender of the Russian people, in much the same way that the Tsar had been. Some may have perceived Stalin as a charismatic figure akin to a god, reflected in the quasi-religious use of icons of Stalin. There is also evidence that individuals considered the deification of Stalin to be ridiculous and there were criticisms of the constant emphasis upon him and that extensive propaganda became counterproductive and led to cynicism by the late 1930s. Candidates might also discuss the widespread use of terror and repression to challenge the view that propaganda was successful. It is worth re-iterating that the nature of Soviet society means that it is difficult to make definitive judgements about how widespread such sentiments actually were, however.

More questions on How were the Bolsheviks able to consolidate their power up to 1924?

3 ‘Hitler’s consolidation of power was achieved by gaining the support of the traditional German elites.’ Assess this view. [30]

Mark scheme: 3 ‘Hitler’s consolidation of power was achieved by gaining the support of 30 the traditional German élites.’ Assess this view. An argument to support this contention is that the purge of the SA in the Night of the Long Knives in 1934 was designed to secure the support of the conservative elites, fearful of the radical and potentially revolutionary brownshirt masses, and of the army high command. As a result of these events, the armed forces took an oath of personal loyalty to the Führer. Another example of concessions made to elite groups in German society might be the Concordat with the Catholic Church which was signed in July 1933. An alternative explanation which might be used was that Hitler used the legal framework to establish full control. Here, consideration might be paid to the response to the Reichstag Fire and Hitler’s use of Emergency Decrees in February 1933, followed by the Enabling Act and the consequent banning of other political parties and trade unions. The use of repression and terror was also an element of Hitler’s methods and candidates may choose to qualify explanations about the essentially lawful transition of power with discussions of the use of violence and intimidation, for instance in the passing of the Enabling Act. The arrest of thousands of communists, opening of camps such as Dachau and the introduction of the Gestapo in this period are worthy of attention. Conclusions might be drawn which seek to combine these various explanations by explaining that Hitler skilfully increased his power legally for above, whilst utilising violence from below to intimidate and that repression was mixed with conciliation towards the élite, particularly through neutering the radical wing of the SA in 1934.

More questions on How did the rise of extremism affect international relations?

4 Assess how influential pacifism was on British popular opinion in the period 1934–39. [30]

Mark scheme: 4 Assess how influential pacifism was on British popular opinion in the 30 period 1934–39. Responses will require a discussion of the extent to which pacifism was supported by the general public in the 1930s, when the peace movement expanded from being the concern of small peace societies into a mass phenomenon, particularly during the period from the Manchurian crisis to the Italian invasion of Ethiopia. This could be linked to the impact of World War I and to the growing threat of further conflict. There might be discussion about the manifestations of pacifism to explore its significance, with examples such as the East Fulham by election result and the Peace Ballot of 1934 being expected to be used to develop an argument which agrees with the statement. However, a case could be made that however strong pacifism was in the public sphere, its impact on policymaking was less certain and that many people fell into the category of preferring peace to war rather than completely rejecting conflict. Furthermore, despite the widespread support for appeasement in 1938, the Spanish Civil War was a turning point for attitudes towards war in Britain. Responses might consider the willingness of some to volunteer to fight for the Republicans as an indication that the growth of fascism was changing attitudes. By 1939 it was widely accepted that war was necessary.

More questions on Why, and with what effects, did Britain and France pursue a policy of appeasement?

5 Assess the importance of economic prosperity in the development of a distinct youth culture during the late 1940s and 1950s. [30]

Mark scheme: 5 Assess the importance of economic prosperity in the development of a 30 distinct youth culture during the late 1940s and 1950s. Social divisions between teenagers who saw themselves as a distinct cultural group and the parents who had lived through a world war led to conflicts about fashions, music, sexual behaviour. Explanations could centre on the impact of the changes in family life during the war; on consumerism and the promotion of ‘youth’ as a market for consumer products; changes in education and in political awareness Possible explanations might lie in the greater prosperity and optimism of the post war years as Americans did not face the problems of Depression and the disciplines of war. Baby Boomers often gained freedom from having working parents exploiting 50s prosperity. TV gave access to different cultures and lifestyles and the US became less parochial. Greater urbanisation offered more opportunities for youngsters. The greater mobility offered by more cars, better roads and cheap fuel made the automobile a means of meeting more people and developing group identity. The role of consumerism in producing youth products and advertising may be linked to music as a major actor in social change with Rock and Roll. Teen magazines encouraged distinctive fashions and youth language. Movies too were tailored to young people and iconic figures such as James Dean and Marlon Brando influenced youth culture. Politically the rise of Civil Rights movements encouraged students and gave weight to the activities and opinions of younger people. Discussion could focus on how far change resulted from external factors – prosperity – the impact of Cold War fears – more urban growth, technology and factors more to do with culture itself such as youth icons, music and literature.

More questions on What were the consequences of the rapid economic growth after 1870?

6 ‘Kennedy’s domestic policies failed to deliver on his promises.’ Discuss this view. [30]

Mark scheme: 6 ‘Kennedy’s domestic policies failed to deliver on his promises.’ Discuss 30 this view. ‘. ... And we stand today on the edge of a new frontier….unconquered problems of ignorance and prejudice, unanswered questions of poverty and surplus. ... I'm asking each of you to be pioneers towards that New Frontier.’ The promises might be linked to New Frontier rhetoric but the realities were that his own party put a brake on radical change and circumstances often made change problematic The recession with falling agricultural income, rising unemployment and high levels of business bankruptcies required government stimulus measures. With lowering of taxes, an increase in minimum wage and higher spending, money was put into the economy. Kennedy’s defenders point to 33/53 reforming bills actually passing and to a variety of social and economic reforms. Unemployment benefits increased, there was more food available for the poor, public works, and greater aid for agriculture. There was also a sustained campaign against organised crime and Kennedy challenged price rises by Big Steel. Critics have argued that plans for regional development and greater social security however did not lead to sustained change. Plans for a medical programme for the elderly, a new Department of Urban Affairs were opposed and Kennedy did not back a bill for aid for parochial education. However regional aid for Appalachia was passed. Despite speeches supporting civil rights, Kennedy was forced to appoint white supremacist judges in the south by Democratic senators and a general Civil Rights Act had to wait until 1964. Kennedy did support the enrolment of James Meredith at the University of Mississippi and used substantial armed force. Kennedy faced growing pressure from civil rights campaigns and though he would have liked to delay legislation did propose a Civil Rights Act. The actual achievements in terms of appointing African Americans and supporting voting rights and full integration, however, have been seen as limited.

More questions on Why was there a second New Deal and how successful was it?

7 Assess the social impact of federal economic policies in the 1980s. [30]

Mark scheme: 7 Assess the social impact of federal economic policies in the 1980s. 30 This is about how far ‘Reagonomics’ actually achieved the ‘trickle down’ and promoted enterprise and social mobility and how far financial measures affected US society. The negative view is that trickle down economic theory was illusory and what tax cuts brought was a considerable increase in social inequality with the 80 000 richest Americans going from owning 1.3% of wealth to 7% in the 1980s without average Americans seeing benefits. The critics point to an increasing gap between the ‘haves and the have nots’ leading to despair among disadvantaged groups. The tax cuts did give 10% more disposable income to middle America but not enough to make an appreciable difference to lifestyle or social mobility. Savings actually declined as pressures for consumption increased. The poor performance of manufacturing industry led to sectional inequalities. More money in wage packets was probably not the cause of rising female employment, one of the changes in the 1980s. The shift to a business-friendly environment led to a decline in union power and influence and there was possibly a ‘hollowing out of the middle class’. The lack of investment in public services fell disproportionately on poorer Americans. Defenders point to a recovery from the problems of the 1970s with greater incentives for innovation and opportunities in growth sectors and the investments made possible by allowing more income to be taken from government to people and a new culture of enterprise and business confidence with less dependence on the state. Statistics show an increase in household debt, little fall in unemployment, a considerable increase in incomed differentials and limited rise in wages. Unemployment and poverty was also not equally spreads in US society with poorly educated African Americans having a 28% unemployment rate compared to the average of around 8%. There was also regional diversity where manufacturing and export industries did not enjoy the boom in services and defence spending.

More questions on What were the consequences of the rapid economic growth after 1870?

Section C: International history, 1945–92

Mark scheme: 8 ‘The importance of the Nixon Doctrine in changing US foreign policy has 30 been exaggerated.’ Evaluate this claim. The announcement that the US would expect its Asian allies to be responsible for their own military defence was made by Nixon in Guam in 1969 and became known as the Nixon Doctrine, in contrast to the wider responsibilities of the Truman Doctrine. It marked a shift from direct US military involvement to the US providing allies with the means for their own defence. In Vietnam it reflected realities of faltering domestic support, problems in ensuring stable governments and 25 000 US lives lost. The type of war being fought was not the same as World War Two or even Korea and US economic and military resources together with the political support needed was not the same as in earlier conflicts, so the doctrine was of considerable importance in reshaping US policy. In the short term Vietnamisation could not replace direct US military intervention and the Doctrine was an indication that US withdrawal – Nixon’s ‘peace with honor’ was a major change. But the overall nature of US policy in Asia had also changed. The Doctrine could be seen as a factor in the changing relations with China. Discussion could focus on the relative importance of long- and short-term consequences. There could also be a discussion of whether the so called ‘doctrine’ was simply a recognition of changes beyond the control of the US. In the short term it affected US bolstering of Taiwan, South Korea and Cambodia. It also led to a request from the Shah of Iran for arms supplies. The US built up Saudi Arabia and Iran as a result with important long-term consequences for the region and subsequent problems.

More questions on Why did war break out in 1939?

9 ‘The resolution of the Cuban Crisis did little to improve US–Soviet relations in the 1960s.’ Assess this view. [30]

Mark scheme: 9 ‘The resolution of the Cuban Crisis did little to improve US–Soviet 30 relations in the 1960s.’ Assess this view. Both powers were keen to avoid a further crisis but this did not prevent them from continuing to build up arms. Brezhnev and Kosygin led the USSR on a massive military build-up. US policy makers used the crisis to justify the nuclear arms build-up which was to become an essential part of their foreign policy. Proxy wars were fought in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and southern Africa and they competed in the space race. The Soviet government increased their research and funding of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in the years that followed, leading to a stockpiling of advanced missiles capable of hitting US targets. Similarly, the USA continued to build up its military resources. Kennedy felt encouraged to be more assertive against the USSR’s Communist allies in Vietnam and, in March 1965, President Johnson committed the first US combat ground troops to Vietnam to aid the South in its war against Soviet-assisted North Vietnamese and Viet Cong forces. On 20 August 1968, Soviet, Polish, East German, Bulgarian, and Hungarian troops invaded Czechoslovakia and deposed the reformist government of Alexander Dubcek. The USA co-sponsored a UN Security Council resolution condemning the invasion and calling for the prompt withdrawal of Warsaw Pact forces; it also delayed ratification of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Brezhnev later justified the invasion with the Brezhnev Doctrine, that when internal or external forces hostile to socialism sought to restore the capitalist order all other socialist states had the right to intervene. However, both the USA and the USSR were keen for a dialogue between the two superpowers to continue. The Cuban Crisis had emphasised to both sides the risk of not cooperating. Kennedy was convinced of the dangers of nuclear brinksmanship. To prevent future crises, a Moscow-Washington hotline was set up giving a direct phone link between the White House and the Kremlin. On 5 August 1963, the Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was signed by the USA, Britain and the USSR. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was signed by the USA and the USSR on 1 July 1968 and became law in 1970. The treaty sought to discourage the further development and sharing of nuclear weapons technology, while allowing for the use of nuclear power for peaceful purposes. The USA and the USSR held preliminary Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) in Helsinki on 17 November 1969 and formal negotiations began in Vienna on 16 April 1970.

More questions on How did the rise of extremism affect international relations?

10 Evaluate the factors that influenced Sino-Soviet relations in the period 1945–69. [30]

Mark scheme: 10 Evaluate the factors that influenced Sino-Soviet relations in the period 30 1945–69. In February 1945 at Yalta it was agreed that the USSR would enter the war in Asia three months after Germany’s defeat. A Sino–Soviet 30-year Treaty of Friendship and Alliance ensued; Stalin offered China aid against future Japanese aggression and recognition of Chinese sovereignty in Manchuria in exchange for concessions he had negotiated at Yalta. He wanted to keep China weak to use it as a platform to expand Soviet influence in East Asia. He doubted the communist leadership and he maintained official relations with the KMT government up until 2 October 1949, the day after the establishment of the PRC. After the PRC was proclaimed, the USSR seemingly became its closest ally for several years. In 1950 Mao signed a 30-year Treaty of Friendship, Alliance and Mutual Assistance. It included a military alliance that required each to come to the other’s aid if attacked and the 1945 treaty made with the KMT was annulled. It also provided the PRC with economic benefits, including a $300 million loan and Soviet technical advisers. However, in 1950, Mao entered the Korean War while Stalin just provided air support and supplied aircraft weapons and munitions. Mao felt exploited and betrayed believing Stalin considered he was superior. Ideological differences also soured their relationship; this worsened under Khrushchev. Mao’s interpretation of Marxism focused on the peasants as the revolutionary class but Stalin used the urban working class. Khrushchev’s ‘Secret Speech’ in 1956 attacked Stalin for his ‘crimes against the party’ accusing him of being engaged in a ‘cult of personality’. Mao believed this was critical of his own style of leadership. In 1957 Mao attended a conference of the world’s communist parties in Moscow; he insisted that Moscow should abandon peaceful co-existence towards the West. He felt that the USSR wanted to leave the PRC internationally isolated. Three issues became critical in dividing the two nations: Taiwan, India, and the Great Leap Forward. The Great Leap Forward caused Soviet resentment as it rejected the Soviet form of economic development. Moscow began to repudiate the terms of the military alliance, and, in 1960, the USSR pulled its remaining technical advisors out of the PRC. The Chinese bombardment of the island of Quemoy in August 1958 escalated the tensions. In 1962, following the Cuban Missile Crisis, Mao accused Khrushchev of being afraid of the USA. When the PRC and India went to war briefly in late 1962 over disputed borders, Moscow supported India. In July 1964 Mao withdrew China’s ambassador and cut diplomatic ties with Moscow. The Sino-Soviet split came to a head with a brief border war in the late 1960s.

More questions on How did the rise of extremism affect international relations?

11 Assess the extent to which the economic challenges of the newly independent African nations were a legacy of colonial rule. [30]

Mark scheme: 11 Assess the extent to which the economic challenges of the newly 30 independent African nations were a legacy of colonial rule. A major legacy from the colonial powers was lack of infrastructure. Roads and railways had been built but not to provide national infrastructures. They were invariably intended to facilitate the export of raw materials. Many, like the Ugandan Railroad, ran straight to the coastline. These nations also lacked the manufacturing infrastructure to add value to their raw materials. Many African countries were rich in cash crops and minerals but were unable to process them. During the colonial period most West African countries, for example, focused on the production and marketing of one or two cash crops. They were primary producers with processing taking place in the West. They were still dependent on the ex-colonial powers; they had gained political, not economic independence. They were also dependent on Western economies for much of their energy; they did not have the refineries needed to refine their crude oil. The economic development and education of local people had been kept low deliberately and, as a result, there was enormous socio-economic deprivation and the lack of a skilled workforce. African states had inherited economies which were not suited to producing enough food to feed their own populations. However, other economic challenges arose after independence which were related to poor political leadership and corruption. As many states abandoned party politics for dictatorships, money was diverted to the military to ensure that rulers retained their power. Corruption also played its part with the elite using the nation’s resources for their own benefit such as presidential homes and hotels. A small percentage became very rich while the state ownership of industry often reduced the incentive to invest. Neo-colonialism was a problem as ex-colonial powers continued to dominate, and their economies were still being exploited rather than developed. Many countries were dependent upon one product; for example, Zambia was mainly dependent upon copper and was badly hit when world prices fell. The failure of African leaders to change the system they inherited led to economic difficulties. Some leaders, like Nkrumah, tried to overcome their dependence by undertaking building projects, like the Volta River hydroelectric dam project but its construction put Ghana heavily into debt. Other countries also had huge external and domestic debts. Some problems arose because of the decline in average rainfall and countries faced droughts and famines.

More questions on Why was imperialism a significant force in Africa from 1870?