Cambridge A Level History 9489 — 2025 May/June Paper 4 · Variant 3

1 Assess the extent to which Mussolini’s policies improved the Italian economy. [30]

Mark scheme: Question Answer Marks 1 Assess the extent to which Mussolini’s economic policies improved the 30 Italian economy. Mussolini aimed to transform and modernise Italy’s economy in order to solve its problems such as industrial and agricultural backwardness and the glaring north-south divide. It could be argued that there was no such commitment to transformation in either industry and agriculture and that Mussolini had come to power due to his willingness to compromise with economic elites and therefore was highly unlikely to carry out radical policies that disturbed their interests. Examples of agreement which suggest that Mussolini did make significant progress could include land reclamation through the Battle for Land, which saw draining and irrigation of land, improving public health through the draining of malarial swamps such as the Pontine Marshes. In industry there was stimulation of modern industries such as electricity, steel, engineering, chemicals through the policy of autarky and placement of large government contracts for key sectors. Large companies were allowed to dominate sectors of the economy, and heavy industry benefitted from lack of tariffs on raw materials. The Corporate State was heralded as a new ‘third way’ which would eliminate the differences between employers and employees and herald a system of co-operation in the national interest. Italy’s economy and society would be superior to those based on capitalism or communism. Counter-arguments to disagree might point to the lack of major changes. The initial appointment of di Stefani suggested a commitment to orthodox economic policies. Furthermore, Mussolini failed to break up large estates in the countryside and rural poverty and the north-south divide only grew under his leadership. Battle for Grain was mainly a propaganda success, despite the apparent modernisation of agriculture through grants for new machinery/chemicals and the provision of advice on modern farming techniques. Although it helped to increase grain production, it ultimately harmed other sectors of agriculture. The Corporate State appeared to be revolutionary but instead favoured employers over workers, led to few real changes and certainly did nothing to reduce class conflict. This was another exercise which was of greater propaganda than real value. Despite the expansion of some modern industries, export markets were harmed by policies such as Battle for Lira. Responses might argue that there were important examples of improvement, but that many of Mussolini’s policies were of greater value as propaganda tools and did little to improve the economy.

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

2 ‘Stalin’s concern for the security of the Soviet Union was the main cause of the Great Terror.’ Assess this view. [30]

Mark scheme: 2 ‘Stalin’s concern for the security of the Soviet Union was the main cause 30 of the Great Terror.’ Assess this view. In order to agree with the statement, responses might argue that the purges and terror were a direct result of the growing threat of war with Nazi Germany. The fear of invasion meant that rapid industrialisation had to be undertaken, and the purges were a way of forcing ever greater sacrifices out of the people. Stalin feared that internal opposition would help the enemy and disloyalty needed to be rooted out. This helps to explain the purges of the armed forces. Alternatively, balance might be achieved by arguing that the Great Terror was a result of Stalin’s paranoid and vindictive personality. It could be argued that he aimed to achieve revenge on any senior Bolshevik who had previously challenged or humiliated him. It could be argued that his personality defects drove him to present himself as the hero of the revolution, saving it from traitors and removing those who understood his limitations. This could explain the determination to rid himself of rivals among the ‘old Bolsheviks.’ It could be argued that Stalin wanted ultimate power and was prepared to remove any potential challengers and that the purges were sparked by the existence of internal threats and opposition such as Ryutin and Kirov. Alternatively, responses might point towards economic difficulties and that the wider purges were an attempt to provide scapegoats for these problems and an attempt to encourage criticism of managers from below. The purges were therefore partly caused by an attempt to deflect the blame for failures of the Five Year Plans. In addition, it could be argued that the gulags proved slave labour to aid in the rapid industrialisation programme. It can further be argued that the purges were a result of the nature of the party and the NKVD. There were purges under Lenin and the elimination of ‘class enemies’ was part of the system. The Terror could also be discussed in light of the difficulties that the central party in Moscow often had in controlling local party administrators and that purges were a response to this and an attempt to tighten central control. There might also be reference to the role of the NKVD, who became increasingly powerful as a result. There might be some debate about the nature of the purges. They can be seen as being driven by Stalin personally, in order to increase his security and power, or by other factors relating to the central authority. Alternatively, there is a debate that the purges developed their own momentum ‘from below.’ A balanced argument is expected, weighing up Stalin’s concerns for the security of the Soviet Union, with other alternatives.

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

3 ‘The Nazi regime was popular mainly due to its economic success.’ Evaluate this view. [30]

Mark scheme: 3 ‘The Nazi regime was popular mainly due to its economic success.’ 30 Evaluate this view. Although responses might debate the extent to which popularity was achieved, this is not the purpose of the question and instead reasons for lack of opposition and apparent popularity are expected to be the focus of responses. To assess the importance of economic benefits, responses will probably address the fall in unemployment and discuss some methods by which the regime was able to meet its promise to provide ‘work and bread.’ There is also an opportunity for candidates to incorporate examples of leisure activities such as Strength through Joy and Beauty of Labour. References to the ’People’s Car’ scheme would also be valid. It might be argued that there was genuine support for Nazi foreign policies and that rearmament and the overturning of aspects of the Treaty of Versailles were popular with many Germans who approved of Hitler’s attempt to return the country to its former position. Responses might be expected to consider propaganda, which emphasised Nazi success in economic and foreign policy and encouraged pride in the nation’s achievements. Detail on Goebbels’ use of mass media, control of arts and set-piece events such as the Nuremberg Rallies and 1936 Olympic Games might also be included. The widespread use of terror could also be considered. The role of the Gestapo and use of concentration camps for political opponents and those deemed in need of ‘re-education’ is possible. Reference to the role of the police and courts is possible and is valid. Responses might also point out that the terror state operated with the help of civilians and the Gestapo relied heavily on tips-offs from the public. Detailed discussions of persecution of Jews and other minority groups are not necessary, other than to explore how far they helped gain support from other Germans.

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

4 Discuss the view that women’s roles and status changed significantly in Britain in the period 1919–39. [30]

Mark scheme: 4 Discuss the view that women’s roles and status changed significantly in 30 Britain in the period 1919–39. Responses might discuss the enfranchisement of women, partially in 1918 and then on an equal basis with men in 1928, under the two Representation of the Peoples Acts. There were 67 female candidates in the 1929 General Election and women played an increased role in political party organisations and in local politics. However, women still found it difficult to be chosen as candidates and to be elected, as there was still prejudice and discrimination. There were never more than 5% of women MPs in this period. Lack of representation suggests that there was some continuity. Employment opportunities continued to develop, even if most of the new roles taken up during World War One were no longer available. The 1919 Sex Disqualifications Act allowed women to be employed in the civil service and clerical work and light industry offered other alternatives to traditional women’s work. Some women broke through the glass ceiling in the professions, such as Ivy Williams, the first female barrister. Such examples were rare, and women remained severely unrepresented in areas such as law, medicine and academia. The marriage bar remained in sectors such as education, nursing and the civil service. Most women worked in poorly paid and low-skilled jobs, often earning less than men for the same work. Social freedoms, which first became apparent during the war, continued. So- called ‘flappers’ wore shorter skirts, dresses or trousers, cut their hair short and drank and smoked in public, going out without chaperones. There was some improvement in women’s access to birth control, which was previously purely the preserve of men. Laws such the 1923 and 1937 Matrimonial Causes Acts gave women greater equality in terms of divorce. However, there was little change to most women’s lives and the freedoms associated with flappers only really applied to relatively small numbers of young and middle- and upper-class women. Divorce remained rare and unaffordable to ordinary working-class women. There was little change in family sizes and most women remained in domestic roles. Women often bore the brunt of the Great Depression, ensuring that their husbands and children were fed first.

More questions on Why was there such extensive dissatisfaction with the peace settlements of 1919–20?

5 Analyse the reasons why fear of communism was so widespread in the US in the late 1940s and 1950s. [30]

Mark scheme: 5 Analyse the reasons why hostility to Communism was so widespread in 30 the US in the late 1940s and 1950s. The discussion might focus on the relative importance of external events – the growing power of the USSR in Eastern Europe, the fall of China, Korea, the arms race and the development of the Soviet atomic and hydrogen bombs. Fear was so great because there had been existing Red Scares since 1917 and Communism was seen to be a threat to US values and security. The expansion of Soviet influence in Eastern Europe seemed to undermine the whole aim of the war as stressed in wartime propaganda and by the Atlantic Charter. The liberal democracies of western Europe seemed to be under threat as well with strong left-wing parties in Italy France and in East Germany so it became not unimaginable that the US itself might be affected. The events in Asia – the Communist success in China in 1949 and the spread of communism in Korea and Indo China and the relative importance of this compassed with Europe could be assessed. These could be discussed in the light of internal developments – the influence of McCarthy and the Congressional hearings, the revelations of spying, accusations made against different elite groups. The widespread publicity given to accusations of communist sympathisers at all levels might be seen to be more significant than external developments. The highly effective emotional appeals of McCarthy and the willingness of the Republicans focused attention on developments abroad. Whether there was a strong element of social resentment and awareness of a gap between ordinary Americans and the New Deal elites might be discussed.

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

6 ‘Rising prices were the biggest challenge to the US economy in the 1960s and 1970s.’ Discuss this view. [30]

Mark scheme: 6 ‘Rising prices were the biggest challenge to the US economy in the 30 1960s and 1970s.’ Discuss this view. Rising prices resulted from high levels of spending, monetary policy and external factors such as the oil crises and were a considerable challenge in push up costs, particularly of transport, creating a wage-cost spiral and affecting US competitiveness in world markets. More a feature of the 1970s, inflation made investors wary of long-term commitments, and it made economic planning by businesses difficult. Productivity was therefore affected and there was a lack of innovation into new technology. However, it was rising places in conjunction with stagnation that made them such a challenge. The economic recessions which affected the US in the early and late 1970s intensified unemployment but did not bring down prices. When there was greater growth as in the mid-1970s this was restricted by another rise in oil prices. Conservative critics pointed to the policies of the Federal Reserve being a challenge because fears of ongoing recession and higher unemployment prevented measures to bring down inflation. The consumer confidence which had helped to boost growth was hit by stockpiling of goods and unwillingness to spend because the fear of both rising prices and recession. Long term factors such as the rise of foreign competition, an overvalued dollar, an over reliance on cheap fuel and income inequality might be set against inflation as such and some responses might analyse ‘stagflation’ and argue that inflation was an isolated development.

More questions on What was the impact of the Great Crash and the Great Depression in the United States?

7 ‘Much less radical than it appeared.’ Evaluate this view of Reagan’s economic policy. [30]

Mark scheme: 7 ‘Much less radical than it appeared.’ Evaluate this view of Reagan’s 30 economic policy. The rhetoric was radical in promising a shift away from big government, deregulation, tax and spending cuts a determination to control inflation by strict monetary policy and promote growth and a move to supply side economics away from Keynesian. There was talk of another American Revolution, but the discussion could centre on whether in themselves the policies were radical or whether because of the overall limitations of cuts and the actual rise in debt the radicalism was limited. In terms of tax cuts, the initial reductions seemed radical but cuts in 1986 and 1987 made less impact. Also, tax cuts were offset by increases in other sectors like Social Security payments and excise taxes. The effects were not especially radical. Growth remained limited at 3.5% in 1987 and unemployment had only a marginal fall. Though Corporate Tax rates were cut from 46 to 40% it has been argued that any radical improvement from ‘trickle down’ was limited though Reagan argued that the principle of reducing business costs was radical. The reduction in big government and deregulation was portrayed as radical but though domestic programmes were cut defence spending rose from $154b in 1981 to $295 in 1989. In a way that was radical but not in the sense that Reagan put over his supply side economics. Government spending overall increased from 1981 to 1989 by $390b. The national debt rose from $998b to $2.9b in his period of office so investment in government remained high and money was not necessarily more available for the private sector. There was deregulation and an end to the price controls of the 1970s. Prices of oil and gas, cable TV and phones were freed. Some key elements were deregulated in transport. Whether this had a radical effect in freeing the US economy and financial sector or simulating growth can be discussed. Considering outcomes, there was an increase in income inequality, in consumer spending and credit and a change in the balance between services and manufacturing. However, the radical shift away from federal borrowing and spending and the role of the state in economic activity was not reduced as much as changed with high levels of defence spending acting as a stimulus The Keynesian consensus was shaken. Monetarism and supply side economics were put centre stage and some reductions made in some sectors of federal spending. Business confidence in some sectors changed radically and culturally there was more stress put on individual enterprise and responsibility. However, in terms of what was set out as a radical realignment, there was more continuity with the past. No set judgement is expected and much depends on how ‘radical’ is defined.

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

8 Assess the motives for US attempts at nuclear arms limitation in the period 1963–79. [30] Section C: International history, 1945–92

Mark scheme: 8 Assess the motives for US attempts at nuclear arms limitation in the 30 period 1963–79. Attempts included the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty which prohibited all testing of nuclear weapons except underground. The Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty signed in 1968 came into force in 1970 and this aimed to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. In 1972 the Soviet Union and the United States agreed to a freeze on Intercontinental and Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles, while the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (1972) restricted the sites that the USA and USSR could use. Collectively these agreements formed SALT I. SALT II (1979) limited both the Soviet Union and the United States to an equal number of missile launchers, and heavy bombers. Discussion could centre on the relative importance of different factors. There was an ongoing fear of conflict – the Cuban missile crisis had been a wake-up call, and the tensions persisted into the Reagan era with the second cold war. The danger that a conventional strike on Cuba or an incident in sea given the US threat could provoke a nuclear conflict had been frightening and spurred more dialogue. There was pressure from public opinion both in the US and in allied countries in Europe. The growing sophistication and potential power of nuclear weapons and the cost of developing them were factors. Superior US technology would give an edge if existing production were limited and could be seen as a motive for the US. However, the costs and dangers of unlimited proliferation were weighing heavily on governments. However, there was a political dimension, US influence depended on offering protection to allies. Key elements in the US were concerned about the overall development of nuclear weapons by America’s allies in Europe and Asia. The nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968 was designed to prevent this, and key allies in Europe and Asia opted to rely on the US nuclear guarantee instead. Answers might balance US self-interest with genuine concerns about the dangers.

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

9 ‘US fear of communism was the main cause of the Cuban Crisis.’ Discuss this view. [30]

Mark scheme: 9 ‘US fear of communism was the main cause of the Cuban Crisis.’ 30 Discuss this view. Responses might argue that the US fear of the spread of communism to Cuba, given its proximity to the USA, was the main cause of the crisis. However, they should also consider other reasons including US desire for influence in Cuba and the extent of Soviet responsibility for the crisis. Kennedy’s fear of a communist country allied to the USSR just 90 miles away from the US mainland helped to precipitate the Cuban Crisis. His reaction to the Cuban Revolution threw Castro into the arms of the USSR. The revolution was an armed uprising led by Fidel Castro that eventually toppled the dictatorship of Batista. By the end of 1958, the guerrilla revolutionaries in Castro’s 26 July Movement had forced Batista to flee Cuba on 1 January 1959. Castro took charge of a new provisional government on 9 January but postponed elections indefinitely once in power. The USA was one of the first countries to recognise his government in Cuba, but relations between the two countries deteriorated as Castro set up a communist regime and forged close ties with the USSR. The USA broke off diplomatic relations with Cuba in early 1961. Tensions between the two countries escalated with the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in April 1961 and Operation Mongoose whereby Cuban exiles and the CIA attacked industry and farmland and assassinated members of Castro’s government. Kennedy was obsessed with defeating Castro and removing any communist threat so close to the USA. Khrushchev decided to protect Cuba. The USA also wanted to retain their influence in Cuba and during the 1950s supported Batista. Much of Cuba's industry was owned by US business and its main export, sugar, was controlled by the USA. However, Castro wanted to be free from US influence. He nationalised businesses and geared the economy to help the poorer Cubans. US refusal to accept Castro’s communist government drove him to seek Soviet support. The USA believed that if Cuba remained communist, communism would also spread to Latin America affecting US interests. The USA stopped selling arms to Cuba and considered banning the purchase of sugar; Castro asked the USSR to buy it instead. This pushed Cuba into the hands of Moscow. However, Khrushchev seized the opportunity to help a communist state in danger, and he saw the possibility of spreading communism to Latin America. He also underestimated Kennedy and thought that he could risk putting IRBMs on Cuba in 1962. He believed that Kennedy was weak because of the Bay of Pigs invasion. Kennedy had not taken military action after the building of the Berlin Wall and Khrushchev believed he would not be able to deal with Soviet military presence in Cuba. Khrushchev wanted to try to score a nuclear success over the US as well as increasing his popularity in the USSR. Kennedy saw U2 pictures of the missiles on 16 October; they had been secretly deployed by Khrushchev in April. The Soviets had lied about their intentions making a US response inevitable. On 22 October, Kennedy ordered a naval ‘quarantine’ to prevent further missiles from reaching Cuba; the world was on the brink of nuclear war.

More questions on Why did the League of Nations fail to keep the peace in the 1930s?

10 ‘The USA benefited more than the People’s Republic of China from improved Sino–US relations in the 1970s and 1980s.’ Evaluate this view. [30]

Mark scheme: 10 ‘The USA benefited more than the People’s Republic of China from 30 improved Sino–US relations in the 1970s and 1980s.’ Evaluate this view. Responses should weigh up the benefits of improved relations to both nations and reach a clear judgement about the view. Both political and economic aspects should be discussed. Politically, it could be argued that both countries benefited equally. Sino- Soviet tension contributed to the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) desire for a rapprochement with the USA. A major diplomatic triumph for the PRC was US support for its place on the UN Security Council in October 1971. This was followed by Nixon’s visit in 1972. The Shanghai Communiqué pledged that it was in the interest of the USA and PRC to work towards the normalisation of their relations. This was achieved on 1 January 1979 when the USA reiterated the Communiqué's acknowledgment of the Chinese position that there is only one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. They also agreed that neither they nor any other power should seek to dominate the Asia-Pacific region, of particular importance to the PRC who shared a border with the USSR. The USA also benefited. The war in Vietnam led it to seek improved relations with the PRC hoping to diplomatically isolate North Vietnam and increase US leverage against the USSR. Rapprochement altered the context of the Cold War and influenced the subsequent détente between the USA and the USSR. Talks began towards actual limits in their nuclear weapons which ultimately led to the signing of the SALT I treaty in 1972. The PRC enabled the USA to play triangular diplomacy and undermine the USSR’s influence. It took time for the strategy to succeed but, in 1989, the Berlin Wall fell and the USSR imploded. However, it might be argued that rapprochement cleared the way for the PRC’s economic opening to the world and the PRC did little to reciprocate. Nixon’s visit may have led to North Vietnam being more open to US efforts to end the Vietnam War and the USSR was very concerned about rapprochement, but these were only short-term benefits for the USA. Some may also suggest that the US president’s 1972 visit to China was a huge strategic blunder. Nixon’s opening of the PRC secured the nation’s rise to great-power status. It is unclear what it had achieved for the USA which, in the ensuing years, faced a government in the PRC often opposed to its interests in Asia and elsewhere. China certainly gained substantially more than the USA in economic terms. Without rapprochement Deng Xiaoping would have needed more time to trigger China’s economic opening to the world. In 1979 Deng visited the USA meeting both Carter and Kissinger. Deng was able to advance the PRC’s globalisation through his visit, emphasising its open-door policy. In 1984 when Reagan visited the PRC, agreements were made on scientific and cultural exchanges, economic cooperation and the development of nuclear energy. The annual value of Sino–American trade by the late 1980s was over $20 billion. While US companies benefited, the gains were far more obvious for the PRC, whose GDP annual growth rates averaged over 10% in the 1980s. Already in 1989 Chinese sales to the USA were more than twice as high as US sales to the PRC.

More questions on Why did the USA emerge as a world power and what was the impact on international

11 Analyse the challenges facing agricultural development in the newly independent African nations. [30]

Mark scheme: 11 Analyse the challenges facing agricultural development in the newly 30 independent African nations. Responses are likely to consider the legacy of the colonial powers and the challenge of reforming agriculture. They might also consider how economic problems in general impacted agriculture as well as how political and social issues held back economic change. African states had inherited economies from the colonial rulers which were not suited to producing enough food to feed their own populations. Agriculture under-performed after independence. Many African leaders failed to change the system they inherited. There was little effort to develop commercial farming skills or to develop infrastructure essential for farmers to transition from subsistence to commercial farming. Agricultural development was still based on a Western economic and political ideology, rather than African solutions for African conditions. The challenge facing the nations was to move from what the developed world dictated to what Africa needed, which was to develop its people and production base. Under the colonial powers the nations grew cash crops like coffee, cocoa, rubber, tobacco and tea and food production was low. They prevented the diversification and development of agricultural and marketing systems focused on local development and regional markets. In 1966–73, 15 of the 32 countries still depended on a single commodity for 50% or more of their export revenues such as cotton in Mali, Chad and Benin. Urban centres with their larger population had more ability to influence policy. Governments were more concerned with satisfying the urban demand for cheap food than supporting rural development and infrastructure. Food prices were often fixed below market value to secure cheap food for cities or export crops taxed heavily to increase government revenue. They prevented agricultural intensification from creating economic development and food security. Decline in average rainfall led to droughts and famines in some countries. However, the African nations faced challenges across the economy which also impacted on agriculture. In most parts of Africa, colonialism had left the new countries with no industrialisation and poor regional economies. They had not been prepared for economic independence. While there was a strong focus on economic development to raise living standards and create food security through investment in manufacturing and mechanisation of agriculture, there was little understanding of this process, such as the development of skills, transport infrastructure and marketing structures. The economic development and education of local people had been kept low deliberately resulting in enormous socio-economic deprivation and the lack of a skilled workforce. Other problems that arose were related to poor political leadership and corruption. In addition, neo-colonialism also became a problem as colonial powers continued to dominate, and their economies were still being exploited rather than developed. It was the failure of African leaders to change the system they inherited and to overcome problems that also led to economic difficulties. As many states abandoned party politics for dictatorships, money was diverted to the military to ensure that rulers retained their power.

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