- WordPress.com … · Web view10.07.2013 · These are not answers. They are outlines that can...

Year 11IGCSE History

Revision Packet

Includes:Paper 1, 2 and 4 StrategiesPast Paper Answer Outlines

December, 2016

The IGCSE Writing Structure:1I + 4E + 1C = 4 - 6 Minutes (Copyright, SS, TQ)2I + 3E + 3EI + 2-4C = 6 - 11 Minutes (Copyright, SS, TQ)3/4I + 2EA + 2EIA + 3EF + 3EIF + 3-5C = 10 - 18 Minutes (Copyright, SS, TQ)

HOW FAR questions (10 marks) must be answered with some quantitative measurement. Consider one of the following: somewhat (a little), to some extent, mostly, or fully.

I = Restate the question in your INTRO.E / R = Give EXAMPLES / REASONS - “An example of this is …”

EI = Explain the Importance - “This is important because … ‘

CBS = Connect Back to the StatementC = Conclude / Wrap it up - “Overall the …”TOPIC #1 - The Peace Treaties of 1919 – 1923: PPQs 1 – 9TOPIC #2 - The League of Nations in the 1920s and 1930s: PPQs 10 - 20TOPIC #3 - The Collapse of International Peace: PPQs 21 - 31 TOPIC #4 – Blame for the Cold War: PPQs 32 - 43TOPIC #5 – The US Policy of Containment Tested (Korea, Cuba and Vietnam): PPQs 44 - 61TOPIC #6 - The Collapse of Soviet Communism in Eastern Europe 1948 – 1989: PPQs 62 –73In Depth Study - Russia 1905 – 1917: PPQs 73 - 94In Depth Study - Russia 1917 – 1921: PPQs 95 - 100 In Depth Study - Russia 1921 – 1941: PPQS 101 - 123

Year 11 Paper 1 Strategies - December, 2016

GCSE Paper 1 Strategies

You will have to answer a total of THREE questions for Paper 1. Paper 1 is worth 60 marks. You have two hours. Follow the instructions on the front cover of the Booklet. Write in dark blue or black pen.

ANSWER THREE QUESTIONS: In Section A (Core Content - from Topics 1 - 6) you answer two of four questions.

You will choose two from questions 5, 6, 7 and 8. Each question will have a 4 mark, 6 mark and 10 mark question.

In Section B (Depth Studies - Russia) you answer any one question. You will choose one from questions 11 and 12.

Number all your answers carefully. Put your name at the top of all the sheets of paper that you write on.

Year 11 Paper 2 Strategies - December, 2016GCSE Paper 2 Strategies

You have two hours. Use the A4 paper provided. Number all your answers carefully. Put your name at the top of all the sheets of paper that you write on. Answer all of the questions.

1. You will be given a Key Question at the top of the page and then some background information.2. You will have as many as 11 sources to study.

1st You must READ each source. 2nd Make a statement identifying what the main meaning of the source is. (Do that in the margin next to the source)

3rd Pick a quote from the source that supports your statement. QUOTE TO SUPPORT! (Underline something)

4th Add extra detail from your own background knowledge.

3. You will have 6 questions worth 50 marks. 4. Know the meaning of Provenance - the origin, or the source of something This is related to the author of a source, date and the reliability.

GCSE Paper 4 Strategies1. Turn your examination booklet to DEPTH STUDY B: RUSSIA, 1905 - 1941. Essay Outline Format:Make sure to argue BOTH sides - that the person or event WAS important, and that it WAS NOT important. Use these headings to organise your essay:

Paragraph 1 - Intro: Present two sides of this argument. Give a background sentence or two. Put the question into context (PQC). CBS.

Paragraph 2: the person / event WAS important Describe the importance. Explain what it/he accomplished. Express the optimism it/he generated. CBS.

Paragraph 3: the person / event WAS NOT important, and OTHER FACTORS and EVENTS/PEOPLEwere important. Describe the ‘Other Factors’. Put he/them into context of the time / political climate. CBS.

Conclusion Paragraph - CBS - overall importance of the person / event Make sure to demonstrate a broad context of the period Make sure you identified how the factors relate and are connected

PAPER 2 - Examiner’s Comments:

Paper 2 is designed to test candidates’ abilities to interpret, extrapolate from, and use historical sources. Although the wording of the questions will differ from year to year, these skills remain constant. Six questions are usually set. Each question will target at least one of these skills. A range of different types of historical material is used. It would not be unusual to find several cartoons, perhaps a photograph, and several written sources (both primary and secondary) included in the paper. Questions will focus on particular sources but candidates are encouraged to use any of the other sources if they are useful in answering the question. Such cross-reference is rewarded highly. Contextual knowledge is also required. This should never be included in an answer for its own sake. Its proper use is to aid and explain the evaluation and interpretation of the sources.

Answering the question

There is a tendency for some candidates to use each question as an excuse either to tell the examiner everything they know about the historical topic, or to display a range of source skills. This is not what is required. First and foremost, the examiner wants the question to be answered. The range and amount of knowledge and skills required depends on what is necessary to produce a good answer to the question. Candidates should remember that their first concern is to answer the question. If they do this properly, they will as a matter of course be displaying the relevant skills and knowledge.

Interpreting sources

All questions require candidates to work out what a source is saying. In some questions this is the only target. Such interpretation always requires candidate to go beyond the surface details and meaning of a source to interpret the message of the author or artist. When candidates explain their interpretation of the source they should be careful to use both the details of the source, and their knowledge and understanding of the historical context, in their explanation.

Extrapolating from sources

Some questions will require candidates to reach a conclusion about a source that goes beyond what the source actually says. These questions might ask, for example, about the purpose of the source, who the author might have been, the intended audience, or the possible impact of the source. In answering these types of questions, candidates need to interpret the sources and use their knowledge of the historical context. Questions about the purpose of sources require candidates to go beyond the message of the source to consider the intended outcome of the author or artist.

Evaluating sources

Candidates can be asked to evaluate sources for usefulness and for reliability. In responding to questions about usefulness, it is important that candidates do not dismiss sources as useful simply because they are biased. Historical sources are usually biased, but they can still be useful to the historian. In fact, it is often their bias that makes them useful as the historians can learn a lot about the author.

When evaluating sources for reliability, candidates need to ask: what does the source say (interpretation), who is saying it, and why are they saying it then? It is important that candidates do not attempt to evaluate sources purely by type. Knowing that a source is from a newspaper, or is an eyewitness account, tells us nothing about its reliability. It is the content of the source that needs to be evaluated, although it is often useful to take note of the provenance.

There are several strategies for evaluating sources. The candidate needs to decide which is the most appropriate for a particular question and a particular source.

Firstly, the claims of a source can be checked against the candidate’s knowledge; Secondly, it is sometimes useful to cross-reference to other sources in the paper to see if they

support the source under question; Thirdly, the tone and language of the source might tell us something; Finally, the provenance of the source can be used in an informed way i.e. by asking why that

person would want to say that, then.

Using the sources

The final question on the paper always requires candidates to consider how far the sources as a whole support a given hypothesis. Very low marks are scored if candidates ignore the sources and use this question as an excuse to write everything they know about the topic.

Candidates should check back through the sources and make rough lists of those sources that support the hypothesis and those that disagree with it. They should then take the first group of sources and explain how each source in the group supports the statement. It is important that an explanation is given for each source and that they make clear (by reference to the source letter) which one they are writing about. General statements about groups of sources will not score high marks. The same should then be done for the sources in the second group. Extra marks are awarded for evaluating the sources.

PAPER 2: For Question 6, worth 12 mark

1. RC + MM + GS + IMSS + QTS / RBS + CP + OK + ST

2. RC Read and Categorise each source – keep a scoring column for each.

3. MM Identify the main message of each source – in the margin.•This will help you categorise each source for the 12 marker.

4. GS Group the sources into those that agree / support the statement from and those that reject – keep a scoring column for each.

•For example, sources B, D, F. H and I tend to support that the League was LONG DEAD before Dec 1935, however, A, C, E and G tend to reject the statement.

5. IMSS The wording of your intro sentences is CRUCIAL•Match the sources to the statement / question. •Recognise and mention that ‘PARTS’ of many sources both reject and support the question statement.

6. QTS / RBS Make sure to QTS and RECONNECT back to the statement.

7. CP Pay attention and Challenge the PROVENANCE – especially of sources E, F, G , H and I.

8. OK Your Own Knowledge will help you understand and interpret the sources.The source may be secondary, so make sure you can place the INFO in itshistorical context. The CONTENT will hint at the date / time anyway.

9. ST Structure your answer – use the GROUPINGS to reject and support. CROSS REFERENCE as you go - DO NOT refer to each source, one at a time!

Convincing Evidence - Trial of Strength

BOTH Convincing Evidence of NOT - Trial of Strength

ANSWER OUTLINES FOR PAST IGCSE QUESTIONS – December, 2016

These are not answers. They are outlines that can help you write full answers. You will likely have to add your own examples to fully answer the questions. Make sure to include introductory sentences, examples with explanation of importance and conclusions.

TOPIC #1 - The Peace Treaties of 1919 - 19231. Who were the Big Three at Versailles and how did they get along? (4)

Identify Georges Clemenceau, PM of France, David Lloyd George , PM of Britain and Woodrow Wilson, President of the USA

Their views of the conference at Versailles were very different, as well as their goals From the beginning they disagreed how harshly to punish Germany Give examples of what each wanted to accomplish:

Clemenceau – wanted Germany severely weakened and called for a harsh treaty – but was criticized by Wilson and George, who worried that French actions could cause another war

Clemenceau clashed with Wilson over many issues (the USA had not suffered nearly as badly as France)

Clemenceau resented Wilson’s more generous attitude to Germany Clemenceau also clashed with Lloyd George, particularly over Lloyd George’s desire not to treat

Germany too harshly, especially in Europe.

DL George – wanted to see Germany punished but not too severely so that Britain could resume trading with Germany – France thought Britain was just helping its own empire by weakening Germany outside ofEurope. Wilson and Lloyd George did not always agree either. Lloyd George was particularly unhappy with point 2 of the Fourteen Points, allowing all nations access to the seas, and with self-determination

Wilson – called for a just peace and a League of Nations – but was criticized by Britain and France for being too idealistic and naïve, especially about the diverse cultures, ethnic groups and political views. Groups were scattered across many countries and were bound to be ruled by other nationalities. Overall, they each accomplished some of their goals but ALL left dissatisfied with the treaty

2. What were Germany’s main territorial losses under the Treaty of Versailles? (4) Alsace and Lorraine went to France The Saar was to be run by the League for 15 years, which meant France took control over it Upper Silesia and Posen went to Poland, Memel went to Lithuania Danzig became an international “free city” run by the League The Rhineland became demilitarized All of Germany’s overseas colonies were taken away, namely in Africa and South Pacific

(Togoland, Cameroon and German SW Africa). Eupen-Malmeady went to Belgium North Schleswig went to Denmark

3. Describe what Clemenceau, Wilson and Lloyd George each wanted to achieve in the peace settlement. (4) Read the outline for question #1 Also: Each wanted to see Germany punished because they blamed Germany for starting the war

Clemenceau: France had suffered as a result of the war (death and destruction to its people, land and economy

- land the size of Wales had been destroyed)and wanted to see Germany so weakened that it could never start another war

wanted Alsace and Lorraine returned to France wanted reparation payments from Germany wanted Germany demilitarized severely

DL George: wanted Germany punished but not too harshly, in order to avoid German revenge in the future wanted Germany to lose its overseas empire wanted to resume trade with Germany and see them strong enough to resist communism

Wilson:

wanted the 14 points to be used as the basis of the treaty, a just peace, self-determination for Eastern Europe and a League of Nations set up

4. Why did Germany dislike the Treaty of Versailles? (6)NOT FAIR: German people were punished and not the leaders that caused the war Clause 231 (War Guilt) was unfair since Germany had to accept ALL the blame Reparations were impossible to make because Germany’s economy was in ruins like the Allies Not a negotiated peace, but rather a diktat under the threat of war Germans felt tricked into signing the cease-firethinking Wilson’s 14 Points would be the basis of

the settlement Their army was a source of great pride and honor, and having it demilitarized was cruel

They worried that they would not be able to defend their country from attack While Eastern Europeans were given self-determination, Germans WERE NOT

5. Which terms of the peace settlement directly affected France? (4) Alsace and Lorraine being returned - some German territories & colonies put under French control Saar under their control Rhineland being demilitarized because it eased French concerns about another German attack Germany being disarmed Reparation payments League of Nations set up

6. Why did the Treaty of Versailles cause problems for Germany in the years up to 1923? (6)The Treaty of Versailles caused a number of problems for Germany: Germany's economy was weak and the reparation payments caused Germany many problems When the German's fell behind on their reparation payments in 1922, the French and Belgian

soldiers marched into the Ruhr region (Germany) in 1923, and simply took what was owned to them in the form of raw materials and goods.

After this event happened, the German government ordered workers to go on strike so that Germany wasn't producing anything for the French to take. The French reacted harshly, killing over 100 workers

Over 100,000 German were protesters were expelled from the region Germany then had no goods to trade and no money to buy things

Hyper-inflation resulted as prices shot up and money was virtually worthless Wages began to be paid daily

Germany's army was reduced to 100,000, which was not enough to defend a country the size of Germany.

Since the army was a symbol of German pride, Germany, in turn, lost some of their pride. Many Germans suddenly found themselves in new countries, possibly split from the rest of their

community. Political instability – the Weimar government formed 9 different coalitions between 1919 - 1923 The Ruhr crises caused Germany to become bankrupt. A new government (Stresemann) accepted

that reparations would have to be paid. The harshness of the reparations made it extremely difficult for Germany torecover economically

and made future war likely.

7. What restrictions were placed on Germany’s armaments?(4) Army limited to 100,000 Conscription banned Not allowed armoured vehicles and military aircraft forbidden Navy reduced to six small battleships, submarines were banned and only 15,000 sailors allowed.

Rhineland was de-militarized

8. Was the Treaty of Versailles fair? (10) Agree and Disagree - to some extent it was fair, but the treaty is seen as too harsh by many. Make sure to use comments by Sally Marks, John Maynard Keynes and others in your response

FAIR: Terms weren’t as bad as Brest-Litovsk Military leaders remained in power and even though their military was reduced, it was stillcapable

of defending Germany Economy recovered by 1925 (twice as much steel as Britain) Territorial losses were not as bad as France had hoped and mostof Germany remained in tact It was the best Treaty possible under the circumstances of the time The Germans were seen as hypocrites - ignored fairness when they were winningand demanded it

when they were losing Germany’s economic problems were partly self-inflicted - other countries raised taxes to pay for

the war but Germany planned to pay its debts by extracting reparations from the defeated states.

NOT FAIR: German people were punished and not the leaders that caused the war Clause 231 (War Guilt) was unfair Reparations were impossible to make because Germany’s economy was inruins like the Allies A weakened German economy was bad for all countries in Europe The Allies / Big 3 weren’t even happy with the Treaty Undoubtedly would cause the Germans to seek revenge Not a negotiated peace, but rather a diktat under the threat of war Germans tricked into signing cease-fire thinking Wilson’s 14 Points would bethe basis of the

Settlement While Eastern Europeans were given self-determination, Germans WERE NOT CONCLUSION – Make sure the reader knows what you believe

9. How far did the peace settlement satisfy the victors? Explain your answer. (10) To some extent the victors achieved goals, but overall none of them were satisfied

Satisfied: Clemenceau and Lloyd George did give Wilson self-determination in Eastern Europe Wilson was pleased that the League of Nations was included Britain was pleased with restrictions placed on Germany’s navy and losing its colonies (give

examples)

France was pleased that Germany was somewhat demilitarised (give example) had to pay reparations and was forced to accept blame (231)

Dissatisfied: The very different objectives of the three leaders could not all be met. None of the Big Three who

drew up the Treaty was satisfied with it.

Clemenceau did not feel that the treaty was harsh enough. In 1920 he was voted out in a French general election.

France was angry that Germany appeared to be weakened outside of Europe (to Britain’s benefit) but kept the leaders of their military in place

Wilson thought the treaty was too harsh and predicted that Germany would one day seek revenge. Wilson felt deceived by Britain and France because they were never sincere about using his 14 Points as the basis for the peace settlements. He said that if he were a German he would not have signed it.

The U.S. Senate never approved the treaty DL George and Britain thought the treaty was too tough on Germany and described the Treaty as ‘a

great pity.’ He believed another war would happen because of it.

9a. PPQ-ish Ques: Describe each of the ‘other’ four treaties. (4) Treaties were made to deal with the other defeated countries by officers and diplomats of the Big

Three, in consultation with representatives of Eastern and Central Europe.

Treaty of St. Germain, 1919 – Austria lost territory to Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, as well as Poland and Italy. Army limited to 30,000.

Treaty of Neuilly, 1919 – Bulgaria lost territory to Greece, Romania and Yugoslavia; and lost access to the Mediterranean Sea. Army limited to 20,000, and reparations payments of £10 million.

Treaty of Trianon, 1920 – Hungary lost territory to Romania, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. Was expected to pay reparations but it’s economy was so weak that it never did.

Treaty of Sevres, 1920 – Turkey lost territory to Greece, and Syria was put under a League mandate to France. Armed forces limited to 50,000, NO air force, and a restricted navy.

Each of the five treaties included reparation payments, disarmament and loss of territory by the defeated.

TOPIC #2 - The League of Nations in the 1920s and 1930s.10. What were the aims of the League of Nations? (4)

To discourage aggression from any nation To encourage countries to co-operate, especially in business, trade and security To encourage nations to disarm To improve the living and working conditions of people in all parts of the world.

To promote collective security To uphold the Treaty of Versailles

11a. Why did the USA not join the League of Nations? (6) For several reasons. The League was linked to the Treaty of Versailles and many Americans hated the treaty. Some were

recent immigrants and felt it would be ‘another’ mistake to squeeze reparations out of Germany. Many Americans were appalled by the death and destruction of WWI and wanted the USA to stay

out of other peoples conflicts (Isolationism). Worries over economic cost of joining the League (blank cheque). Business leaders thought

membership would restrict the US economy, especially if the League imposed sanctions. Some Americans were anti-British or anti-French and didn’t want to join the League to help Britain

and France defend their colonies. The US Senate rejected the treaty and membership in the League. They were led by Republicans

who opposed Wilson and the Democrats.

11b. Why did some countries view the setting up of the League with suspicion? (6) 42 countries had joined when the League opened its doors in January 1920 It was dominated by European powers, namely France and Britain, and considered a white, wealthy,

imperialistic and capitalistic organization. There was a concern by non-European countries that their goals and issues might be ignored Three of the most powerful countries were not members (USA, Germany and Russia) Britain and France were both weakened by WWI and not in a position to provide the leadership or

resources necessary without the USA. Britain and France were preoccupied with other interests besides the League (empire, trade and

Germany) Both Britain and France had very different ideas of what kind of organization the League should be Powerful members would use the League to promote their own self-interests and many worried

about double-standards

12. What prevented the League of Nations from being strong in the 1920s? (6)Membership and the structure of the League prevented it from being as strong as it could have.The League was considered too idealistic, which made its progress difficult to achieve. The League depended heavily on Britain and France, but both were weakened by WWI and unable

to fill the gap left by the USA’s absence.The USA, Germany and USSR not members – and without such powerful countries the LON would

have difficulty accomplishing its goals. The League depended heavily on the “Good Will” of its members, especially in the early part of the

1920s.The LON was considered too Euro-Centric, causing other members to question the LON’s

commitment to their concerns. Punishments organized by the League Council were not always agreed upon and often not very

threatening to aggressive members (moral condemnation, financial and economic sanctions, and military force).

The League had no army, which made collective security more difficult to achieve.The Assembly met only once a year and decisions had to be unanimous, which was near impossible. The Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) had no way of enforcing its decisionsThe League lacked the “Teeth” it needed to impose punishmentsThe best interests of the League were often ignored by members acting out their own self interests.

12b. What was the role of the Assembly? (4)The Assembly met only once a year and decisions had to be unanimous, which was near impossible. It could recommend action to the Council.

It voted on admitting new members or temporary members to the Council. It controlled the LON's budget. It discussed ideas put forward by the Council. It elected judges to the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ).

12c. What was the role of the Council? (4) The Council was a smaller group than the Assembly, meeting 5 or 6 times a year, and in

emergencies. It had 4 permanent members - Britain, France, Italy and Japan. Temporary members were admitted to three year terms. Between 3 and 9 were included during

the LON's history. Each permanent member had a veto, enabling it to stop any LON action. The Council was entrusted with solving disputes between members, although it was never easy. It had 3 main powers: Moral Condemnation, Sanctions and Military Force.

12d. What was the role of the Commissions? (4) Mandates Commission - run by Britain and France for the purpose of ‘resettling’ people that were

left in colonies once ruled by Germany and her Central allies. Britain & France were expected to act in the interests of those people and their territory (not out of self-interests). It also took control of minority groups within territories controlled by the LON.

Refugees Committee - helped individuals return to the home-nation after WWI, especially from the Russian Empire, Balkans, Greece, Armenia and Turkey. By 1927, the LON reported that there were 750,000 refugees from former Russian territories and 168,000 Armenians. The Refugees Committee helped these people settle and find work.

Slavery - worked to abolish slavery around the world, especially in East Africa. As well, it sought to free workers who were treated so poorly that they were considered slaves.

Health Committee - attempted to deal with the problem of dangerous diseases (leprosy and influenza), and to educate people about heath and sanitation.

13. What successes did the League of Nations have in the 1920s? (4) One of the main goals of the League was to prevent war, and overall that was accomplished in the

1920s. The League did much to create the atmosphere where disputes could be resolved peacefully and

agreements could be made (namely through the Conference of Ambassadors). Important agreements were made with the support of the League (Washington Treaty of 1922,

Locarno Pact of 1925 and the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928). Having Germany to enter the League in 1926 was a positive sign. The League settled disputes (Upper Silesia in 1921, Aaland Islands 1921 and ending Greece’s

invasion of Bulgaria in 1925). The League had a lot of success through it special commissions:

Refugees - returning refugees and former prisoners of war home after war (estimated 400,000prisoners)

International Labour Organisation - (working conditions) - banning poisonous white lead from paint, limited the hours that small children were allowed to work and improved working conditions generally.

Health - worked hard to defeat leprosy and diseases around the world Transport - made recommendations on marking shipping lanes and international highway

codes Social problems - blacklisted four large German, Dutch, French and Swiss companies involved

in the illegal drug trade and helped free 200,000 slaves in British-owned Sierra Leone.

14. What weaknesses did the League of Nations have in the 1920s? (4) Membership, structure and inaction: Study the outline for question # 12 The League was considered too idealistic, which made its progress difficult to achieve. Absence of important countries (USA, USSR and Germany) Britain and France weren’t prepared to take over the membership of the League. They both had

other priorities and both countries were weakened after the first World War There were weaknesses in the structure of the League (the Assembly only met once a year and

decisions made by the Assembly had to be unanimous) Punishments handed down by the Council were not easily agreed upon or enforced The Permanent Court of International Justice had no way of enforcing its decisions The way in which the League handled border disputes demonstrated the self-interests of powerful

members and notion of Double Standards in the League(Vilna in 1920, Corfu in 1923 and Bulgaria1925)

Failed to stop Lithuania from taking Memel in 1923, the Russo-Polish war from 1920 – 1921 as Britain and France supported Poland

Failure in the bringing of disarmament (Germanyand defeated Central Powers were the only countries forced to disarm).

15. Overall, was the League of Nations successful in the 1920s? (10) Use the examples from numbers 12, 13 and 14. Agree and disagree to some extent. Conclude with what you think overall.

16. How did the League of Nations deal with Japan over the Manchurian crisis? (6) There was now a long and frustrating delay. The League set up the Lytton Commission in December

1931, two months after Japan invaded. League officials (Lytton Committee) sailed round the world to assess the situation in Manchuria for

themselves. It was September 1932 – a full year after the invasion – before they presented their report.

The League condemned Japans’s actions and said Manchuria should be returned to the Chinese. The Japanese government agreed but their army refused. On Feb 24, 1933 the report from the League’s officials was approved 42 to 1 in the Assembly.

Only Japan voted against. (Japan resigned from the League on 27 March 1933) The League discussed economic sanctions, but without the USA, Japan’s main trading partner, they

would be meaningless. Besides, Britain seemed more interested in keeping up good relationships with Japan than in

agreeing to sanctions. The League also discussed banning arms sales to Japan, but the member countries could not even

agree about that. They were worried that Japan would retaliate and the war would escalate. Britain and Francewere not willing to risk their navies or armies in a war so far away with Japan.

Only the USA and the USSR would have had the resources to remove the Japanese from Manchuria by force and they were not even members of the League.

The League failed to stop the invasion.

17. How did the League of Nation deal with Italy over the Abyssinian crisis? (6) Italy invaded Abyssinia in October 1935 and the League condemned the aggression. To start with, the British and the French failed to take the situation seriously. They played for time. They wanted to keep good relations with Mussolini, who seemed to be their strongest ally against

Hitler and signed the Stresa Pact in 1935. At the meeting to discuss this, they did not even raise the question of Abyssinia. The League never actually did anything to discourage Mussolini. On 4 September, after eight months’ deliberation, a committee reported to the League that neither

side could be held responsible for the Wal-Wal incident. The League put forward a plan that would give Mussolini some

of Abyssinia. Mussolini rejected it. The League was designed for just such disputes and, unlike in the Manchurian crisis, it was ideally

placed to act (as it was involved a European country and was close to Europe). A committee was immediately set up to agree what sanctions to impose. The League imposed an immediate ban on arms sales to Italy while allowing them to Abyssinia. It banned all loans to Italy. It banned all imports from Italy. It banned the export of rubber, tin and metals to Italy.

However, the League delayed a decision for two months over whether to ban oil exports to Italy. It feared the Americans would not support the sanctions. It also feared that its members’ economic interests would be further damaged (ie: British coal exports to Italy).

Britain and France never closed the Suez Canal, which was the Italians’ main supply route to Abyssinia and closing it could have ended the Abyssinian campaign very quickly. Both Britain and France were afraid that closing the canal could have resulted in war with Italy.

The Hoare-Laval plan was leaked to the French press. It proved quite disastrous for the League. Sanctions discussions lost all momentum. The Abyssinian crisis was a disaster for the League of Nations and had serious consequences for

world peace.

18. Was Disarmament a success for the League of Nations? (10) It would be difficult to argue that the League was successful with disarmament. In the 1920s, the League largely failed in bringing about disarmament. At the Washington

Conference in 1921 the USA, Japan, Britain and France agreed to limit the size of their navies, but that was as far as disarmament ever got.

In 1923, the League’s first attempt at a disarmament treaty was accepted by France and by other nations, but was rejected by Britain because it would tie it to defending other countries.

In 1926, plans were finally made for a disarmament conference, but it took five years even to agree a ‘draft convention’ for the conference to focus on and in 1933 that was rejected by Germany

Even so, in the late 1920s, the League’s failure over disarmament did not seem too serious because of a series of international agreements that seemed to promise a more peaceful world (Locarno and Kellogg–Briand Pact).

In the 1930s, however, there was increased pressure for the League to do something about disarmament.The Germans had long been angry about the fact that they had been forced to disarm after the First World War while other nations had not done the same.

Many countries were actually spending more on their armaments than they had been before WWI. In the wake of the Manchurian crisis, the members of the League realised the urgency of the

problem. In February 1932 the long-promised Disarmament Conference finally got under way. By July 1932 it had produced resolutions to:

prohibit bombing of civilian populations limit the size of artillery limit the tonnage of tanks prohibit chemical warfare.

But there was very little in the resolutions to show how these limits would be achieved. For example:

the bombing of civilians was to be prohibited, but all attempts to agree to abolish planes capable of bombing were defeated.

Even the proposal to ban the manufacture of chemical weapons was defeated. It was not a promising start. The big question, however, was related to the principle of equality. All the powers knew that Hitler was secretly rearming Germany already. They also began to rebuild

their own armaments. The Disarmament Conference struggled and finally ended in 1934. Disarmament failed for a number of reasons:

Some say it was all doomed from the start. No one was very serious about disarmament anyway.

It did not help that Britain and France were divided on this issue. Many British people felt that the Treaty of Versailles was unfair and the British signed a

naval agreement with Germany in 1935, in violation of the Treaty.

19. What factors demonstrate that the League was a failure in the 1930s? (4) A number of factors: Use page 254 (Walsh Blue) - The USA and other important countries were absent, the League had

no troops, League Decisions were too slow, the Treaties it had to uphold were seen as unfair, Economic Sanctions did not work and finally, leading members acted out of Self Interests.

OTHER EXAMPLES: Disarmament Manchuria Abyssinia Agreements and alliances made outside the League – British/German naval agreement of 1935

British, French and Italians signed the Stresa Pact in 1935 Franco-Soviet Pact of May 1935, in Dec 1935 Hoare-Laval plan was leaked to the French press. It proved quite disastrous for the League.

Rhineland in March 1936 Appeasement

20. How far can the failure of the League be blamed on the Depression? Explain your answer. (10) The League failed for many reasons Yes, the Depression contributed to the failure of the League. For example: The Wall Street Crash started a long depression that quickly caused economic problems throughout

the world. It damaged the trade and industry of all countries. It affected relations between countries and led nations to pursue self-interests. Many adopted

aggressiveforeign policies. It also led to important political changes within countries (ie: Germany, Italy and Japan).

Much of the goodwill and the optimism of the late 1920s evaporated. The League lost momentum and was then unable to deal with other serious issues of the 1930s.

Other reasons the League failed: Self-interests of leading members – Britain and France were never prepared to abandon their own

interests to support the League. Germany, Italy and Japan disregarded the League when it didn’t suit their goals

Membership - the USA and other important countries were not members. The League lacked authority and sanctions were rarely effective. Even though the USSR joined in 1934, Germany and Japan withdrew in 1933, while Italy withdrew in 1937.

Structure: Punishments - were too often ineffective, especially sanctions. League members did not

willingly use their most powerful weapon because it hurt their own economies and were easily disregarded by non-leaguemembers like the USA.

Lack of Troops–the League relied on members to commit troops when needed, but troops neverfought on behalf of the League. Britain and France were always unwillingly to commit troops.

Decisions were slow–most events required quick and determined actions, which the League was unable to muster because decisions had to unanimous.

The Treaties the League was supposed to enforce were seen as unfair.

TOPIC #3 - The Collapse of International Peace 21. What were Hitler’s main foreign policy goals? (4)

Hitler wrote his ideas for Germany in his 1924 book, Mein Kampf, when he was in prison. Abolish the Treaty of Versailles - Many Germans thought that the treaty was unfair and called the signers ‘November Criminals.’ It

was a constant reminder to Germans of their defeat Expand German Territory - Germany had lost land during WWI and Hitler wanted to carve out an empire

in parts of Eastern Europe (Lebensraum) for ALL German people. Defeat Communism - he wanted to defeat the Soviet Union / Bolsheviks because he blamed Germany’s defeat in WWI and

thought Communists wanted to take over Germany.

22. Describe the importance of the Saar plebiscite. (4) Border area between France and Germany Held as a League mandate for 15 years In 1935 a plebiscite was held and around 90% voted to rejoin Germany

Claim by Hitler that grievances between France and Germany were now removed. It was an overwhelming victory for Hitler and the Nazis, and was perfectly legal within the Treaty

23. Describe the steps Hitler took during the 1930s up to invasion of Poland in September 1939. (6) 1933 - Hitler became German Chancellor in January and by March had emergency powers that

essentially saw him become the dictator. He also stalled the Disarmament Conference (‘principle of equality’) and pulled out in October 1933. He even pulled Germany out of the League of Nations.

1935 - Held massive rearmament rally in Germany, publically violating the TOV. He also signed a naval agreement with Britain (35% of Britain’s) – making other countries suspicious of his militarism.

Reintroduced conscription in Germany 1936 – violating the Treaty Remilitarized the Rhineland 1936 – without resistance Fought Communists and tried out new weapons in the Spanish Civil war - 1936 Made Anti-Comintern Pact with Japan (1936) and Italy (1937) – which became the Axis Alliance Anschluss with Austrian March 1938 Signed the Munich Agreement (September 29, 1938) giving him control of the Sudetenland Invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia in March 1939 – breaking Munich Agreement Signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact (August 24, 1939) as Britain and France looked on helplessly Invaded Poland on September 1, 1939

24. Were Britain and France surprised when Italy and Germany signed the Rome-Berlin Axis? Explain. (10)SURPRISED:

SHOCKED! Signed in 1937 They wanted a strong ally against Hitler and appeased Mussolini for years hoping to gain his support. Mussolini stopped Hitler from taking Austria in 1934 – showing his power Britain, France and Italy signed the Stresa Pact early in 1935, which formalized a protest at German

rearmament and a commitment to stay united against Germany. Britain and France had appeased Mussolini over Abyssinia (Hoare-Laval agreement) Both Mussolini and Hitler seemed to be in competition with each other – an alliance was not likely Saw that Appeasement failed and war was likely

NOT SURPRISED: Mussolini had already caused Britain and France problems since he was unpredictable and acted out of

Aggressive Self-Interests. Britain and France had appeased Italy and let him takeAbyssinia and Corfu. They had wanted Italy as a 'watchdog' over Germany and Hitler. Britain and France were scared because it made war more likely. It showed that Italy had a lack of respect for Britain andFrance. It shocked them because it showed them how 'powerful'and 'persuasive' Hitler could be. That he could

take Mussolini from right under their noses.

25. Describe the events that led to the Anschluss? (6) Austria was separated from Germanyby the Treaty of Versailles – always angered Germany In his 1924 book ‘Mein Kampf’ Hitler clearly states that he wants to regain territory lost in the Treaty Mussolini prevented Hitler from taking over Austria in 1934. In March 1936 German troops remilitarize the Rhineland – giving Hitler confidence In 1937 Mussolini becomes Hitler’s ally through the Rome – Berlin Axis Nazis were encouraged to stir up trouble in Austria Hitler pressures Schuschnigg about the Anschluss ( political union ) Schuschnigg’s appeals to Britain and France were rejected - Both unwilling to go to war over Austria. Austria / Schuschnigg tries to outwit Hitler and calls for a plebiscite - Hitler makes sure that Nazis influence

the outcome (did not want to risk defeat) 99.75 % voted in favour of Anschluss in March 1938 Hitler achieved his goal – regained land,natural resources and Austrian troops–Without Using Force

26. Why did Britain and France permit the Anschluss? (6) Anschluss was the political Union between Germany and Austria in March 1938 Neither was willing to go to war over Austria or to defend a flawed Treaty of Versailles Britain thought it was wrong to separate Germany from Austria in the first place – even Britain’s Lord Halifax suggested

to Hitler that Britain would not resist the Anschluss France was not prepared to act without British support Both Britain and France were following the Policy of Appeasement (had other priorities than Austria)

27. What was the Munich Agreement? (4) Agreement between Britain, France, Germany and Italy September 29, 1938 to give Hitler the Sudetenland, as long as

Hitler agreed NOT to invade the rest of Czechoslovakia. Hitler had claimed that Germans in Czechoslovakia were being mistreated and threatened invasion to protect them. Chamberlain suggested a plebiscite be held in the Sudetenland but Hitler refused and threatened war. Chamberlain and Hitler made the agreement without consultingthe Czech government or the USSR. Czechoslovakia was furious because they were NOT consulted and were now vulnerable to attack Chamberlain believed this would bring peace in our time. Germany eventually invaded Czechoslovakia in March 1939. Stalin watched carefully and realized that he had no partners in Britain or France.

28. Why was the Nazi-Soviet Pact important? (6) Signed between the USSR (Stalin) and Nazi Germany (Hitler) – August 24, 1939 Hitler and Stalin privately agreed to divide Poland and NOT attack each other. Stalin was a bit worried about Germany – he wasn’t sure he could trust France because Hitler moved into

TheRhineland without any French resistance Stalin thought Britain and Francewere powerless against Hitler – and didn’t want to rely on them as allies Stalin thought France and Britain would be happy to let Hitler take over Eastern Europe and fight the

Communist USSR Hitler openly announced that he wanted to take over the USSR in his 1924 book ‘Mein Kampf’ British and French hoped they could use Hitler as a buffer against communism Hitler now only needed to fight on one front instead of both sides of Germany (WWI Schlieffen Plan?) It made an attack on France and Britain, by Hitler, more likely Stalin was interested in Eastern Poland and taking over the Baltic States anyway Stalin signed it to gain time to build up his armed forces, knowing Hitler would not keep his word France and Britain promised Poland they would defend it if it was invaded This agreement made war more likely (and Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939) Britain and France declared war on Germany3 September 1939. The Soviets invaded Poland on September 17, 1939.

29. The Policy of appeasement was justified. How far do you agree with this statement? (10)JUSTIFIED

Britain and France worried more about Communism than Fascist Nazis. Hitler was a buffer against the spread of Communism.

Britain did not have the support from its empire for war with Germany. Leaders did not want to be responsible for repeating the horrors of WWI. The British and French governments realized that there armed forces were not ready for another war (needed

time to remilitarize). Britain and France were still recovering from the economic effects of the depression and had other priorities The Treaty of Versailles was flawed and it was only right to let Hitler correct some of the terms. There was little support from the USA for another war.

NOT JUSTIFIED The policy encouraged Hitler to be more aggressive. Each step taken gave him more confidence. The policy allowed Germany to grow too strong too fast. It surpassed Britain and France. The policy scared the USSR and influenced them to sign the Nazi-Soviet Pact. The policy put too much trust in Hitler’s promises, which he broke consistently.

It should have been obvious what Hitler’s real intentions were since he wrote them in Mein Kampf.

30. Hitler was gambler rather than a planner in foreign affairs. Do you agree? Explain. (10) Hitler was both.

GAMBLER March 1936, he marched into Rhineland after France and USSRjust signed the Mutual Assistance Pact.

He knew the French were better-prepared and even thought he might beattacked by the USSR if he violated the Treaty of Versailles, yet he still made a move.

Most of his gambles broke the terms of The Treaty ofVersailles(example:reintroducedconscription) Hitler started to rearm Hitler tried to invade Austria in 1934 but was stopped by Mussolini. He failed but was willing to take the

gamble to see how other would react. This shows he did not plan his actions. He took random steps to see if he would get away with hisactions (example: Spanish Civil War). He forced the Anschluss and Britain and France did nothing. He gambled with his demands over the Sudetenland and intimidated the British and French.

PLANNER Hitler’s real intentions were since he wrote them in Mein Kampf. Hitler started off with little demands to see leader's reactionand if he got away he would ask for more. Hitler was careful with which terms of the Versailles Treaty he violated. He focused on German aspects and

not British and French interests. Hitler took advantage of the Depression and the political climate in Germany. This made it sure that he would

get support from the German people. He was clever by signing a Treaty with Mussolini and Japan (Rome-Berlin Axis – 1937). Overall Hitler took small risks at the beginning to gainpower and gauge his opponents.

31. How far was the Treaty of Versailles to blame for the outbreak of war in 1939? (10) There were many events that could be blamed for the outbreak of war. Rearmament Hitler actions. He took Germany out of the League of Nations. Began rearming Germany. The Policy Of appeasement The policies caused by the peace treaties. The Nazi Soviet Pact. The Failures of the League of Nations. The Depression and Political Consequences The flawed Treaty of Versailles

TOPIC #4 – Blame for the Cold War 32. What was agreed at Yalta? (4)

Stalin would enter the war against Japan once Germany surrendered Germany would be divided into four zones and Berlin too (F,B,A,S) Hunt down and punish Nazi war criminals – for genocide Countries liberated from German occupation (Eastern Europe) would bepermitted to hold FREE elections to choose

their new government. To join the new UNITED NATIONS, with the aim to keep peace Eastern Europe would be a ‘Soviet Sphere of Influence.’Agreed at Potsdam (4): Agreed to round up Nazis in their zones of occupation. Agreed to put 21 leading Nazi on trial in Nuremberg for war crimes. USSR received Eastern Poland while Poland was compensated with German territory. Truman was against full reparations on Germany but agreed to reparations from their zones of occupation. Japan would be attacked as planned.’ ‘Details of German zones of occupation finalised.’ ‘Germans living in Hungary and Czechoslovakia sent back to Germany.’

33. What was meant by a Soviet ‘Sphere of Influence’ in Eastern Europe? (4)

Soviets wanted to influence Eastern Europe in a way thatcould guarantee their security. That meant shaping the countries in Eastern Europe, inpolitical, social and economic ways and making

those newgovernments friendly and PRO-Soviet. Russia and the USSR had been invaded 3 times since 1914 (1914 in WWI, 1921 during the Russian Civil War and 1941 by the Nazis)

through Eastern Europe and wanted protection against hostile opponents. The Soviets suffered at the hands of the Nazis in WWII (as many as 20 million killed) and wanted to take action to

prevent such events in the future. By creating a sphere, they could guarantee security. Even though the Soviets formed an alliance during WWII with Britain and the Americans, no Allied soldiers were ever

sent to help the USSR against the Nazis.

34. What was different about the Yalta and Potsdam Conferences of 1945? (4) Yalta was far more conciliatory (they cooperated), with the Allies making a number of agreements. Potsdam witnessed greater tension and suspicion, and mostly disagreements. The war in Europe was over, which would test the allies in their attempt to resolve European issues. Stalin's armies were occupying most of Eastern Europe. Stalin’stroops were in control of the Baltic States, Finland, Poland,Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria and Romania. The agreed “free” election did NOT take place in Poland, as Stalin setup a Communist government. There was a new president (Harry Truman) who was much more suspicious of and tougher on Stalin. He was angry at

Stalin for imposing a one party communist government in Poland. Truman was also angry because the USSR had expanded its territory an additional 480 kilometers westward. There was a new PM in Britain, Clement Attlee. The USA had successfully tested an atomic bomb, but did not inform Stalin in advance (it increased fear of the USA,

and the Soviets felt threatened). Stalin’s demanded that Germany be made to pay reparations and be crippled. The Allies disagreed. Other differences: Yalta was in the Ukraine - Feb 1945 while Potsdam (a suburb of Berlin)-July 1945.

35. Why were Western Governments suspicious of the USSR in the period from 1945 to February 1948? (6) For many reasons: Their alliance during the war was unlikely - democratic-capitalism vs communism. Before the war there was much

distrust and tension, and that resurfaced at the war’s end. They had accepted that Soviet security needs in Eastern Europe and agreed to a Soviet ‘sphere of influence’; however

they had not accepted such complete Communist domination. Stalin broke his promise at Yalta about ‘free’ elections in Eastern Europe. Western powers thought that European countries could be both democratic and friendly to Stalin. Truman and the allies could only see the spread of Communism. Stalin’s METHODS caused concern:

He imprisoned opposition leaders and attacked Church leaders (Hungary) He abolished monarchy in Romania (1947) He executed Non-Communists leaders in Bulgaria The Red Army was left in the countries it occupied evenafter the war was over. The USSRused secret police.

Stalin set Cominform in 1947 to control communist leaders in Eastern Europe. The economies of Eastern Europe were run for the benefit ofthe Soviets. In Poland (1947) and Czechoslovakia (1948) Coalitions and then non-Communists were thrown out. Local communist leaders were replaced by pro-Stalin Communists IRON Curtain Speech (March 1946) By 1948, even Italy and France were vulnerable to Communist take-over.

36. What was the Truman Doctrine? (4) Truman was very suspicious of Stalin and the Soviet Sphere of influence being an excuse for Soviet domination and

takeover of Eastern Europe. Truman realized that communism spread in areas where poverty and lack of opportunity existed. Truman was worried about the spread of Communism and established the National Security Council (NSC) and the

CIA in 1947. The main goals of the Truman Doctrine:

To contain the spread of Communism (CONTAINMENT).To help countries resisting Communist subjugationTo ensure that the U.S. economy would benefitfrom trade and markets

37. What was the Domino Theory? (4) The idea that the spread of Communism was more likely when one country in a region became Communist.

Neighbouring countries were always vulnerable to the spread of Communism, like dominos.

This theory was put forth in the late 1940s when the U.S. Government became increasing worried about the spread of communism in China (1949), North Korea and later in Vietnam.

The domino theory was used by United States administrations during the Cold War to justify American intervention around the world.

38. What were the main reasons for the Marshall Plan? (4) Truman sent Sec. of State George C. Marshall to Europe in 1948 to study the situation. Truman realized that communism spread in areas where poverty and lack of opportunity existed. Most of Europe was

ravaged by WWII and vulnerable to communism. When a coalition government was taken over by Communists in Czechoslovakia (1948) Truman and the U.S. Congress

realized that action needed to be taken to rescue Europe. The U.S.A. did the following:

Invested $17 billion from 1948 – 1952 Helped rebuild Europe and raise the standards in West. Europe to reduce the appeal of Communism. Planned to rebuild Germany, which Stalin feared, and make Germany the EXAMPLE for all of

Europe opposed to Communism Planned to weaken Soviet control and influence in Eastern Europe, especially in Berlin

The plan itself hoped to accomplish the following: To help the U.S. economy by increasing exports and investments in Europe (to avoid another

Depression), with conditions: 1st Countries must apply 2nd U.S. supervision over rebuilding projects 3rd Companies must be privately owned and reduce import taxes (to help increase purchase of goods) 4th Allow U.S. investments and countries must buy American goods.

Marshall Aid took the form of fuel, raw materials, goods, loans and food, machinery and advisers. It jump-started rapidEuropean economic growth, and stopped the spread of Communism. It was considered so successful and generous that George Marshall received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1953 as a

result.

39. How did the Soviets react to the Truman Doctrine? (4) They were very suspicious and angry. The Communists/Soviets came down hard in Czechoslovakia wherea pro-American minister (Jan

Masaryk) was found dead under his window (suicide or murder?) The Communist Information Bureau (COMINFORM) was formed in Sept 1947. Soviets used Propaganda - Soviet leader A.A. Zhdanov accused the USA. of enslaving Europe with strings attached to

the Marshall Aid. Self determination and sovereignty (right to rule) were undermined by the U.S.A. Strikes and demonstrations were organised by Communists in Western Europe (especially in Britain, France and Italy)

to wreck the Marshall Plan. COMECON (Council for Mutual Economic Assistance) was formed in Jan 1949. It was the economic response to

Marshall Aid, but no injection of cash. Countries in Eastern Europe were encouraged to specialise in different products.

Stalin banned acceptance of Marshallaid / money by countries in Eastern Europe. In June 1948, Stalin blockaded West Berlin from Western help ofreceiving supplies and equipment as he thought it

would drivewestern allies out of Berlin to make sure Berlin can remaindependent on the USSR.

40. Why did the Soviets blockade Berlin in June 1948? (4) Stalin had wanted to cripple Germany after WWII. He worried that a recovered Germany would pose

another threat to Soviet security. The western allies wanted to rebuild Germany as quickly as possible. They combined their zones in 1947

and introduced a new currency called the deutschmark in 1948. They decided to include West Germanyin their plans for aNon-Communist Western Europe.

Stalin saw these steps as an attempt to divide Germany with the wealthier, larger part of the country closely allied to the USA.

Stalin was worried by the idea of a successful, Non-Communist government in the westof Germany and attempt to stop this formation of West Germany.

Stalin blocked all supply lines (road, rail and canal access) to Berlin. He cut off the 2 million people of West Berlin from western help.

Stalin believed that this would force the Allies out of Berlin and make Berlin entirely dependent on the USSR.

41. What action did the Allies take when Berlin was blockaded and why? (6) The Western allies needed to be careful about what action to take because most responses could be

considered acts of war, provoking Stalin. Instead of ramming the roadblocks with U.S tanks, the U.S.A air-lifted supplies into Berlin. Truman wanted to show that he was serious about the policy of containment and wanted Berlin to be a

symbol of freedom behind the Iron Curtain. Over the next tenmonthsWest Berlin was supplied by a constant stream of airplanes (every 3 minutes

with 27,000 flights) bringing in everything from food and clothing to oil and building materials. The Allies wanted to show the people of Western Europe their ability and willingness to resist Soviet

Communism and get them closer to the Americans.Truman wanted to show that he strongly believed in his policy of containment.

If the Allies did this because if they gave up on WestBerlin the Soviets may have tried to take all of West Germany.

By May 1949, however, it was clear that the blockade of Berlin would not make theWestern Allies give up Berlin, so Stalin reopened communications.

42. What were the results of the Berlin Crisis? (6) Germany was divided into two nations. May 1949, the Allied zones became the Federal Republic of Germany (known as West Germany). The Communist eastern zone was formed into the German Democratic Republic (or East Germany) in

October 1949. Germany would stay a divided country for 41 years. Berlin would remain a powerful symbol of Cold War tension. Iron Curtain became a reality with watchtowers, barbed wire fences, and land mines separating West and

East Germany. Berliners decided to leave the city altogether. NATO was set up The two superpowers and their allies had shown how suspicious they were of each other. How they would obstruct each other with propaganda such as that in Sources 34 (The crisis was planned

In Washington, behind a smokescreen of anti-Soviet propaganda.) Source 35 (We refused to be forcedout of the city of Berlin. We demonstrated to the people of Europe that we would act and act resolutely, when their freedom was threatened. Politically it brought the people of Western Europe closer to us. TheBerlin blockade was a move to test our ability and our will to resist.-President Truman, speaking in 1949).

But each side had shown that it was not willing to go to war with the other. The Berlin Blockade established a tense balance between the superpowers.

43. The Soviet Union was to blame for the start of the Cold war. How far do you agree with statement? (10) To some extent the statement is accurate; however the USA was also to blame. Some, however, would argue that the Cold War was somewhat inevitable. Briefly describe what the Cold War -state of mutual mistrust that existed between the USA and the USSR after the WWII

alliance deteriorated, from 1945 to 1991. It took the form of propaganda, subversion, espionage, threats and anarms race, while both countries competed for global influence of their ideals.

Inevitable and Both to Blame: The USA and the USSR were suspicious of one another fora long time (since 1918). The World had a few powerful countries before WWII, butfollowing WWII, there were just two (USA and

USSR), and they had very different beliefs and ideas. The USA was democraticand capitalist country, whereas the USSR was communist. Each sidethought they were right and wanted to spread their ideas. The Alliance formed between the USA and the USSRduring WWII was clearly not strong enough (as it

broke down not long after) to overcome the decades ofsuspicion and unease between the 2 nations. Neither was willing to compromise their differencesin ideas, beliefs and visions for the future. The USA hated communism since it had firstappeared. Both nations escaped relatively unharmed -compared toother major world powers like Britain, Germany

AndFrance-after WWII (even though the USSR was affected badly it recovered quickly). Stalin wanted to dismantle Germany, keep it weak,dependent, extract reparations from it and spread

Communismthere, whereas Truman wanted to rebuild, reindustrialize, anddemocratize Europe becausehethought it'd prevent anotherfuture world war (and be a buffer to Communism). Neither side

was willing to compromise, so tension was inevitable.The USA wasalso to blame for the start of the Cold War:

Truman encouraged suspicion to grow between the USA and USSR by adopting a 'get tough' attitude toward Stalin when Stalin forcefully set up pro-Soviet governments in Eastern Europe.

Stalin never trusted the Americans because they did not send troops to help the USSR against the Nazis.

Stalin WAS granted a 'sphere of influence' overE. Eur, but the Allies didn'texpectcomplete domination. The Policy of Containmentencouraged hatred to grow in away as it encouraged people to either fully

support democracyand American beliefs and ideas, or side with communism and theideas of the USSR. The Domino Theory made the USSRsuspicious of the USAtoo with ‘Dollar Diplomacy’ seen as a bribe. The USA practiced the Truman Doctrine (Containment) and established the Marshall Plan – both sent the

message to the Soviets that the USA was willing to stop their expansion. The USA was involved in setting up NATO (North AtlanticTreaty Organization) which further worried and

escalated Soviet concerns. The USA never fully understood or appreciated the legitimate security concerns the USSR had from past

threats in Eastern Europe. The USA created a hydrogen bomb (1952)and the Soviets responded by building up their arms.The Soviets were to blame: Stalin took advantage of his Eastern European 'sphereof influence' by his obvious attempts to spread

Communism (thisallowed for more suspicion to grow between him andTruman), and his desire for domination and power (this spoiled the good will extended by Roosevelt between the USA&USSR) Stalin Methods were considered extreme and antagonised the Western Allies:

He left his Red Army troops in East Europe after WWIIended, making the USAanxious and suspicious. He imprisoned opposition leaders and attacked Church leaders (Hungary) He abolished monarchy in Romania (1947) He had Non-Communists leaders in Bulgaria executed In Poland (1947) and Czechoslovakia (1948) Coalitions and then non-Communists were thrown out (even the death of Jan

Masaryk - a pro-American Minister – caused suspicion. Local communist leaders were replaced by pro-Stalin Communists Economies of Eastern Europe were run for the benefit of the Soviets (satellite states) Stalin used secret police to spy on people.

Stalin set up COMINFORM in September 1947, which greatly encouraged the arousal of suspicion andtension between the people of E. Europe.

Stalin sort of allowed for the Marshall Aid and TrumanDoctrine to be created because of the way heRuled E. Europe (he outlawed religion) and people were clearly still strugglingand their hardships weren't going away, nor were they beingdealt with.

Stalin’s actions were the reason for Churchill’s 'Iron Curtain' speech in 1946 because of the way he divided East andWest Europe from one another.

By 1948, even Italy and France were vulnerable to Communist take-over, which was another sign of communist expansion.

Stalin blockaded Berlin and tried to tempt the USAintowar or withdraw from Berlin. The USSR started the Arms Race in August 1949 when they developed their first atomic bomb.

TOPIC #5 – The US Policy of Containment Tested (Cuba and Vietnam)

44 Describe the relations between Cuba and the USA between 1959 and 1961. (4) Frosty and tense. Cuba had been a haven for American businesses and operated an important naval base at Guantanamo. Cuba had a revolution (1956 – 59) and the Communist Castro replaced the American-supported Batista. Castro said he wanted to run Cuba without interference and that Americans living there were safe. Castro nationalized American businesses and the USA was annoyed. The USA imposed a trade embargo in Oct 1960. The Soviets stepped in to support Cuba, politically, economically and militarily. The USA broke off diplomatic relations in January 1961 with Cuba (the USA was not prepared to tolerate

a Soviet satellite in the heart of its own ‘sphere of influence’). President Kennedy supplied arms, equipment and transport for 1400 anti-Castro exiles to invade Cuba

and overthrow him (20,000 Cuban troops armed with tanks and modern weapons destroyed the USbacked guerrillas at the Bay of Pigs).

The Bay of Pigs Invasion failure proved the CIA’s miscalculation of Castro and made Castro more popular.

45 Why was the Bay of Pigs invasion a failure for the USA? (6) It was utterly a disaster, both militarily and politically. It encouraged Cuba to turn to the USSR for support. 1400 Cuban exiles were defeated (killed or captured) by 20,000 Cuban troops with modern arms and weapons. The invasion caused a rift between Kennedy and his military leaders. The CIA had expected that the invasion would encourage a popular uprising in Cuba - it didn’t materialise. Castro was made even more popular in Cuba and parts of Latin America for standing up to the USA. The invasion was a humiliating defeat for Kennedy and made him look weak and inexperienced. The invasion encouraged Khrushchev and the Soviets to test Kennedy.

46. Why did the Cuban Missile Crisis cause so much alarm? (6) Threat to America. The missiles were Nuclear and could kill over 80 million Americans within minutes. Missiles sites were built and more were under construction. New level of Soviet aggression. The Soviets were attempting to threaten America in their own sphere. The USA seemed ready to tolerate conventional arms being supplied to Cuba, but would not accept

nuclear missiles on Cuba (this crisis could erupt into war or even a nuclear exchange). In May 1962 the Soviet Union announced that it was supplying Cuba with arms. By July 1962 Cuba had the best-equipped army in Latin America. By September it had thousands of Soviet missiles, plus patrol boats, tanks, radar vans, missile erectors, jet bombers,

jet fighters and 5000 Soviet technicians to help to maintain the weapons. Kennedy and his warning of September 11 were now to be tested (Kennedy warned the USSR that he

would prevent ‘by whatever means might be necessary’ Cuba’s becoming an offensive military base – by which, everyone knew, he meant a nuclear missile base).

47. How did Khrushchev feel about Kennedy? Explain. (6) Khrushchev was a military general and a veteran of WWII. He was a tough man and was NOT impressed easily. He thought Kennedy was too young and inexperienced to be president (aged 43). He thought Kennedy had no ‘guts’ because of the failed plan at the Bay of Pigs, and for NOT taking any

action when the Berlin Wall was built (both in 1961). He wanted to intimidate and test Kennedy to see what the ‘limits’ were and gauge what the Soviets were

able to get away with.

48. Why did the Soviets place missiles in Cuba? (6) To bargain with the USA - Khrushchev wanted the missiles as a bargaining counter. If he had missiles on Cuba, he

could agree to remove them in return for some American concessions (maybe missiles in Turkey). To test the USA – It was part of Cold War politics. The missiles were designed to see how strong the Americans and

JFK really were. Thought that the USA did not want direct involvement in Cuba (B of Pigs) To trap the USA - Khrushchev wanted the Americans to find them and be drawn into a ‘starting’ a nuclear war. He did

not even try to hide them. To get the upper hand in the arms race – Missiles on Cuba made an American ‘first strike’ attack on the USSR less

likely. To defend Cuba - The missiles were genuinely meant to defend Cuba.

49. Why was the USA concerned about Soviet Missiles in Cuba? Same answer as #46 above. (6) Threat to America. The missiles were Nuclear and could kill over 80 million Americans within minutes. Missiles sites were built and more were under construction. New level of Soviet aggression. The Soviets were attempting to threaten America in their own sphere. The USA seemed ready to tolerate conventional arms being supplied to Cuba, but would not accept

nuclear missiles on Cuba (this crisis could erupt into war or even a nuclear exchange). In May 1962 the Soviet Union announced that it was supplying Cuba with arms. By July 1962 Cuba had the best-equipped army in Latin America. By September it had thousands of Soviet missiles, plus patrol boats, tanks, radar vans, missile erectors,

jet bombers, jet fighters and 5000 Soviet technicians to help to maintain the weapons. Kennedy and his warning of September 11 were now to be tested (Kennedy warned the USSR that he would prevent ‘by whatever means might be necessary’ Cuba’s becoming an offensive military base – by which, everyone knew, he meant a nuclear missile base).

50 The Soviets claimed victory in the Cuban Missile Crisis. How far do you agree? Explain. (10)Arguments can be made for the Soviets ‘winning’ the crisis:

Cuba was protected from any further U.S. invasion. Cuba remained communist and highly armed The Soviets made a secret deal with the Americans and U.S. missiles were removed from Turkey 6 months later. Khrushchev was seen as a ‘Peacemaker’ for removing the missiles. The Test Ban Treaty of 1963 was achieved and a direct phone line was set up between the White House and the

Kremlin.Arguments can be made for the Americans ‘winning’ the crisis:

Missiles were withdrawn under UN supervision. JFK was tested but stood up to the Soviets and made Khrushchev back down. Castro was angered by Khrushchev and Soviet-Cuban relations were strained. The U.S. Sphere was protected from ‘Offensive’ weapons. The Test Ban Treaty of 1963 was achieved.

Overall: Both leaders emerged with something from the crisis, but did give in slightly. Historians agree that the Cuban missile crisis helped to thaw Cold War relations between the USA and the USSR. Both leaders had seen how their game of brinkmanship had nearly ended in nuclear war. Now

they were more prepared to take steps to reduce the risk of nuclear war. A telephone hotline was set up between the White House and the Kremlin. The Test Ban Treaty of 1963 – to ban the testing of nuclear weapons resulted. It was a victory for the United Nations too as the crisis was solved peacefully with UN supervision of the dismantling

of the weapons.

51. What was the Ho Chi Minh Trail? (4) The name of the supply route from Communist North Vietnam to the South for the Vietcong. It was named after the Communist leader Ho Chi Minh. It was a series of hidden paths and dirt roads used by foot soldiers on bikes, in truck and even in tanks. The trail was also used to move guerrilla fighters and consisted of a network of underground passages with living

areas and even hospitals. The trail was also used to attack buildings, South Vietnamese government and Americans. Most weapons sent were from the USSR and China. The trail extended from North Vietnam through Laos and Cambodia.

52. Why did the USA find it impossible to defeat the Vietcong? (6) American tactics were somewhat ineffective. Fighting in a foreign country - facing the jungle, tropical climate and booby traps Easy targets – young and inexperienced, patrolling in large groups Relied too heavily on technology and bombing - which only slowed the Vietcong (supply lines remained opened. Lost support from peasants and villagers b/c of bombing, search + destroy and killing innocent civilians

(1965 – 100,000 S. Vietnamese killed and by 1968, 300,000 killed) They faced experienced fighters using guerrilla tactics and terrorism (ambushes + sabotage) attacking in small

committed cells, with limited weapons. The Vietcong had no base camps, didn’t wear uniforms and blended in with civilians. The Vietcong and NVA wore down American morale and energy (attack and retreat), making the inexperienced

soldiers nervous and desperate. The battlefield was not what the Americans were trained for. Americans did not know the terrain and the Vietcong

used the jungle as camouflage. The Vietcong and NVA refused to give in, making it a war of attrition for the USA (costly). The Americans faced an enemy that was well supplied by the Chinese and Soviets.

53 How far was US public opinion the most important reason for America’s withdrawal from Vietnam? (10) There are many reasons that can be argued for the American withdrawal from Vietnam. US Public Opinion was a major reason for American Withdrawal. From 1964-65 a poll showed that 80% of the population agreed with Pres. Johnson and were for the war. America at

this time saw itself as the "good guys”. After years of support, Americans shifted their feelings when the war dragged on and its realities horrified them.

Opinion of Most Americans were affected by a number of factors: Americans were bombarded with Media Images of the war - Since it was a Media War American citizens and

politicians were bombarded with the images, stories of torture + massacre and the use of chemical weapons. They could not support the way any longer.

Americans were horrified by the Conduct of Soldiers – behaviour on search and destroy missions, the My Lai Massacre and the use of drugs by soldiers alienated Americans.

Americans were against the Draft – By 1968, 36,000 Americans were dead and many refused to support the war or the draft. The most famous protestor was boxer Muhammad Ali. He refused to serve in the military and went to prison. Less intelligent soldiers were taken in the draft.

Americans were shocked by the Reality of the Tet Offensive – Americans realised that that the war could not be won American Protests grew and calls for withdrawal increased - Protests in the USA got Bloody. In April 1970 – 4 were

killed at a Kent State Univ. war protest. Chants of ‘LBJ, how many kids did you kill today’? People burn draft cards. The Cost in $$$ and Deaths alarmed Americans, considering that no clear victory was in sight. By 1968, 13% of US

Government budget was spending in Vietnam (vital domestic programs suffered). The USA spent $28 billion a year, an estimated 2 million Vietnamese were killed, 58,148 Americans were killed and 300,000 Americans were injured.

The presidential election of 1968 - the single most important indication of American Public Opinion against the war in Vietnam. Both candidates (Nixon and Humphrey) campaigned for American Withdrawal.

Other Reasons for the American Withdrawal: Lost support from villagers in South Vietnam – bombing, search + destroy, chemicals and hamlet program

The Americans could not defeat the Vietcong - Tactics of Vietcong compared to American tactics (Guerrilla warfare vs Conventional and technological methods). Experienced fighters vs the inexperienced American soldiers on a regular rotations.

Instability in South Vietnam’s Government - It became clear that frequent military coups and little support for the government of South Vietnam by most Vietnamese made the war senseless. Most Vietnamese favoured reforms promised by Communists (economic and representative government) anyway.

The Policy of Vietnamisation- Policy followed by President Richard Nixon for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Vietnam between 1969 – 1973, while supplying the government of S. Vietnam with money, weapons and training. America no longer wanted the responsibility alone for containing Communism in Vietnam. They hoped the Government of the South and its army (ARVN) could hold up.

54 What was the ‘Domino Theory’? [4] The idea that the spread of Communism was more likely when one country in a region became Communist.

Neighbouring countries were always vulnerable to the spread of Communism, like dominos. This theory was put forth in the late 1940s by President Truman when the U.S. Government became increasing

worried about the spread of communism in China (1949), North Korea and later in Vietnam. The domino theory was continued by Eisenhower and Kennedy, and used by United States administrations during the

Cold War to justify American intervention around the world. Americans believed that, if South Vietnam fell, Laos, Cambodia and Thailand - and then Burma & India could follow.

55 Why did the Vietnam War become increasingly unpopular with the people of America? [6] The war became unpopular with the American people for many reasons. From 1964-65 a poll showed that 80% of the population agreed with Pres. Johnson and were for the war. America at

this time saw itself as the "good guys”. It was supposed to be a war of ideals - of freedom vs communism. After years of support, Americans shifted their feelings when the war dragged on and its realities horrified them.

Americans were bombarded with Media Images of the war - Since it was a Media War American citizens and politicians were bombarded with the images, stories of torture + massacre, the use of chemical weapons and the deaths of American soldiers. They could not support the way any longer.

Americans were horrified by the Conduct of Soldiers – behaviour on search and destroy missions, the My Lai Massacre and the use of drugs by soldiers alienated Americans.

Americans were against the Draft – By 1968, 36,000 Americans were dead and many refused to support the war or the draft. The most famous protestor was boxer Muhammad Ali. He refused to serve in the military and went to prison. Less intelligent soldiers were taken in the draft.

Americans were shocked by the Reality of the Tet Offensive – Americans realised that that the war could not be won American Protests grew and calls for withdrawal increased - Protests in the USA got Bloody. In April 1970 – 4 were

killed at a Kent State Univ. war protest. Chants of ‘LBJ, how many kids did you kill today’? People burn draft cards. The Cost in $$$ and Deaths alarmed Americans, considering that no clear victory was in sight. By 1968, 13% of US

Government budget was spending in Vietnam (vital domestic programs suffered). The USA spent $28 billion a year, an estimated 2 million Vietnamese were killed, 58,148 Americans were killed and 300,000 Americans were injured.

56 Who were the Vietcong and what part did they play in the Vietnam War? [4] Experience guerrilla fighters from North and South Vietnam who defeated the Japanese, the French and

eventually the USA. They were Communists that waged a war of terror against the South Vietnamese government

and civilians (including – police, tax collectors and teachers). Used guerrilla tactics and terrorism (ambushes + sabotage) in small groups. They played an extremely important part in the Vietnam War. Along with the NVA they attacked in small committed cells, using booby traps, and often living underground. They refused to give in and wore down their enemy’s morale and energy, making the Americans nervous

and desperate. They knew the terrain and used the jungle as camouflage.

They used the support from peasants and lived among them. They were an extension of Chinese and Soviet policy in Vietnam, and were chiefly responsible for the

American defeat in Vietnam.

57. What tactics did US forces use against the Viet Cong? [4] Relied on technology and bombing (Rolling Thunder 1965 - 1968).

Tried to disrupted the VC and NVA supply routes. Able to strike at Communists even when U.S. troop levels decreasing. Forced NV to negotiating table by 1972

Strategic Hamlets – to win the hearts and minds of Vietnamese peasants. Defoliant Sprays (Agent Orange) – to destroy the jungle and expose the Vietcong. Napalm Bombs (inflammable jelly which sticks to human beings and burns their skin). Search and Destroy missions - got to the enemy.

58 What did the Geneva Agreements of 1954 decide about the future of Vietnam? [4] The Conference produced a declaration which supported the independence of Indochina from France. In addition, the Conference declaration agreed to halt foreign involvement (or troops) in internal Indochina affairs. Divided Indo-China into 4 countries (Cambodia, Laos, North Vietnam and South Vietnam). North and South Vietnam were divided at the 17th parallel. Free elections were to be held in the two Vietnams in July 1956, without foreign interference.

59 How successful was US policy towards Vietnam in the period 1963–1975? Explain your answer. [10] The US policy changed from 1963 to 1975. It began with Containment and ended with withdrawal

Through Vietnamisation. At first it was working with the South, providing advice and money. Later it saw the full use of American military might put to the test, yet concluded with the Americans looking for a way out “with honour”.

1963 - 65: The USA was involved by providing money and advisors. Their support for President Ngo DinhDiem ended as he was too corrupt to unite the South, and because he was killed in a military coup(Nov 63).

American involvement was criticised by Buddhist monks because of their support for Diem The assassination of President Kennedy led to a shift in policy by Pres Johnson. The Gulf of Tonkin incident in August 1964 changed American involvement because Congress authorized Pres

Johnson to use combat troops in Vietnam. American military involvement was underway, with the first Marines arriving in 1965.

This showed how serious the USA was about containing Communism.

1965 - 68: In Feb 1965, the US started Operation Rolling Thunder. Americans supported Pres Johnson and the policy. Allowed them to strike Communist forces and damage North Vietnam's war effort. However, it couldn't defeat the Communists -only slow them down.

Turning Point - 1968: Questions are raised and support for Johnson and the war weakening. The Tet Offensive shocked Americans. Questions were raised about the tactics, the likely outcome and the Policy

of Containment. But the Communists did not achieve their goals (to gain overwhelming support in the South) as the USA and

South Vietnamese forces regained control of all areas attacked. A SUCCESS FOR CONTAINMENT.

The My Lai Massacre raised other questions and led to increasing opposition in America. American tactics caused too much collateral damage and support was lost from peasants. American policy took a serious blow when Pres Johnson decided not to run for reelection. The USA

looked to end the war and called for peace negotiations with the North.

1969 - 73: This period witnessed some political gains, which raised the possibility that American Policy was successful. Relations between the USA, China and the USSR improved. Nixon was in a position to seek help in ending the war with North Vietnam. Vietnamisation and increased bombing of the North showed Nixon and the USA were not

weak (therefore showing success of Policy) But Nixon’s bombing of Laos and Cambodia outraged the world and damaged the American image.

1973 - 75: A Peace deal was reached in January 1973. The Americans agreed to withdrawal troops. In March 1973 the last American troops left Vietnam and it had NOT BEEN TAKEN BY COMMUNISTS. Nixon pledged to continue military support for the South but Congress refused (thought any additional financial

or military support was a waste). By 1975: In April 1975 Saigon fell to the Communists.

Conclusion:Success of American Policy:

The Americans were not in Vietnam when the Southfell to Communism. Even though Communism spread to Laos and Cambodia, the rest of Asia was protected. The Communists realised that the Americans were more than willing to confront the Domino Theory. Vietnam was a proxy war between the USA and Communist China and the USSR. The fact that

relations improved with both was a victory for American policy.

Unsuccessful American Policy: A lasting peace was not achieved. The policy of Containment failed - devised for Europe in the 1940s, it was not right for Asia in the 1960s. Militarily, the policy failed – U.S. military strength alone could not stop the spread of Communism Politically, the policy failed – Communism actually spread to Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos Forced the USA to improve relations with China and the USSR

60 How successful was American foreign policy towards Cuba and Vietnam? Explain your answer. [10]Successful to some extent.

Cuba: No offensive weapons were placed in Cuba. Missiles were withdrawn under UN supervision. JFK was tested but stood up to the Soviets and made Khrushchev back down. The U.S. Sphere was protected from ‘Offensive’ weapons. The Test Ban Treaty of 1963 was achieved.

Vietnam: Vietnam did not become Communist when American troops were fighting the Communists forces. Even though Communism spread to Laos and Cambodia, the rest of Asia was protected. The Communists realised that the Americans were more than willing to confront the Domino Theory. Vietnam was a proxy war between the USA and Communist China and the USSR. The fact that

relations improved with both was a victory for American policy. The USA was not drawn into another full scale war to fight the spread of Communism.

Unsuccessful to some extent.Cuba:

Despite the Bay of Pigs, the trade embargo and the end to diplomatic relations, CubaremainedCommunist supported by the USSR. Cuba was safe from U.S. invasion. Cuba remained highly armed in America’s sphere of influence.

Vietnam: A lasting peace was not achieved. The policy of Containment failed and ended - devised for Europe, it was not right for Asia in the 1960s. Militarily, the policy failed – U.S. military strength alone could not stop the spread of Communism Politically, the policy failed – Communism actually spread to Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos

American opposition led to political policy changes in the USA.

61 What were the consequences of the Vietnam War? (6) Effects on the Environment– Chemical warfare - Damaged crops which led to food shortages.

Destroyed 5.4 million acres of forest areas and the animals and plants living there. Poisoned streams and rivers

Effects on Vietnamese Citizens – Chemical warfare meant that South Vietnamese citizens had in their bodies levels of dioxin (a powerful poison used in Agent Orange) three times as high as US citizens. Large numbers of unexploded mines and bombs caused death and injury to adults and children for years to come. Napalm caused horrific burns which killed or disfigured victims, often civilians caught in crossfire(2million killed).

Effects on U.S. soldiers - Drug addiction Hard drugs were available easily and cheaply in VietnamFrom neighbouring Laos and Cambodia.

- Confusion and bitterness US forces were not welcomed home in the same way as victorious troops in the Second World War. Many found it difficult to adjust to civilian life

- Stress Strains of war led to post traumatic stress- Cancer Some troops who handled Agent Orange contracted cancer

Effects on Vietnamese Society - Fighting drove thousands of peasants into shanty towns near US bases – poverty, prostitution and drug

abuse were common. US forces were supplied with vast amounts of luxuries as well as military supplies – this created a huge black market with corrupt South Vietnamese government officials.

Buddhist priests protested about the effects of the American presence in Vietnam in the late 1960s. Around 5 million South Vietnamese were displaced from their homes. Vietnam took well over 20 years to

start recovering from the war. Exposure to chemicals produced mal-formed children, landmines and booby traps left behind, farming

land and rainforests destroyed, refugees fled and over 2,000,000 Vietnamese killed. Poverty, Communist policies and the hope of a better life led thousands of Vietnamese to become ‘boat

people’ in the late 1970s onwards. Around 1 million refugees escaped to the West (mainly USA). At least 50,000 were drowned or murdered by pirates.

In the mid 1990s the USA finally ended its trade ban with Vietnam and the World Bank was allowed to invest in the country.

The policy of Containment failed - devised for Europe in the 1940s, it was not right for Asia in the 1960s.It damaged America’s reputation. It advanced the Domino Theory and forced the USA to improve relationswith China and the USSR.

TOPIC #6 - The Collapse of Soviet Communism in Eastern Europe 1948 - 198962 How was the Hungarian Uprising of 1956 dealt with by the USSR? (4)

The USSR dealt severely with the Hungarians. In November 1956 200,000 Soviet troops and 2,500 tanks moved into Budapest. Two weeks of bitter street fighting followed. Nearly 3,000 Hungarians and 700 - 800 Russians were

killed. Imre Nagy and his fellow leaders were imprisoned and then executed. The Hungarian resistance was crushed in two weeks. Khrushchev put János Kádár in place as leader. Kádár took several months to crush all resistance. Around 35,000 anti-Communist activists were arrested and 300 were executed. Some reforms were cautiously introduced, but Hungary was prevented from leaving the Warsaw Pact.

63 Why did the USSR try to dominate Eastern European countries after WWII? (6) From PPQs #33 and 35. Soviets wanted to influence Eastern Europe in a way that could guarantee Soviet security. That meant shaping the countries in Eastern Europe, in political, social and economic ways and making

those new governments friendly and PRO-Soviet. Russia and the USSR had been invaded 3 times since 1914 (1914 in WWI, 1921 during the Russian Civil War and 1941 by the Nazis)

through Eastern Europe and wanted protection against hostile opponents. The Soviets suffered at the hands of the Nazis in WWII (as many as 20 million killed) and wanted to take action to

prevent such events in the future. By creating a sphere, they could guarantee security. Even though the Soviets formed an alliance during WWII with Britain and the Americans, no Allied soldiers were ever

sent to help the USSR against the Nazis. Stalin’s METHODS caused concern:

He imprisoned opposition leaders and attacked Church leaders (Hungary) He abolished monarchy in Romania (1947) He executed Non-Communists leaders in Bulgaria The Red Army was left in the countries it occupied even after the war was over. The USSR used secret police.

Stalin set Cominform in 1947 to control communist leaders in Eastern Europe. The economies of Eastern Europe were run for the benefit of the Soviets. In Poland (1947) and Czechoslovakia (1948) Coalitions and then non-Communists were thrown out. Local communist leaders were replaced by pro-Stalin Communists

IRON Curtain Speech (March 1946) By 1948, even Italy and France were vulnerable to Communist take-over.

64 The Soviet grip on Eastern Europe was complete until the emergence of ‘Solidarity’ in Poland.Do you agree with this view? Explain your answer. (10) To a large extent it was secure by 1980, but it never was fully complete. The Soviets did dominate events in Eastern Europe, but Solidarity was the first movement that exposed

the seriousness of Soviet problems. Started with taking control of Eastern Europe after WWII (see PPQ #62). The establishment of the ‘Iron Curtain’ caused concern in the west and loss of freedom in Eastern Europe Challenges to Soviet control were dealt with severely in East Germany (the Berlin Wall). Challenges to Soviet control and the Soviet system were most evident in Hungary (1956) and

Czechoslovakia (1968). The Soviet control was complete but did face other challenges - Tito in Yugoslavia and Albania left the

Warsaw Pact after events in Czechoslovakia in 1968. Solidarity kicked off a series of events in the 1980s that saw the Soviets lose control of Eastern Europe. The Poles had long hated the Russians, who had ruled over Poland for hundreds of years. The Poles had a tradition of protesting and striking against the government - 1949, 1956 and 1970. The prosperity (wealth and high standard of living) during the 1970s in Poland was better than other

communist countries. But by 1980 this changed when the standard of living dropped - prices of food, fuel and clothing rose. Workers formed trade unions and went on strike. Solidarity at first demanded better wages and working conditions but was soon making political demands

(democratic elections with multiple parties permitted). BUT, the Soviet grip was losing strength not because of Poland, but because of other factors: See PPQ #73 - NOT BECAUSE OF GORBACHEV section

65 Describe the events in Hungary in 1956. (4) Hungarians were encouraged by Khrushchev’s De-Stalinisation approach and wanted changes in

Hungary. Events in Poland seemed to further encourage Hungarians. In June 1956 a group within the Communist Party in Hungary opposed Rákosi, and later the leader,

Ernö Gerö. Student demonstrations began on 23 October and saw the giant statue of Stalin in Budapest pulled

Hungarians DEMANDED immediate and RADICAL changes. The USSR allowed a new government to be formed under the well-respected Imre Nagy. Soviet troops

and tanks stationed in Hungary since the war began to withdraw. Nagy planned extensive reforms (free elections, impartial courts, private ownership of farmland, withdrawal of

Soviet forces and leave the Warsaw Pact). In November 1956 thousands of Soviet troops and tanks moved into Budapest. Two weeks of bitter fighting followed. About 3000 Hungarians and 700 Russians were killed. Imre Nagy and his fellow leaders were imprisoned and then executed. The Hungarian resistance was crushed in two weeks. Around 35,000 anti-Communist activists were arrested and 300 were executed. Some reforms were cautiously introduced, but Hungary DID NOT withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact. Hungarians lost faith in the USA, the UN and the West for not coming to their aid and preventing the Soviets.

66 Why did the USSR invade Czechoslovakia in 1968? (6) By 1968 Alexander Dubček became the leader of the Czech Communist Party and proposed a policy of

‘socialism with a human face’: less censorship, more freedom of speech and a reduction in the activities of the secret police.

Dubček was a committed Communist, but he believed that Communism did not have to be as restrictive as it had been before he came to power and therefore began a series of reforms. .

The Soviet Union was very suspicious of the changes. The pace of reforms was too fast and liberal. As censorship had been eased, attacks against the Communist leadership flourished (grew),

pointing out how corrupt and useless they were. Communist government ministers were ‘grilled’ on live television and radio about how they were

running the country and about events before 1968. Czechoslovakia was one of the most important countries in the Warsaw Pact (centrally placed next to Germany with

strong industry and resources that the USSR relied on).

The Soviets were worried that the new ideas in Czechoslovakia might spread to other countries in Eastern Europe (Domino Effect).

There were also concerns about a new political party (Social Democratic Party) would rival the Communists and undermine Communist control.

The Soviets were also worried that the stability of the Warsaw Pact was at risk. Brezhnev came under pressure from the East German leader, Walter Ulbricht, and the Polish leader, Gomulka, to

restrain Czechoslovakia. He wanted to show affirm hand and control unfolding events. The USSR worried that Czechoslovakia might turn to the West for help, both economically and politically. On 20 August 1968, to the stunned amazement of the Czechs and the outside world, Soviet tanks

and Warsaw Pact Allies moved into Czechoslovakia. The Soviets were prepared for a violent response but there was little resistance. Many Czechs, however, refused to

co-operate with the Soviet troops. Ultimately the Soviets enforced the Brezhnev Doctrine - one party and secure membership in Warsaw Pact.

67 Gorbachev was responsible for the collapse of Soviet control in Eastern Europe.How far do you agree with this statement. Explain your answer. (10) To some extent. Students MUST gauge HOW FAR. Gorbachev had many concerns about the USSR that needed to be addressed. He was willing to confront

the problems in order to reform the ‘Soviet Communist’ system, but never purposely undermined or attempted to end it.

NOT BECAUSE OF GORBACHEV: The USSR faced serious problems. The Soviet economy was weak and ignored for too long - couldn’t compete with the West (computers and

tele-communications). American farmers could produce 7X more food than Soviet farmers (the USSR imported grain from the USA) Too much money being spent on the arms race - a single bomber in the 1980s was the same as 200

during WWII, Soviets spent money on tanks instead of cars and TVs. Costly and un-winnable war in Afghanistan – 15,000 dead and $8 billion a year The working attitude of the Soviet people - welfare state (job and home) with NO INCENTIVE to work

harder and standards slipped Corruption ran too deeply for changes to happen - lack of loyalty by citizens - Dachas (luxurious country

houses) The days of fear under Stalin were gone and criticism common Alcoholism was rampant and life expectancy low - both contributed to decline in Soviet industry

BECAUSE OF GORBACHEV: Glasnost – (political arm) and Perestroika (economic arm)– introduced Market Forces in 1987 (buy

and sell for profit) Gorbachev proposed that the Soviet economy should be improved by ‘perestroika’ – restructuring,

including capitalist practices. There should be more “glasnost” – openness to restoring faith in government and end corruption.

Faced with President Ronald Reagan’s ‘policy of confrontation’, he engaged Reagan (worked with him), cut the arms budget and signed an agreement in 1987 with the USA to remove medium-range nuclear missiles from Europe

Gorbachev proposed many changes that the hard-line communist found difficult to accept. He was unpopular because his economic reforms did not work as quickly as expected.

Promoted international trust and cooperation for the USSR, but planned to keep a socialist system. His withdrawal of Red Army support for other communist countries resulted in one by one the

communist governments coming to an end. Announced the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan in May 1988 - out by Feb. 1989

In March 1989 he made it clear to the leaders of Eastern Europe that the Red Army would NO LONGER be used to keep them in power. The Brezhnev Doctrine was ended (at UN, Dec 1988).

His policies contributed to 1989 being the ‘Year of revolution’ in Eastern Europe.HOW FAR - DON’T FORGET.

68 Describe the effects of building the Berlin Wall on the people of Berlin. (4)MAIN PART OF THE ANSWER:

The wall acted as a physical barrier between east and west. Families were divided. Border guards had orders to shoot people trying to defect. Hundreds were killed

over the next three decades. It cut all communications between the sides and with Checkpoint Charlie being the only crossing point. It stopped the movement of Germans and refugees.

BACKGROUND: By the late 1950s thousands were defecting (leaving). Often highly skilled workers or well-qualified managers. Between the years 1954 -1960, East Germany suffered a "brain drain". During that period, 4,600 doctors,

15,885 teachers, 738 university teachers, 15,536 engineers and technicians moved from East to West Germany.

The Communist government could not afford to lose these high-quality people - more importantly, from Khrushchev’s point of view, fleeing Communist rule for a better life under capitalism undermined Communism generally.

Khrushchev and the Communists worried that the USA and the West used Berlin as a “listening post” to spy on the East.

There was tension between the USA and the USSR because of Cuba and the U2 incident over the USSRin May, 1960 (Gary Powers).

In 1961 the USA had a new President, the young and inexperienced JFK. Khrushchev thought he could bully Kennedy (Bay of Pigs, April 1961) and chose to pick a fight over Berlin.

He insisted that Kennedy withdraw US troops but JFK refused - Built in response to JFK’s refusal to hand over West Berlin to Communist control.

At two o’clock in the morning on Sunday 13 August 1961, East German soldiers erected a barbed-wire barrier along the entire frontier between East and West Berlin, ending all free movement from East to West. It was quickly replaced by a concrete wall.

All the crossing points from East to West Berlin were sealed, except for one. This became known as Checkpoint Charlie.

69 Why was the Berlin Wall built? (6) For many reasons - see PPQ #68 - Background.

70 There was never a real likelihood that either the Soviets or the Americans would turn the Cold War into a ‘Hot War’ in Europe. Do you agree? Explain your answer. (10)

The Cold War was the state of mutual mistrust that existed between the USA and the USSR from 1945 - 1991. Both sides stopped short of direct military confrontation and instead tried to undermine each other

through local wars (PROXIES) such as Vietnam (1946 - 75) and the Korean War (1950 - 53). Billions of dollars and roubles were spent on propaganda, subversion, espionage, threats and the Arms Race.

THERE WERE CHANCES / LIKELIHOOD THAT IT COULD TURN INTO A HOT WAR: Berlin Blockade and subsequent Berlin Airlift - caused tension and responses needed to be calculated

carefully in order to avoid war. If the Korean War had escalated the Soviets could have been drawn in. Since it ended in a ceasefire after

only three years, Soviet-USA confrontation was not likely. Since American forces were heavily involved in Vietnam, there was always a chance that Soviet support

for the Communists could draw them in. It didn’t. Events in Hungary and Czechoslovakia brought attention to the Cold war divisions. Had western powers

responded to Hungarian calls for help, it could have brought about US-Soviet conflict. It didn’t. The Cuban Missile Crisis is the closest the two superpowers came to a ‘Hot War’. The fact that direct

conflict was avoided proves that the Cold War was mostly a war of political posturing and propaganda.Other factors that threatened the general peace between the USA and the USSR:

Methods used by the Soviets in Eastern Europe after WWII. Defense of the Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan. Alliances formed against each other - NATO (1949) and Warsaw Pact (1955).

71 What was glasnost? (4) It was a policy introduced by Gorbachev when he became Soviet leader in 1985. It means openness.

Because the USSR faced many problems, Gorbachev wanted to openly discuss ways to improve the Soviet system.

He wanted to talk about the true history of Soviet control and atrocities committed by the government, since Stalin.

He hoped this approach would lead to an open debate of how to improve Soviet communism. It included more democracy and freedom of the press. FYI - PERESTROIKA: debating the effectiveness of government policies, namely the restructuring and reforming of the Soviet

economy It included introducing a free market in which goods that people wanted (consumer goods) were

produced at affordable prices, instead of government pricing. It emphasized the need to have a less centralized economy like the west. Glasnost may have actually undermined Perestroika because the best qualified people to make the

economy work (communists) were removed by free elections.

72 Why was Solidarity formed in Poland? (6) For many reasons. Background: Solidarity was a new trade union set up in Poland in the summer of 1980. Protests in Poland were different from other Eastern European countries b/c they tended to be about

wages or food prices. They protested successfully in 1956 and 1970, but in both cases they never tried to get rid of the government or challenge the USSR.

Complaints by the Polish during the 1970s: Standard of living Demand for consumer goods - queuing for food … shortages) Governments handling of the economy/industry during crisis in 1979– wanted joint control to manage the

economy. Government propaganda distorted the truth

Solidarity grows in the summer of 1980 and many think it is the only way forward: Government announced increases in the price of meat and workers strike. Lech Walesa leads workers at Gdansk shipyard, who put forward 21 demands (free trade unions, right to

strike, more pay, end censorship). Aug 30 – government agrees to Solidarity’s 21 demands. Through September and October, membership in Solidarity rises to 7 million. The communist government

officially recognises Solidarity. (Jan 1981 – 9.4 million).

72a. Why did the Polish government clampdown on Solidarity in December 1981? (6)There were a number of factors that caused the government to change its policy towards Solidarity.• Increasing signs that Solidarity was acting as a political party.

The government said it had secret tapes of Solidarity leaders talking about a new provisional government – without the Communist Party. Brezhnev would not allow this.

• Poland was sinking into chaos. Meat and fish supplies were down by 25 per cent. Almost all Poles felt the impact of food shortages. Rationing had been introduced in April 1981. National income had fallen by 13 per cent in a year, industrial production by 11 per cent and foreign trade by

20 per cent. Unemployment was rising. Strikes were continuing even after Solidarity ordered them to stop.

• Solidarity was also tumbling into chaos with many different factions. Some wanted more pressure put on the communists … not Walesa. The 1981 Congress ‘issued a statement of sympathy and support for peoples of the Soviet bloc and to all the

nations of the Soviet Union’.• The Soviets thought the situation in Poland had gone too far.

The USSR was prepared to restore Communist control. This was something the Polish leaders wanted to avoid.

73 How far was the collapse of Soviet Communism due to the reforms of Gorbachev? Explain. (10) From PPQ #67. To some extent. Students MUST gauge HOW FAR. Gorbachev had many concerns about the USSR that needed to be addressed. He was willing to confront

the problems in order to reform the ‘Soviet Communist’ system, but never purposely undermined or attempted to end it.

NOT BECAUSE OF GORBACHEV: The USSR faced serious problems. The Soviet economy was weak and ignored for too longcouldn’t compete with the West (computers and

tele-communications). American farmers could produce 7X more food than Soviet farmers (the USSR imported grain from the USA) Too much money being spent on the arms race - a single bomber in the 1980s was the same as 200

during WWII, Soviets spent money on tanks instead of cars and TVs. Costly and un-winnable war in Afghanistan – 15,000 dead and $8 billion a year The working attitude of the Soviet people - welfare state (job and home) with NO INCENTIVE to work

harder and standards slipped Corruption ran too deeply for changes to happen - lack of loyalty by citizens - Dachas (luxurious country houses) The days of fear under Stalin were gone and criticism common Alcoholism was rampant and life expectancy low - both contributed to decline in Soviet industry

BECAUSE OF GORBACHEV: Glasnost and Perestroika – introduced Market Forces in 1987 (buy and sell for profit)

Gorbachev proposed that the Soviet economy should be improved by ‘perestroika’ – restructuring, including capitalist practices.

There should be more “glasnost” – openness to restoring faith in governmentand end corruption. Faced with President Ronald Reagan’s ‘policy of confrontation’, he engaged Reagan (worked with

him), cut the arms budget and signed an agreement in 1987 with the USA to remove medium rangenuclear missiles from Europe

Gorbachev proposed many changes that the hard-line communist founddifficult to accept. He was unpopular because his economic reforms did not work as quickly as expected.

Promoted international trust and cooperation for the USSR, but planned to keep a socialist system. His withdrawal of RedArmy support for other communist countries resulted in one by one the

communist governments coming to an end. Announced the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan in May 1988 - out by Feb. 1989 In March 1989 he made it clear to the leaders of Eastern Europe that the Red Army would NO LONGER

be used to keep them in power. The Brezhnev Doctrine was ended (at UN, Dec 1988). His policies contributed to 1989 being the ‘Year of revolution’ in Eastern Europe.

HOW FAR - DON’T FORGET.

In Depth Study - Russia 1905 - 1917

74 Describe the main features of Tsarist rule over Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. (4) It was ruled by a Tsar (Emperor). He had total power and was autocratic. Russia had no parliament or elections and so the Tsar had total power. This power was supported by the Church (Russian Orthodox) and the wealthy landowning class. Tsar Nicholas II was hard-working but weak and indecisive. There was the problem of ruling a vast empire.

Local government was in the hands of people appointed by the Tsar - Ministers and civil servants. Racism against Jews and non-Russians within the empire was common and encouraged. Class divisions were also played a distinctive part in control the people - who were NOT united.

Censorship of newspapers and books. Nicholas was unable to deal with the necessary changes needed, so he relied heavily on the support of

fierce Cossacks on horseback whose loyalty was secured by valuable land grants, and by the Okhrana, his secret police and spies Opposition was outlawed and dissidents exiled.

75 Explain why Nicholas II survived the 1905 Revolution. (6) He survived for many reasons, namely through diplomacy, playing politics, dividing his opponents and using force. He ended the war with Japan in September 1905 - which defused some of the tension (wasting resources) allowed

Nicholas to bring back his soldiers and transfer them to troubled areas and crush revolutionaries. He secured a loan from France and paid his soldiers in full, keeping them loyal.

He made concessions - he gave into the Liberals who got what they wanted and promised financial help (Peasant Banks) to peasants.

He issued the October Manifesto on the 30th - OCTOBER MANIFESTO - Promised:: A Parliament (Duma) elected by the people was set up, making Russia a Constitutional Monarchy Civil Rights - freedom of speech and conscience Uncensored newspapers and the right to form political parties The middle class and liberals were pleased because they were granted rights and wanted an end to the

revolution - they now supported the government of Nicholas II. The October Manifesto gave Russian people basic rights and defused the tension across Russia. Ultimately Nicholas did not allow opposition. Russia was ready for change but he split his opponents.

Once the middle classes were satisfied he sent in his troops to break up the St. Petersburg Soviet and the crush an armed uprising in Moscow and other troubled areas.

Troops were sent out to take revenge on workers and peasants who had rioted. Through force and loyal soldiers,the government re-established order throughout Russia.

The loyalty of the military would ultimately dictate the authority of Nicholas.

76 How important was the First World War in the collapse of Tsarist rule? Explain your answer. (10) It was extremely important, but there were many other factors that led to the collapse of the Tsar.

Importance of WWI: It was important because it lasted a long time and affected all of Russian society - workers, peasants, soldiers, nobility

and government. Food shortages, conscription (fewer farm workers), fewer trains carrying food to cities and inflation. Shortages of coal and industrial materials - factories closed (unemployed, cold and hungry) and strikes Prices rose, longer working hours, sale of vodka stopped.

Confidence in the government was lost - economic and political effects of war caused extreme hardships. The government was not united in the war effort - Duma leaders were frustrated by the Tsar’s refusal to appoint a

representative government that would unite the war effort.

Large numbers of Russian soldiers were killed in the war - Losses mounted rapidly (by December 1914 over one million Russians were killed, wounded or taken prisoner - 8 million by March 1917).

Heavily defeated at Tannenberg and Masurian Lakes. Slaughtered - many died without weapons, ammunition or even boots. Morale was low.

First World War AND other reasons: The Tsar had lost support and earlier reforms had caused discontent. Reforms between 1906 - 1914 saw little benefit

for most. Workers did NOT benefit - condition, wages, price increases (bread). 1912 Lena goldfields in Siberia - workers STRIKE, asking for conditions, wages and hours (troops moved in -

170 killed and 373 wounded) STRIKES - 1911 to 1914 on the rise. Profits made in industry were going to capitalists, or they were used to pay off loans to banks in France.

Other concerns led to discontent with Nicholas: Relations between the Tsar and his people worsened. There was a downturn in the economy by 1912 - unemployment and hunger on the rise - Industry

concentrated on the war effort leaving many shortages. Celebrations in 1913 for 300 years of Romanov rule were overshadowed by problems. Government tried to get support by discriminating against Jews, Muslims and other minorities. Capitalists also worried about the appointment of some ministers by Tsar.

When the war was not going well, the Tsar had put himself in personal command of the armies. In September 1915 he went to the army HQ at Mogilev. This took him away from governing leaving it in the hands of his wife.

Nicholas was then personally blamed for defeats.

When Nicholas handed over control of the government to the Tsarina there were problems: She was mistrusted because of her German background She would NOT work with the Duma and dismissed able ministers (this left no one organising food, fuel or

supplies to cities, and food rotted in train stations). Her reputation was damaged because of her relationship with Rasputin (he seemed to be in charge of the

government and Concern grew at the influence of Rasputin over the Tsarina). Lost support of all in society - workers, middle class, aristocracy (whose sons were the commanding officers

in a dreadfully planned and supplied war)..

There was discontent and strikes, and they wanted the Tsar to end the war. Increasing numbers were losing faith in the ability of the Tsar to rule thecountry, including nobles.

Rasputin was murdered in December 1916 by Prince Felix Yusupov and Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich

There was a revolution in 1917which led to the final days of the Tsar. 40,000 workers from the Putilov engineering works in Petrograd went on strike. Thousands of women marched on International Women’s Day demanding food. The Tsar ordered demonstrations to be forcefully ended but Soldiers (March 12) joined the strikers and

women, marched to the Duma demanding it take control.

Petrograd Soviet was set up and took control of food supplies and set up soldiers’ committees to undermine officers.

Nicholas tried to get back to Petrograd but railway workers refused his train - he abdicated on March 15, 1917.

77 Describe the attempts made to reform the government of Russia between 1905 and 1914. (4)

BE CAREFUL ABOUT THIS QUESTION. IT”S ASKING ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT so focus on the creation and effect of the Duma. If you are asked aboutreforms in Russia, make sure to talk about Stolypin’sreforms.

The Duma was set up in 1906 (as promised in the 1905 October Manifesto). The first two Dumas (1906 and 07) made demands for more power, rights for ordinary people (free to

strike, free education), more land given to peasants. Nicholas passed the FUNDAMENTAL LAW, which meant that the first two Dumas could not pass laws,

appoint ministers, control finance in important areas (defense), elections favoured the nobles (2,000 /90,000), and the tsar could dissolve them anytime.

PM Peter Stolypin made changes to the election laws. He made sure to exclude national minorities and dramatically reduced the number of people who could vote (namely in Poland, Siberia, the Caucasus and in Central Asia).

The new electoral law also gave better representation to the nobility and gave greaterpower to the large Land owners (harming the peasants).

The Third Duma met on 14th November 1907. The former coalition of revolutionary parties were now out-numbered by nationalists who supported the Tsar.The Third Duma (1907 - 1912) was given morefreedom and openness. People could share in political life and debate important issues. The Tsar no longer had total power.

In the Fourth Duma the nationalists were still in the majority but there had been an increase in the number of radicals elected.

STOLYPIN’S REFORMS: He reduced terrorism and revolutionary activity; and promotedRussification He used the Carrot and Stick approach.

Carrot (incentive) - tried to win over peasants and made land available to prosperous ones, focused on industrial progress and impressive economic growth was realized between 1908 - 1911.

Stick (severe punishment) - brutal suppression of opposition, was hardon strikers, protestors and revolutionaries, exiled over 20,000, over1,000 hanged

He focused on peasants and reforming land issues: He encouraged the ‘best elements’ to buy up strips of land from neighbors. Peasants’ Banks - set up to provide loans to peasants to buy up land KULAKS - rich peasants who owned their own land and animals; they benefited from Stolypin’s land reform

policies and were very loyal to the government. As a result, production levels improved; record harvest of grain production in 1913

Russian industry improved dramatically too between 1906 and 1914: Boom - production increased by 100% and a new wealthy middle class emerged. Became world’s 4th largest producer coal, pig iron and steel (Baku oil fields) Factories used up-to-date mass production methods and health insurance was introduced. Populations in major cities (M, St. P, Kiev and Baku) soared. Factories were more efficient - 2/5 of factories had at least 1,000 workers

78Why did Russia do so badly in the First World War? (6) For many reasons: Use PPQ #76, but focus on the military and government. It lasted a long time and Russia was NOT led effectively or properly prepared. All of Russian society were affected - workers, peasants, soldiers, nobility and government.

Food shortages (harsh winters in 1916, 17), conscription (fewer farm workers), fewer trains carrying food to cities and inflation.

Shortages of coal and industrial materials - factories closed (unemployed, cold and hungry), newer businesses went bankrupt (more unemployed) and protests / strikes rose.

Prices rose, longer working hours, sale of vodka stopped. Confidence in the government was lost - economic and political effects of war caused extreme hardships. The government was not united in the war effort - Duma leaders were frustrated by the Tsar’s refusal to appoint a

representative government that would unite the war effort. Large numbers of Russian soldiers were killed in the war - Losses mounted rapidly (by December 1914 over one

million Russians were killed, wounded or taken prisoner - 8 million by March 1917). Heavily defeated at Tannenberg and MasurianLakes. Slaughtered - many died without weapons, ammunition or even boots. Morale was low.

When the war was not going well, the Tsar had put himself in personal command of the armies. He went to the army HQ at Mogilev. This took him away from governing leaving it in the hands of his wife.

Nicholas was then personally blamed for defeats.

When Nicholas handed over control of the government to the Tsarina there were problems: She was mistrusted because of her German background She would NOT work with the Duma and dismissed able ministers (this left no one organising food, fuel or

supplies to cities, and food rotted in train stations). Her reputation was damaged because of her relationship with Rasputin (he seemed to be in charge of the

government and Concern grew at the influence of Rasputin over the Tsarina). Lost support of all in society - workers, middle class, aristocracy (whose sons were the commanding officers

in a dreadfully planned and supplied war).

79‘It was the failure of the Russian royal family which brought about revolution in March 1917.’ Do you agree? Explain your answer. (10)

It was extremely important, but there were many other factors that led to the March Revolution. Here are some important factors:

Ruling Family - Ideas, methods, priorities of Nicholas and the Tsarina and association with Rasputin WWI Failure of reforms - most never benefited from reform attempts Revolutionary groups constantly sought to undermine (strikes) and overthrow Nicholas (Socialist

Revolutionaries and Social Democrats).• The Romanov’s had ruled Russia for over 300 years. They were autocratic rulers and had the authority

and power to make changes. Nicholas II was the leader in 1917 and never learned to correct the problems Russians faced in the 23 years of his reign.

• Nicholas regularly rejected requests for reform and by 1917 it had been years of discontent that finally exploded.

• He was an ineffective ruler – couldn’t concentrate on the business of being Tsar.• He constantly faced opposition and revolutionary groups, but did not understand the changes Russia was

experiencing.• As their ‘Little Father’ he failed to care for the people of Russia and even used extreme methods to keep

control–Cossacks and the Okhrana.• After promised reforms in the 1905 October Manifesto, most Russians never benefited. • Issues of land, wages and working conditions, prices, representation in the Duma and political rights

continued to haunt Nicholas but he did little to improve living for all.• When the war was not going well, the Tsar had put himself in personal command of the armies. He went

to the army HQ at Mogilev. This took him away from governing leaving it in the hands of his wife.• Nicholas was then personally blamed for defeats and the Tsarina was blamed for problems in the

government. Family reputation was damaged because of their association with Rasputin - especially Nobles worried that

Rasputin brought disgrace to the royal family. Lost support of all in society - workers, middle class, aristocracy (whose sons were the commanding officers

in a dreadfully planned and supplied war). All of these examples led to growing discontent of Nicholas and his family

There were many other factors that led to the 1917 March Revolution: Importance of WWI It was important because it lasted a long time and affected all of Russian society - workers, peasants, soldiers, nobility

and government. Food shortages, conscription, fewer trains carrying food to cities and inflation - agricultural system crumbled due to a

lack of workers. Shortages of coal and industrial materials - factories closed (unemployed, cold and hungry) and strikes - many newer

companies went bankrupt, leading to increased unemployment. Prices rose, longer working hours, sale of vodka stopped.




Heavily defeated at Tannenberg and MasurianLakes. Slaughtered - many died without weapons, ammunition or even boots. Morale was low.

Other reasons:

The Tsar had lost support and earlier reforms had caused discontent. Reforms between 1906 - 1914 saw little benefit for most.

Workers did NOT benefit - condition, wages, price increases (bread). 1912 Lena goldfields in Siberia - workers STRIKE, asking for conditions, wages and hours (troops moved in -

170 killed and 373 wounded) STRIKES - after 1905 decrease. 1911 to 1914 on the rise. Profits made in industry were going to capitalists, or they were used to pay off loans to banks in France.

Other concerns led to discontent with Nicholas: Relations between the Tsar and his people worsened. There was a downturn in the economy by 1912 - unemployment and hunger on the rise - always shortages. Capitalists also worried about the appointment of some ministers by Tsar.

There was discontent and strikes, and they wanted the Tsar to end the war. Increasing numbers were losing faith in the ability of the Tsar to rule thecountry, including nobles.

Rasputin was murdered in December 1916 by Prince Felix Yusupov and Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich

The final steps that led to the March 1917 Revolution ultimately undid any chance the Ruling Romanov family had to regain control:

40,000 workers from the Putilov engineering works in Petrograd went on strike. Thousands of women marched on International Women’s Day demanding food. The Tsar ordered demonstrations to be forcefully ended but Soldiers (March 12) joined the strikers and

women, marched to the Duma demanding it take control. Petrograd Soviet was set up and took control of food supplies and set up soldiers’ committees to undermine

officers. Nicholas tried to get back to Petrograd but railway workers refused his train - he abdicated on March 15,

1917.

80 What were the main political grievances of the Russian people in the early 20th century? (4) Nicholas was an Autocrat and had total power and control. Many wanted rights and freedoms, especially

amongst the middle class liberals. They called for free elections and a parliament (Duma) to voice their opinions and express their will. They called for a constitutional monarchy, designed to force the Tsar to share power. Many wanted civil rights (speech, worship, conscience), especially minorities such as Jews. Because it was a vast empire, there were problems with corruption and slow action in local governments

by ministers and civil servants appointed by the Tsar. People demanded more say in local affairs. The people complained that they were victims and the ‘Little father’ did nothing to help them. The Tsar

used Cossacks and Okhrana to keep control, and their methods were violent. Opposition was outlawed and dissidents were exiled.

81 Why was the revolution of 1905 a failure? (6) Also refer to PPQ #75. The revolution of 1905 seemed to be on the verge of total success but the Tsar took clever action late in

the year to avoid losing power. Describe some of the events of the revolution: Bloody Sunday, strikes in many cities by workers demanding an 8 hr

day, better wages and conditions, humiliating defeats by the Japanese, groups demanding changes and rights, peasants rioting in the countryside and seizing land, sailors on the Potemkin, general strikes spread across cities and opposition groups uniting to cut off control of cities.

Ultimately the revolution failed because the Tsar: Ended the war with Japan in September 1905, eliminating the complaints about war. He signed the October Manifesto - giving the impression that democratic government had been achieved

because he offered a parliament (Duma) elected by the people, civil rights (freedom of speech and conscience), uncensored newspapers and the right to form political parties. This divided his opponents and bought him time for his next move.

Finally, the Tsar brought back all of his soldiers from the war with Japan, secured a loan from France to pay them in full and ordered them to crush all protests, especially in St. Petersburg and Moscow.

Ultimately Nicholas did not allow opposition.Russia was ready for change but he split his opponents. The October Manifesto gave Russian people basic rights and defused the tension across Russia.

Through force and loyal soldiers the government re-established order throughout Russia.

82 By 1914, how successfully had Russia recovered from the 1905 revolution? Explain youranswer. (10)

PPQ #82b. Why was Russia not fully recovered from the 1905 revolution? Explain your answer. (6)

Refer to PPQs #76 and #77. Make sure to explain HOW SUCCESSFUL. To some extent it had recovered because its industrial output and agricultural production levels had improved.

Political progress was made with the Third Duma. It was a period of economic growth but social problems continued - Russia was NOT recovered. SUCCESSFULLY RECOVERED: The Tsar appointed an able minister called Peter Stolypin. He made numerous changes to Russia from 1906 until his

assassination in 1911. STOLYPIN’S REFORMS:

He reduced terrorism and revolutionary activity; and promoted Russification He used the Carrot and Stick approach.

Carrot (incentive) - tried to win over peasants and made land available to prosperous ones, focused on industrial progress and impressive economic growth was realised between 1908 and 1911.



policies and were very loyal to the government. As a result, production levelsimproved; record harvest of grain production in 1913


DUMA - Political Reform There were FOUR Dumas - 1906, 1907, 1907 - 1912, and 1912 - 1916. Although the first two Dumas (1906 and 1907) were not very successful (partly because of the

FUNDAMENTAL LAWS), they did appease the middle class liberals. Once election laws were changed before the Third Duma (1907 - 1912), nobles were pleased because

their representation improved. The Third Duma met on 14th November 1907. The former coalition of revolutionary parties were now

out-numbered by nationalists who supported the Tsar.The Third Duma (1907 - 1912) was given morefreedom and openness. People could share in political life and debate important issues. Accident insurance was even provided for some workers.

In the Fourth Duma the nationalists were still in the majority but there had been an increase in the number of radicals elected.

The Tsar no longer had total power. The people united behind the Tsar when war broke out in 1914. People put patriotism before grievances. The Tsar did SEEM to work more closely with the Fourth Duma at the onset of war.

NOT SUCCESSFULLY RECOVERED by 1914: Even with Stolypin’s reforms, he used the Stick (severe punishment) - brutal suppression of opposition,

was hard on strikers, protestors and revolutionaries, exiled over 20,000, over1,000 hanged (‘necktie’) Many of the 4 million peasants felt misled by the government suggestion to settle along the Trans-Siberian Railway

(but good land was taken up by speculators) and became landless wandering labourers. The population was growing so fast (1.5 million per year) and food production couldn’t keep up - ineffective farming

methods. Stolypin was assassinated in Kiev, Ukraine in September 1911. Most reforms were over.

The Tsar had lost support and earlier reforms had caused discontent. Reforms between 1906 - 1914 saw little benefit for most.

Workers did NOT benefit - condition, wages, price increases (bread) - many newer businesses went bankrupt (leading to more unemployment).

There was a downturn in the economy by 1912 - unemployment and hunger on the rise. 1912 Lena goldfields in Siberia - workers STRIKE, asking for conditions, wages and hours (troops moved in -

170 killed and 373 wounded) STRIKES - 1911 to 1914 on the rise - Profits made in industry were going to capitalists, or they were used to pay off loans to banks in France.

Other concerns led to discontent with Nicholas: The arrival of Rasputin, from 1907, to the royal court led to questions about the Tsar’s ability to rule the

empire. Rasputin was considered by most to be a smelly peasant and drunken sex maniac, hypnotizing, seducing and raping women.

The Tsar and Tsarina’s support and association with Rasputin led to conflict with the Duma, criticism by the middle classes in newspapers and ultimately resentment by the nobility.

Celebrations in 1913 for 300 years of Romanov rule were overshadowed by problems. Government tried to get support by discriminating against Jews, Muslims and other minorities. Capitalists also worried about the appointment of some ministers by Tsar.

83 Describe the events of ‘Bloody Sunday’ in 1905. (4) On Jan 22, 1905, some 200,000 people, including striking workers and their families, gathered at the WinterPalace in

St. Petersburg, organized and led by Father Gapon. In 1903 Gapon formed the Assembly of Russian Workers and had over 9,000 members after a year. He had a reputation

as a just man who called for industrial action and strikes to get help for the poor workers. They carried a petition for Tsar Nicholas asking for his help to seek truth, justice and protection. They said they were impoverished and oppressed, with unbearable work, and felt like slaves. They asked for the Tsar to help them reduce the working day to eight hours and to provide a minimum wage. Out of respect the people were clutching religious icons and singing hymns and patriotic songs (particularly "God

save the Tsar"). The Tsar was not in the Palace as he had left St Petersburg when the first signs of trouble appeared. As demonstrators proceeded towards the Winter Palace they were met by a regiment of soldiers and mounted

Cossacks. Without warning, the soldiers opened fire and the Cossacks charged. It was a decisive day. Although the Tsar had not been present at the Winter Palace at this time, he received the blame

for the deaths, resulting in a surge of bitterness towards himself and his autocratic rule from the Russian people. The Tsar had lost the affection of his people.

In Depth Study - Russia 1905 - 1917 (continued)

84 Why was there a revolution in Russia in 1905? (6) For many reasons. Use PPQ #80 for help. Make sure to add other grievances - like economic ones.

Political Grievances: Nicholas was an Autocrat and had total power and control. Many wanted rights and freedoms, especially

amongst the middle class liberals. They called for free elections and a parliament (Duma) to voice their opinions and express their will. They called for a constitutional monarchy, designed to force the Tsar to share power. Many wanted civil rights (speech, worship, conscience), especially minorities such as Jews. Because it was a vast empire, there were problems with corruption and slow action in local governments

by ministers and civil servants appointed by the Tsar. People demanded more say in local affairs. The people complained that they were victims and the ‘Little father’ did nothing to help them. The Tsar

used Cossacks and Okhrana to keep control, and their methods were violent. Opposition was outlawed and dissidents were exiled.

Other Grievances: The peasants were very dissatisfied - conditions and land The workers had grievances - wages and hours People blamed the Tsar for the war with Japan - worsened condition in cities Middle class were angry that the Tsar wouldn’t share power Government industrial development policies and poor harvests

Examples of Grievances: Relaxed censorship and government run trade unions in 1903 led to an explosion of anti-government propaganda and strikes. The war in 1904 with Japan caused hardship across Russian society. Prices rose in cities. There were

shortages of food and other goods. By 1905 the war was going terribly bad for Russia - protests about the incompetence of the Tsar. An economic slump led to loss of jobs, demonstrations and strikes. Factories closed and workers found

themselves unemployed and hungry. Workers wanted to reduce the working day to eight hours and to have a minimum wage. Peasants had to pay higher taxes. The ‘Bloody Sunday’ massacre in January led to massive demonstrations and anger at the Tsar. As demonstrators proceeded towards the Winter Palace they were met by a regiment of soldiers and

mounted Cossacks. Without warning, the soldiers opened fire and the Cossacks charged. It was a decisive day. Although the Tsar had not been present at the Winter Palace at this time, he

received the blame for the deaths, resulting in a surge of bitterness towards himself and his autocratic

rule from the Russian people.

85 Did the Revolution of 1905 achieve anything for the people of Russia? Explain your answer. (10) See PPQs #74, #76 and #81. To some extent progress was made but ultimately little lasting change was achieved. What the Revolution Achieved: It ended the war with Japan in September 1905. Itforced Nicholas to make concessions - he gave into the Liberals they got what they wanted. It forced Nicholas to issue the October Manifesto on the 30th - OCTOBER MANIFESTO - Promised::

A Parliament (Duma) elected by the people was set up, making Russia a Constitutional Monarchy Civil Rights - freedom of speech and conscience Uncensored newspapers and the right to form political parties The middle classes were pleased because they wanted an end to the revolution.

The Tsar appointed an able minister called Peter Stolypin. He made numerous changes to Russia from 1906 until his assassination in 1911. L

STOLYPIN’S REFORMS: He reduced terrorism and revolutionary activity; and promotedRussification He focused on peasants and reforming land issues: strips of land, Peasants’ Banks, KULAKS Stolypin’s land reform policies created some loyalty to the government.

As a result, production levels improved; record harvest of grain production in 1913 Russian industry improved dramatically after 1905.

Boom - production 100%, wealthy middle class emerged, 4th largest producer coal, pig iron and steel (Baku oil fields), factories used up-to-date methods and health insurance was introduced.

Populations in major cities (M, St. P, Kiev and Baku) soared and factories were more efficient.

1905 REVOLUTION NOT ACHIEVED: Ultimately Nicholas did not allow opposition. Russia was ready for change but he split his opponents. The October Manifesto gave Russian people basic rights and defused the tension across Russia. Through force and loyal soldiers the government re-established order throughout Russia.

The loyalty of the military would ultimately dictate the authority of Nicholas. There were FOUR Dumas - 1906, 1907, 1907 - 1912, and 1912 - 1916. The first two Dumas (1906 and 1907) were not very successful, only appeasing opponents. The first two Dumas made demands for more power, rights for ordinary people (free to

strike, free education), more land given to peasants BUT it could not pass laws, appoint ministers, control finance in important areas (defense), elections favoured the nobles (2,000 / 90,000), and the tsar could dissolve them any time.

Prime Minister Peter Stolypin made changes to the election laws before the Third Duma (1907 - 1912). He made sure to exclude national minorities and dramatically reduced the number of people who could vote (namely in Poland, Siberia, the Caucasus and in Central Asia).

Because of election laws, the former coalition of revolutionary parties were now outnumbered by nationalists who supported the Tsar.

Even with Stolypin’s reforms, he used the Stick (severe punishment) - brutal suppression of opposition, was hard on strikers, protestors and revolutionaries, exiled over 20,000, over1,000 hanged (‘necktie’)

Many of the 4 million peasants felt misled by the government suggestion to settle along the Trans-Siberian Railway (but good land was taken up by speculators).

Stolypin was assassinated in Kiev, Ukraine in September 1911. Most reforms were over.

Reforms after 1906 saw little benefit for most. Workers did NOT benefit - condition, wages, price increases (bread). There was a downturn in the economy by 1912 - unemployment and hunger on the rise. 1912 Lena goldfields in Siberia - workers STRIKE, asking for conditions, wages and hours (troops moved in -

170 killed and 373 wounded) STRIKES - 1911 to 1914 on the rise. Profits made in industry were going to capitalists, not workers.

86 Describe the events of the March 1917 revolution. (4) Final steps to 1917 March Revolution: The Tsar had lost support. The Tsar ignored lessons from 1905. There was mutiny in the army.

The Tsar had lost support of his soldiers and generals, and finally accepted that mutiny had spread through his army - the armed forces began to mutiny, refusing orders to fire on demonstrators.

The people wanted improvements in their conditions. The Tsar had lost the support of his people.

His military blunders destroyed any belief that he was able to run the country. They were unhappy as he would not recognise their suffering from extreme hunger - peasants were rioting in

the countryside and seizing land 40,000 workers from the Putilov engineering works in Petrograd went on strike. Thousands of women marched on International Women’s Day demanding food. Soldiers (March 12) joined the strikers and women, marched to the Duma demanding it take control.

A wave of strikes broke out in March which the Tsar was unable to crush. The Duma leaders were frustrated at the Tsar’s refusal to appoint a representative government and they

gained control of the soldiers. Petrograd Soviet was set up and took control of food supplies and set up soldiers’ committees to

undermine officers. Nicholas tried to get back to Petrograd but railway workers refused his train. Nicholas II abdicated on March 15, 1917 and over 300 years of Romanov rule in Russia ended.

87. Why did the Provisional Government of Kerensky lose support in Russia? (6) Russia had serious problems (food, fuel, better conditions, and government). At first the Provisional Government took ‘easy’ action - freed political prisoners, freedom of the press, freedom of

speech, right to strike, ended discrimination. The Provisional Government always saw itself as a temporary body with limited power and limited influence because

of the Soviet (Petrograd). It did not act on the three BIG issues because it waited for an elected government to make the tough decisions. Three of the most important issues to the people (War, Land and Food) were not solved by the P.G. Conditions

worsened throughout 1917. The P.G. continued the war and the offensive vs Germany in July 1917 was a disaster. Soldiers, sailors and workers

turned against the P.G. (July Days). Kerensky sends in soldiers to crush the revolt, and is then made the Prime Minister at the end of July. Punishment brigades were sent to the countryside to stop peasants from seizing land - peasants HATED the

Provisional Government even more. Soldiers deserting from the army - trying to get back to villages to get a share of the land - military control and

discipline collapsed. No basic services - cabs and carriages - were available. Police and order disappeared in Petrograd (robberies were

common). The people gave up on the P.G. Food was rationed in the cities - price rose and long lines with complaining Russians. The Kornilov Revolt (Sept 1917) was another example that the P.G. was not successful or popular. When Kerensky

turned to the Bolsheviks, he confirmed the P.G.’s weakness and made the Bolsheviks seem to be heroes, and an alternative to the government.

No group in Russia was well enough organised or led to take over from the P.G. until Lenin returned in October 1917. Then the Bolsheviks had the organisation, leadership, determination and opportunity to overthrow the P.G.

Lenin was a charismatic leader who generated support easily.

88. How far was the Bolshevik seizure of power in 1917 a ‘people’s revolution?’ Explain your answer. (10) To some extent: The majority of the population was peasants and they remained angry at the Provisional Government. Workers and soldiers lost faith in the P.G. and turned to the Petrograd Soviet and Bolsheviks for support. BUT - the Bolsheviks were in fact a minority party (November elections proved that). The Bolsheviks used the Sovnakom (Council of People’s Commissars) to issue decrees in November and

December to support the ‘people’ (land handed over to peasants, asked for peace with Germany,8 hrwork day, 48hr week, rules made about overtime and holidays, workers insurance ).

By December all non-Bolshevik newspapers banned, opposition Constitutional Democratic Partybanned and Its leaders arrested, the Cheka (secret police) set up to deal with ‘spies and counter-revolutionaries’,factories put under control of workers’ committees and banks put under Bolshevik government control.

The Bolsheviks claimed to represent the people but had to use force, control of vital cities (Petrograd and Moscow) and dissolved the Constituent Assembly in January 1918.

89. Why did workingmen want to present a petition to the Tsar on 22 Jan 1905? (6) Use PPQs 83 and 84.

For many reasons: Workers faced extremely poor conditions. Workers wanted to improve working conditions, increase wages, join legalized trade unions and improve

living conditions.' The government had tried to set up approved trade unions but the workers wanted free unions. Workers were angry at the humiliating defeats suffered in the war with Japan. The peasants were desperately poor and many had little money to buy food. In the towns workers suffered long hours under dangerous conditions for little pay. Towns were overcrowded and many workers slept on factory floors - others lived in overcrowded shared

accommodation. Finally, the rule was oppressive - opposition groups were dealt with by the Okhrana through torture,

imprisonment and execution.'

90. ‘The Tsar learned nothing and the people gained nothing from the 1905 revolution.’ Do you agree?Explain your answer. (10) Use PPQs 81 and 84. To some extent. Because of 1905 the Tsar made some cosmetic changes but continued to lose respect of the people - riots

and strikes followed. The Tsar realised he had to make concessions and issued the October Manifesto. This promised a

constitutional monarchy and elected parliament - he hoped to appease his middle class opponents - but unrest continued and the people became more coordinated:

The Constitutional Democrats and Peasants' Union were established. Workers established the St. Petersburg Soviet - but this was broken up and the leaders sent to Siberia.'

By this Manifesto the Tsar had split the opposition but he had acted in bad faith as he was determined to get back power as soon as he could.

There were hopes that the peasants’ lives would improve. When the first Duma met they made demands for further concessions, the Tsar simply dissolved it. People who objected were treated repressively - like before. The Third Duma gave more freedom and openness - for the first time people could share in political life and

the Duma could debate important issues. The Tsar seemed to be losing total power - so he appointed Stolypin as Prime Minister and he dealt severely

with any uprisings through Field Courts for Civilians. The turning point for the Tsar was WWI: In time the Tsar dismissed all his chief advisers and relied solely

on his wife and Rasputin, whilst he went to lead his troops at the front.

91. Describe the reforms of Stolypin (1906 – 1911). (4)91b. How did Stolypin’s (1906 – 1911) reforms make a difference in Russia? (6)

STOLYPIN’S REFORMS: He reduced terrorism and revolutionary activity; and promoted Russification He used the Carrot and Stick approach.

Carrot (incentive) - tried to win over peasants and made land available to prosperous ones, focused on industrial progress and impressive economic growth was realised between 1908 and 1911.



policies and were very loyal to the government. As a result, production levels improved; record harvest of grain production in 1913


92. Why was there growing discontent in Russia between 1914 and 1917? (6) Russia fought in WWI from 1914 to 1917. The events of the war were EXTREMELY important. It was important because it lasted a long time and negatively affected all of Russian society - workers, peasants,

soldiers, nobility and government. Food shortages, conscription, fewer trains carrying food to cities and inflation - agricultural system crumbled due to a

lack of workers. Shortages of coal and industrial materials - factories closed (unemployed, cold and hungry) and strikes - many newer

companies went bankrupt, leading to increased unemployment. Prices rose, longer working hours, sale of vodka stopped.




Heavily defeated at Tannenberg and Masurian Lakes. Slaughtered - many died without weapons, ammunition or even boots. Morale was low.

Other reasons: The Tsar had lost support and earlier reforms had caused discontent. .

Capitalists also worried about the appointment of some ministers by Tsar. There was discontent and strikes, and they wanted the Tsar to end the war. Increasing numbers were losing faith in the ability of the Tsar to rule the country, including nobles.

Rasputin was murdered in December 1916 by Prince Felix Yusupov and Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich The final steps that led to the March 1917 Revolution ultimately undid any chance the Ruling Romanov family had to

regain control: 40,000 workers from the Putilov engineering works in Petrograd went on strike. Thousands of women marched on International Women’s Day demanding food. The Tsar ordered demonstrations to be forcefully ended but Soldiers (March 12) joined the strikers and

women, marched to the Duma demanding it take control. Petrograd Soviet was set up and took control of food supplies and set up soldiers’ committees to undermine

officers. Nicholas tried to get back to Petrograd but railway workers refused his train - he abdicated on March 15,

1917.

93. How important was Lenin in bringing about revolution to Russia in October 1917? Explain. (10) Vital! Very important, but there were many factors that contributed to the October Revolution. After the Tsar, Russia was weak and vulnerable - so many problems. Lenin was the leader of the Bolshevik party and the force behind the Bolshevik seizure of power - plan, charisma,

determination, influence, key support from Petrograd and Moscow (workers and soldiers). He had been exiled from Russia but was powerful enough to take control of the Bolsheviks when he returned. The Bolsheviks were NOT that influential until September, 1917 (Congress of Soviets and Kornilov). Lenin was very influential and gave inspiring speeches (charismatic). His April Thesis set a course for the direction Russia should take and helped Bolsheviks gain supporters, and damaged

the credibility of the Provisional Government. The Bolsheviks did NOT attempt to take control UNTIL Lenin returned and convinced them to do so - he argued with

them all night. Use the Sources on pages 48 - 49. Other Factors:

Weaknesses of the Provisional Government (PG). Core issues NOT dealt with - Peace, Bread and Land. Economic issues:

Inflation grew worse than in 1914.There was shortage of food, fuel and raw materials, which meant that prices rose.Low wages for workers.

Opposition groups not organised or led confidently. No political rights and too much inequality.

The role of Leon Trotsky. The WAR! Kornilov Revolt. NEED TO CONTINUE …

94. Describe the Bolshevik seizure of power in November 1917. (4) The Bolsheviks were surprisingly able to seize power with little resistance. Had their headquarters in Petrograd at the Smolny Institute. Bolsheviks did not hide their intentions - newspapers and leaflets. Early on November 7th small groups of Bolsheviks Red Guards took control of bridges, main telegraph

office, railway stations, power station and the State Bank. Resistance was minimal - shops and factories were open. Kerensky was unable to gather troops to resist the Bolsheviks and left the city with American assistance. Bolsheviks moved toward the Winter Palace (P.G.) - Cossacks left and only resistance were cadets and

Women’s Death Battalion. Naval ship Aurora supported Bolsheviks. Cadets and P.G. Ministers gave up. Bolsheviks had Petrograd.

In Depth Study - Russia 1917 - 1921

95. Why did Civil War break in Russia after the Bolshevik seizure of power? (6) The war was fought from 1918 - 1921 for a number of reasons: There were two main sides fighting – 1) Whites (anti-communists – including: Greens,

Foreigners [Brits, French, USA, Japan, Czechs and Slovaks], and 2) Reds (Bolsheviks or Communists). The Bolsheviks were the minority party and angered opponents when Lenin shut down the democratically

elected Constituent Assembly in January 1918 with Red Guard soldiers. When Lenin and the Communists took power many were willing fight against them. Some were angered by the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (harshness) and Russia’s withdrawal from WWI

(especially allies and military leaders) - they were called the WHITES. Some did not want Communism to spread - especially allies, tsarists and middle class constitutional

democrats. Some wanted the Tsar to return to power or a military dictator in power to deal with the collapse of order in

Russia. Some wanted a Constitutional Government, like the one elected in November 1917, to represent Russia. Overall, all most wanted to defeat the Bolsheviks/Communists.

96. To what extent was Lenin a great leader? Explain your answer. (10) There are three main interpretations of Lenin:

Praised for achievements - created the USSR out of WWI and Civil War. Seen as a tyrant who seized power to experiment with Marxism, and inflicted terrible suffering on the Russian

people. An able leader with good intentions, who created a dictatorship based on terror.

A modest man without personal ambition. Was a good, persuasive speaker. Excellent leadership qualities. He made the November 1917 Revolution happen. Had superb organising skills. Had good political judgment and adapted to changing circumstances. He used the Cheka and terror to win the Civil War, but allowed more freedom after 1921 (NEP).

NEGATIVE: He created a dictatorship - seized power with a small group without the support of most of the population. He would not share power - Socialist Revolutionaries had won the Constituent Assembly elections in Nov

1917. He used terror to stay in power - Cheka, Red Terror (arrested, shot and sent to labour camps). He was willing to see millions of Russians suffer for his ideals - Marxism into practice. He stopped opposition - censorship, trade unions outlawed and workers forced to stay in cities. He made the Communist Party and organisation for carrying out his orders.

97. Describe War Communism. (4) War Communism was the name given to the harsh economic measures the Bolsheviks adopted during the

Civil War.It had two main aims: The first aim was to put Communist theories into practice by redistributing (sharing out) wealth among the

Russian people. The second aim was to help with the Civil War by keeping the towns and the Red Army supplied with food

and weapons. All large factories were taken over by the government. Production was planned and organised by the government.

Discipline for workers was strict and strikers could be shot. Peasants had to hand over surplus food to the government. If they didn’t, they could be shot. Food was rationed. Free enterprise became illegal – all production and trade was controlled by the state. War Communism achieved its aim of winning the war, but in doing so it caused terrible hardship. Peasants refused to co-operate in producing more food because the government simply took it away. This

led to food shortages which, along with the bad weather in 1920 and 1921, caused a terrible famine (estimates suggest that 7 million Russian people died in this famine).

In February 1921 Bolshevik policies sparked a mutiny at Kronstadt naval base - Trotsky’s troops put down the uprising, but soon afterwards Lenin abandoned the emergency policies of War Communism.

98. Explain why the Bolsheviks were successful in the Civil War, 1918 – 1921. (6) The Bolsheviks had many advantages over their opponents, the Whites and Greens. Trotsky built up the Red Armyusing conscription, added over 300,000 men, and used 50,000 fanatical

Bolsheviks as Commissars The Red Army was united, disciplined and brilliantly led by Trotsky. The Bolsheviks also kept strict control over heartlands in western Russia. They made sure that the towns and armies were fed, by forcingpeasants to hand over food and by

rationing supplies. They took over the factories of Moscow and Petrograd so that they wereable to supply their armies with

equipment and ammunition. The Checka used the Red Terror and intimidated the population - made sure that nobody in Bolshevik

Territoriesco-operated with the Whites (many beatings, hangings and shootings of opponents). Trotsky was personally courageous - and used his special train to coordinate attacks, move troops quickly

andcreatepropaganda that the Whites committed atrocities. Finally, the Reds had important territorial advantages. Their enemieswere spread around the edge of

Russia while they had internal lines of communication. This enabled them to move troops quickly and effectively by rail, while their enemies used less efficient methods.

Their opponents had a number of disadvantages: Lacked good leaders(cruel and disrespectful) Yudenich, Denikin and Kolchak had different aims, did not trust each other and never coordinated attacks. Armies foughtwith each other. Whites were portrayed bythe Communistsas foreign CAPITALISTS while theCommunistswere the

defenders ofRussia.

99. ‘Lenin’s New Economic Policy (NEP) was a success.’ How far do you agree with this statement? Explain. (10) To a large extent the NEP was a success. Russia had suffered for many years and the NEP brought badly needed relief.

Features of the NEP: In March 1921 Lenin announced a new policy he called - New Economic Policy (NEP)to replace WarCommunism.

The NEP effectively brought back capitalism for some sections of Russian society. Grain requisitioning was stopped. Peasants would pay tax on what they produced and were allowed to sell

surplus grain for profit rather than giving it up to the government. Traders could buy and sell goods. Small factories were handed back into private ownership and private trading of small consumer goods

(shoes and clothes) was allowed. Lenin made it clear that the NEP was temporary and that the vital heavy industries (coal, oil, iron and steel)

would remain in state hands. Under NEP food production had risen steeply by 1925. The NEP saw Russia use technological innovations and modernise with electric power (Electrification). An Anglo-Soviet trade agreement in 1921 marked the beginning of increased trade with the West - western

goods exchanged for Russian oil. The NEP lasted until 1928 and Russia did become more prosperous - partly be attributed to a period of stability.

DISADVANTAGES: The cost of manufactured goods remained high and peasants could notafford them. Many peasants remained poor using outdated equipment. Many peasants remained poor and used backward methods of farming Nepmen were targeted for their profits and luxurious lifestyle. Industrial workers were better off but unemployment remained high. By 1926 the economy had reached pre-1914 levels but massive investment was needed to turn the Soviet

Union into a modern industrial country - which led to Stalin’s harsh policies of the 1930s. The introduction of non-communist ideas had upset some and they wanted a return to more socialist

methods of running the country. Political divisions within the Communist party developed and many leaders of the revolution suffered

(Kamanev, Zinoviev and Trotsky).100. How far did the NEP prove that the Bolsheviks had failed to establish a Communist state in Russia?

Explain your answer. (10) To some extent: The NEP reflected non-communist ideas - in fact it was based on capitalist principles. Introduced by Lenin in 1921 to replace the harsh War Communism - it lasted until 1928. Business people encouraged to start up shops and small factories. Peasants were encouraged to produce more food. Goods were available, disaster was averted as the ‘NEP was a return to capitalism. Capitalism and a free market had to be brought back if disaster was to be avoided. An example was where

business people were not only allowed to start up shops and small factories but were allowed to make a profit. Goods began to emerge on sale and a new class of profiteers (NEPmen) emerged.

State control was relaxed and peasants were allowed to make a profit on what they produced. This was the incentive to produce more food.

For many communists this was a bitter humiliation but they realized their survival depended on it. The NEP did NOT prove failure because the Communists kept power. The state controlled major industries and transport system. Lenin argued that so long as the Soviet government controlled the major industries, the transport system,

the banks and foreign affairs, it still controlled the whole economic system. He argued that NEP in Russia would become socialist Russia and theUSSR was firmly established in 1922. Lenin used the argument that for communism to be successful they would need to take two steps forward

and one step back. The NEP was a backward step that overall allowed them to move forward.

In Depth Study - Russia 1921 - 1941 101. How did Stalin become the leader of the Soviet Union? (6)

Stalin became leader for many reasons. Stalin was very clever in his ability to manipulate opponents - he used people and then ditched them. The main contenders were - Leon Trotsky, Nikolai Bukharin, Grigori Zinoviev, Andrei Rykov, Leon Kamenev

Mikhail Tomsky and the least likely, Josef Stalin. He was clever and took advantage of the positions he held in the communist party.

He was General Secretary of the Communist party and had put many supporters in top Party posts to guarantee support.

Stalin was also the beneficiary of many mistakes by the other contenders, namely Leon Trotsky. He played one group against the other. Stalin was underestimated by the other contenders. Stalin put himself forward as a great friend of Lenin, such as appearing as chief mourner at Lenin’s funeral. He tricked Trotsky into missing Lenin’s funeral.

Trotsky and other opponents made mistakes: Trotsky seriously underestimated Stalin. Trotsky’s ideas were too extreme for many as he wanted permanent revolution whereasStalin’s policy was

socialism in one country was widely favoured. He was arrogant and often offended other senior party members. He failed to take the opposition seriously - he made little effort tobuild up any support within theparty. Trotsky also frightened many people in the USSR with his calls for ’permanent revolution’. Trotsky fell ill late in 1923 when Lenin was dying, and Trotsky needed to be at his most active. He was also the victim of a trick by Stalin about Lenin’s funeral - telling Trotsky it was on the 26th of

January, when it was in fact on the 27th. Trotsky was away in the south of Russia and did not appear at the funeral whereas Stalin appeared as chief mourner and Lenin’s closest friend.

Lenin’s warning about Stalin was ignored because of the jealousy of most communist leaders felt towards Trotsky.

Stalin, Zinoviev and Kamenev accused Trotsky of trying to split the communist party. Stalin then had Zinoviev and Kamenev sacked having accused them of working with Trotsky.

102. Why did Stalin have many people murdered and imprisoned in the 1930s? (Purges) (6).

Stalin became a ruthless dictator of the USSR in the 1930s - for a few different reasons. By the 1930s Stalin had developed the USSR into a TOTALITARIAN state. He believed that he was the ONLY one that could lead and save the USSR - he worried about an attack by

Hitler. Stalin was not prepared to accept challenges to his authority. He feared Kirov and had him murdered and

then used this as an excuse to turn on Zinoviev and Kamenev who eventually were shot. Between 1934 and 1938 Stalin set out to ‘PURGE’ the communist party of people who “might” oppose him.

He carried out “Show Trials” which were broadcast on radio, includedlaughable charges and often accompanied by confessions from prominent communists.

He later focused on common people (doctors, actors, teachers, poets, writers, workers and farmers) who lived in fear at work, in the office, on the farm, on the street and even at home.

He targeted Kulaks because of their opposition to Collectivisation. Stalin’s purge of the military was almost disastrous by 1941. 90% of all Soviet army generals were removed (to

some extent because of Civil War disagreements and loyalty to Trotsky). He later purged the NKVD because they knew of all the atrocities committed under Stalin.

He was insecure and felt threatened. Stalin wanted to deal with those who were thought to be disloyal and those who he had defeated to gain

power. He got the better of Trotsky but feared his enemies would attempt to overthrow him. This was particularly strong

during the terrible violence during the collectivisation and industrialisation campaigns of the early 1930s. He had to make sure that there was no opposition within the USSR to his (Five Year) plans to make the

country economically strong. It was fairly typical for the communist party to carry out purges to remove thosesuspected of being

disloyal. This time it was at the top level of the party. By 1937 it is estimated that 18 million people had been transported to labour camps and 10 million died. By 1938 ALL of the Bolshevik leaders from 1917 had died or been executed (Trotsky was a Menshevik).

103. By 1941, how far was the USSR stronger as a result of Stalin’s policies? (10) The USSR was ready for war in 1941, but Stalin’s policies brought both strength and disaster to the USSR. Stalin was determined to modernize the USSR, which he estimated were 100 years behind the West.

STRONGER: He improved industry and introduced collectivisation. His industrialisation policies, and strong leadership, saved Russiafrom defeat in the Second World War as

planes and tanks were available.Five Year Plans andturned Russia into the second greatest industrial power in the world in just 30years.

Factories and mines developed all over the Soviet Union. Coal and iron production doubled and electric power almost tripled. Over 100 new cities and towns were built from nothing. Huge new steel mills and 1500 new industrial plants built. New dams and hydro-electric power fed industry’s energy. There were advances in education and medicine - enormous numbers learned to read and write. Ethnic minorities were encouraged to see themselves as Soviet citizens.

By the 30s living standards were beginning to rise very slowly. Collectivisation brought some successes.

Introduced modern methods with tractors and fertilisers to farming. Set up Kolkhoz (collective farm run by peasants) and Sovkhozes(collective farm run by the State) Grew more food in the 1930s and bred more cows and pigs. More food production freed up more workers for industrial projects.

WEAKER: He was, however, ruthless in his quest.

The Soviet Union was certainly transformed but could this have been achieved by other, less drastic measures. The use of targets in the Five Year Plans produced quantity at theexpense of quality. There were not

enough skilled workers. Theworkers had no rights and were subjected to harsh discipline. Many deaths and accidents - 100,000 died building the Belomor Canal. Focus on heavy industry meant that there were few consumer goods. Most state housing was overcrowded - families. Wages actually fell between 1928 and 1937.

Collectivisation was not successful despite the terrible upheaval production levels failed to reach those of pre-1914 despite new machinery.

He caused the death of millions of people during collectivisation and the purges. He got rid of some of the Soviet Union's best brains - thinkers, writer, artists - people who could have

produced brilliant work in manyfields.

He destroyed the Communist Party by turning it into an organization for carrying out his orders. He got rid of old Communists who might have been able to steer theSoviet Union towards a more humane form

of socialism. He was responsible for 30 years of terror and fear turning Russia into a totalitarian state.

104. Explain why Stalin introduced the Purges. (6) Stalin became a ruthless dictator of the USSR in the 1930s and introduced the purges for a few different

reasons. By the 1930s Stalin had developed the USSR into a TOTALITARIAN state. He believed that he was the ONLY one that could lead and save the USSR - he worried about an attack by

Hitler. Stalin was not prepared to accept challenges to his authority. He feared Kirov and had him murdered and

then used this as an excuse to turn on Zinoviev and Kamenev who eventually were shot. Between 1934 and 1938 Stalin set out to ‘PURGE’ the communist party of people who “might” oppose him.

He carried out “Show Trials” which were broadcast on radio, includedlaughable charges and often accompanied by confessions from prominent communists.

He later focused on common people (doctors, actors, teachers, poets, writers, workers and farmers) who lived in fear at work, in the office, on the farm, on the street and even at home.



He was insecure and felt threatened. Stalin wanted to deal with those who were thought to be disloyal and those who he had defeated to gain

power. He had got the better of Trotsky but feared his enemies would attempt to overthrow him. This was particularly

strong during the terrible violence during the collectivisation and industrialisation campaigns of the early 1930s. He had to make sure that there was no opposition within the USSR to his (Five Year) plans to make the

country economically strong. It was fairly typical for the communist party to carry out purges to remove thosesuspected of being

disloyal. This time it was at the top level of the party. By 1937 it is estimated that 18 million people had been transported to labour camps and 10 million died. By 1938 ALL of the Bolshevik leaders from 1917 had died or been executed (Trotsky was a Menshevik).

105. ‘Stalin was a disaster for the Soviet Union. Do you agree with this statement? Explain. (10) From PPQ #103. Stalin was determined to modernize the USSR, which he estimated were 100 years behind the West.

SUCCESS: He improved industry and introduced collectivisation. His industrialisation policies, and strong leadership, saved Russiafrom defeat in the Second World War as

planes and tanks were available. Five Year Plans and turned Russia into the second greatest industrial power in the world in just 30years.

Factories and mines developed all over the Soviet Union. Coal and iron production doubled and electric power almost tripled. Over 100 new cities and towns were built from nothing. Huge new steel mills and 1500 new industrial plants built. New dams and hydro-electric power fed industry’s energy. There were advances in education and medicine - enormous numbers learned to read and write. Ethnic minorities were encouraged to see themselves as Soviet citizens.

By the 30s living standards were beginning to rise very slowly. Collectivisation brought many successes. USE PPQ #110.

Introduced modern methods with tractors and fertilisers to farming. Kolkhoz (collective farm run by peasants) and Sovkhozes(collective farm run by the State) Grew more food in the 1930s and bred more cows and pigs. More food production freed up more workers for industrial projects. By 1940 agricultural production was beginning to exceed 1928 levels.

FAILURE: He was, however, ruthless in his quest. By the 1930s Stalin had developed the USSR into a TOTALITARIAN state.

The Soviet Union was certainly transformed but could have been achieved by less drastic measures. The use of targets in the Five Year Plans produced quantity at theexpense of quality. There were not



He caused the death of millions of people during collectivisation and the purges. Between 1934 and 1938 Stalin set out to ‘PURGE’ the communist party of people who “might” oppose

him and SHOW TRIALS, which included laughable charges and often accompanied by confessions from prominent communists, were broadcast on radio,

He got rid of some of the Soviet Union's best brains - thinkers, writer, artists - people who could have produced brilliant work in many fields. During the period from 1934 to 1938 common people (doctors, actors, teachers, poets, writers, workers and

farmers) lived in fear at work, in the office, on the farm, on the street and even at home of being arrested.Independent thinking was destroyed (Cult of Stalin / Personality).

Stalin’s purge of the military was almost disastrous by 1941. 90% of all Soviet generals were removed. He destroyed the Communist Party by turning it into an organization for carrying out his orders.

Of the 1,961 members at the 17th party congress in 1934, 1,108 were arrested. Of the 139 Central Committee members in 1934, 90 were killed. Of the 11 POLITBURO members in 1934, 5 were killed.

He got rid of old Communists who might have been able to steer the Soviet Union towards a more humane form of socialism.

The education system was geared to Stalinist propaganda – exaggerating his role in the Revolution with Lenin.

Religious worship was banned – making way for loyalty and worship of Stalin. He was responsible for 30 years of terror and fear turning Russia into a totalitarian state.

By 1939 it is estimated that over 20 million were sent to labour camps and 12 million died.

106. What part did Leon Trotsky play in the Bolshevik Revolution to 1925? (4) Trotsky played an extremely important part. Some saw him as the real leader of the Russian Revolution. Lenin did keep rather in the background, not speaking often, not writing much, but largely engaged in

directing organisational work in theBolshevik camp, whilst Trotsky thundered forth at meetings in Petrograd.

Trotsky was a brilliant speaker and writer, as well as the party’s best political thinker, after Lenin. Trotsky was also the man who had organised the Bolshevik Revolution and convinced Lenin to wait two weeks before

taking control of Petrograd. Trotsky built up the Red Army and was seen as the hero the Civil War as the courageous leader. Finally, he was the man who negotiated peace for Russia with the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. Trotsky promoted his policy of‘Permanent Revolution’ -to help spread communism by revolution in other

countries by providing money and agents. He wanted to end the NEP and bring more socialist ways to the Soviet economy. 1924 Lenin’s death - Trotsky did not attend because he was tricked by Stalin. 1924 Stalin, Kamenev and Zinoviev join together to dominate thePolitburo, and cut off Trotsky and

Bukharin. 1925 Trotsky was sacked as War Commissar.

107. Why was Stalin able to become dictator of Russia by 1929? (6) Stalin became leader for many reasons. Stalin was very clever in his ability to manipulate opponents - he used people and then ditched them. The main contenders were - Leon Trotsky, Nikolai Bukharin, Grigori Zinoviev, Andrei Rykov, Leon Kamenev

Mikhail Tomsky and the least likely, Josef Stalin. He was clever and took advantage of the positions he held in the communist party.

He was General Secretary of the Communist party and had put many supporters in top Party posts to guarantee support.He was also Commissar of Nationalities, gaining many supporters.

Stalin was also the beneficiary of many mistakes by the other contenders, namely Leon Trotsky. He played one group against the other. Stalin was underestimated by the other contenders. Stalin put himself forward as a great friend of Lenin, such as appearing as chief mourner at Lenin’s funeral.

He tricked Trotsky into missing Lenin’s funeral. Trotsky and other opponents made mistakes: Trotsky seriously underestimated Stalin. Trotsky’s ideas were too extreme for many as he wanted permanent revolution whereas Stalin’s policy was

socialism in one country was widely favoured. He was arrogant and often offended other senior party members. He failed to take the opposition seriously - he made little effort tobuild up any support within theparty. Trotsky also frightened many people in the USSR with his calls for ’permanent revolution’. Trotsky fell ill late in 1923 when Lenin was dying, and Trotsky needed to be at his most active. He was also the victim of a trick by Stalin about Lenin’s funeral - telling Trotsky it was on the 26th of

January, when it was in fact on the 27th. Trotsky was away in the south of Russia and did not appear at the funeral whereas Stalin appeared as chief mourner and Lenin’s closest friend.

Lenin’s warning about Stalin was ignored because of the jealousy of most communist leaders felt towards Trotsky.

Stalin, Zinoviev and Kamenev accused Trotsky of trying to split the communist party. Stalin then had Zinoviev and Kamenev sacked having accused them of working with Trotsky.

108. ‘Stalin only kept control in Russia by oppression and the elimination of opponents.’Do you agree? Explain. (10)DISAGREE: Stalin kept control with many harsh methods, and certainly by oppressing and eliminating opponents, but

his methods were diverse and creative manipulation. Stalin used economic development, agricultural reform, propaganda,arts, censorship and personality cult,

education and youth movements. Stalin’s modernization of the USSR brought him a lot of support from common people in the USSR and he

was seen as their saviour - a man of the people. Although collectivisation was extremely harsh on most, it gave Stalin support from many peasants.

Stalin used propaganda to create a view of himself. Radio, films and newspapers were allcontrolled by the state. Pictures and statues of him helped in the creation of the ‘cult of Stalin’ - towns were named after him and he was

given credit for everything. Artists were forced to produce work which glorified the achievements of Soviet workers, peasants or of the

Revolution and Stalin’s role in it (this art was called Socialist Realism).

Education was changed. History was rewritten and books were changed ordestroyed. Children were taught that Stalin was the ‘Great Leader’ - they learned Stalin’sversion of history. As old communists were purged their pictures were pasted out of textbooks. Young people were trained in Socialism - taught political ideas through activities such as sports.

OPPRESSIVE METHODS: (Checka / NKVD, purges / show trials, terror, labour and prison camps, executions). Stalin was leader of a totalitarian state - there were no human rights. People were sent to the camps in Siberia and often dealt with without trial.

Millionswere imprisoned in labour camps (gulags) often on suspicion - 3million by 1939. Theywere sent there if they were thought to be a threat - and did not have court trials. Theywere forced to do hard manual work with little food throughout the Russian winter.

There was no freedom of speech and censorship was strong. The press and radio were heavily controlled. Failures were not discussed, only successes. Most Soviet citizens were NOT allowed to travel to other countries. Christian leaders were imprisoned and churches closed down. Under the new constitution of 1936 the Communist Party kept control of centralgovernment and of each

republic.

The Cheka (called the NKVD by 1934) was used to destroy opponents. They were used to hunt down and destroy opponents and terrorise ordinary people into obedience

Stalin used the purges and the show trials - he was not prepared to accept challenges to his authority. (ie. Kirov, Zinoviev and Kamenev were all murdered).

Between 1934 and 1938 Stalin set out to ‘PURGE’ the communist party of people who “might” oppose him. He carried out “Show Trials” which were broadcast on radio, includedlaughable charges and often accompanied

by confessions from prominent communists. Of the 1,961 members at the 17th party congress in 1934, 1,108 were arrested. Of the 139 Central Committee members in 1934, 90 were killed. Of the 11 POLITBURO members in 1934, 5 were killed.

He later focused on common people in the Great Terror (doctors, actors, teachers, poets, writers, workers and farmers) who lived in fear at work, in the office, on the farm, on the street and even at home.



Stalin wanted to deal with those thought to be disloyal and those who he had defeated to gain power. By 1937 it is estimated that 18 million people had been transported to labour camps and 10 million died. By 1938 ALL of the Bolshevik leaders from 1917 had died or been executed (Trotsky was a Menshevik).

109. Who were the kulaks? What was a kolkhoz? What were sovkhoz?(4) Kulaks wereprosperous peasants that owned small farms, tools and animals. They had been encouraged to buy up land and maximize production when Stolypin was organizing land

reforms before 1914. Under Stalin they were targeted and blamed for anything that went wrong in an attempt to use class hatred

to build support for collectivization. Many Kulaks slaughtered their animals, and destroyed their crops and machinery rather than turn them over

to collectives. Stalin resorted to harsh measures - many Kulaks were hanged, sent to poor farming areas and others sent

to gulags (prison work camps). Kolkhoz- collective farms (Collectives) where peasants joined their plots to form larger state run farms. The government provided them with tractors, and all animals and tools were pooled together. The government told the Kolkhoz what to grow and then bought a fixed amount - peasants were paid a

share of the profits and were allowed to keep a small plot of land to grow their own food. Sovkhozes- collective farm run by the Statewhere workers drew wages, like they would in industry. ‘Hoz’ farms were organized by the state, but ‘Toz’ farms were owned by peasants who shared machinery.

110. Why did Stalin introduce collectivism? (6) Collectivisation was the process introduced by Stalin when all land and farms were put together and run

By a committee. All animals, tools, and produce of the farm were shared, while produce would be sold to thestate (90%) at a low price and, in return, the state would provide agricultural machinery to improveefficiency.10% of

produce was used to feed the farmers (kolkhoz). THE BASICS:

The population was growing and needed to feed its workers. Stalin needed to raise money for his industrialization programme - sell surplus food. Agriculture was backward - introduce new machinery and methods. Collectivisation was the Socialist way to farm land.

Farming methods were outdated and not producing enough food - collectivization made farming efficient. The inefficient farming methods were not producing enough food for theworkers in the cities and if the USSR was

to industrialise successfully even more workers would have to be fed. The population of the industrial centres was growing rapidly and the country was already 2 million tons short of

the grain it needed to feed its workers. Farming had to start using more machinery as the number of farm workers would decline as peasants went to

work in the factories. Collectivisation fitted in with socialist principles of common ownership.

Collectives made it easier to introduce new machinery and methods. To deal with the kulaks - Dekulakisation.

Stalin wanted to control the countryside and the peasants, particularly thericher peasants called the kulaks, whom he disliked.

The government wanted a surplus to sell abroad in order to make the money it needed to spend on developing industry.

If Stalin controlled the countryside he could fix the price of food and this would help to keep the wages of the industrial workers down.

111. How far was Stalin’s policy of collective farming successful? Explain. (10) There were successes from collectivization but ultimately it had many failures. Collectivisation was the process introduced by Stalin when all land and farms were put together and run

By a committee. All animals, tools, and produce of the farm were shared, while produce would be sold to thestate (90%) at a low price and, in return, the state would provide agricultural machinery to improveefficiency.10% of

produce was used to feed the farmers (kolkhoz). THE BASICS:

The population was growing and needed to feed its workers. Stalin needed to raise money for his industrialization programme - sell surplus food. Agriculture was backward - introduce new machinery and methods. Collectivisation was the Socialist way to farm land.

SUCCESSES: Introduced modern methods with tractors and fertilisers to farming. Grew more food in the 1930s and bred more cows and pigs. More food production freed up more workers for industrial projects. Kulaks were gone by 1934 and by 1941 Stalin had his collective farming.

Stalin had what he wanted - agriculture under his control. FAILURES:

Peasants resisted and many refused to cooperate - many slaughtered their animals, and destroyed their crops and machinery rather than turn them overto collectives.

Stalin resorted to harsh measures - many Kulaks were hanged, sent to poor farming areas and others sent to gulags (prison work camps) and violence was grim and bitter.

In March 1930 Stalin put a temporary halt to the policy. There was a serious decline in agricultural output from 1928 - 1933 (grain harvest, # of cattle and 3 of pigs) Food shortages in early 1930s - USSR never admitted or asked for int’l aid. Requisition parties came and took the food required by the government, often leaving peasants to starve . Food production fell and there was a famine in 1932–1933 - millions died, even in Kazakhstan and Ukraine

(USSR’s ‘bread basket’). It’s estimated that 13 million peasants died as a result of collectivisation. It took until 1941 to get Soviet production levels back to those of 1928. Even in WWII many Soviet farmers welcomed German troops because of their hate for Communist control.

112. How successfully did Stalin reform agriculture? Explain.(6) See PPQ # 110 - above.

113. What were the advantages of collective farming? (4) Introduced modern methods with tractors and fertilisers to farming.

Farms were made large enough to use machinery and modern methods. It improved efficiency - grew more food in the 1930s and bred more cows and pigs. More food production freed up more workers for industrial projects. It increased production of cheap grain (which kept the grain price low) to feed industrial workers and tosell

for export. Stalin had what he wanted - agriculture under his control - to sell produce for hardcurrency - and enabled

him to control the peasants. By 1940 agricultural production was beginning to exceed 1928 levels. Since 1933 it has avoided famine in the Soviet Union. Collective farming achieved political goals because it was the Socialist way to farm land.

114. Why was collectivization opposed by many peasants? (6) Most peasants got nothing from collectivization. Collectivisation was the process introduced by Stalin when all land and farms were put together and run

By a committee. All animals, tools, and produce of the farm were shared, while produce would be sold to thestate (90%) at a low price and, in return, the state would provide agricultural machinery to improve efficiency. 10% of produce was used to feed the farmers (kolkhoz).

PROBLEMS IT CAUSED: It left many peasants starving - because they had to meet their quota for the state many of the

peasants were starving. They lost their wealth, land, animals, tools and equipment - richer peasants (Kulaks) would have to give up

all their wealth they had acquired for an equal share in the profits of a collective farm. It was compulsory - peasants resisted and many refused to cooperate - many slaughtered their animals,

and destroyed their crops and machinery rather than turn them over to collectives. Stalin resorted to harsh measures - many Kulaks were hanged, sent to poor farming areas and others sent

to gulags (prison work camps) and violence was grim and bitter. It was an attempt to stir up hatred between different classes of peasants.

Requisition parties came and took the food required by the government, often leaving peasants to starve. Food production fell and there was a famine in 1932–1933 - millions died, even in Kazakhstan and Ukraine

(USSR’s ‘bread basket’). It’s estimated that 13 million peasants died as a result of collectivisation. It did not make things better - changes did not necessarily improve the situation with agriculture

remaining in depression for most of the 1930s.

115. What were the ‘show trials’ of the 1930s? (4) The ‘show trials’ were part of the Purges of the 1930s. Stalin purge his opponents within the Communist party - he was not preparedto accept challenges to his

authority. Between 1934 and 1938 Stalin carried out ‘Show Trials’which were broadcast on radio, includedlaughable

charges and often accompanied by confessions from prominent communistsin public. Trials were staged for the benefit of the media and used as political propaganda. There was no real evidence put forward. Confessions were usually obtained by torture.

The trials gave Stalin an opportunity to get rid of the old Bolsheviks that he viewed as rivals. The important show trials included Zinoviev and Kamanev in 1936 and Bukharin and Rykov in 1938.

116. Why did Stalin carry out Purges in the 1930s? (6) From PPQ #102 - same answer.

117. Had Stalin made the USSR a stronger country by 1941? Explain. (10) From PPQs #103and #105- similar examples.

118. Describe the main features of Stalin’s first Five Year Plan. (4) Five Year Plans - a series of plans designed to develop vital areas of the Soviet economy with ambitious

targets in specific time periods. The FIRST FIVE YEAR PLAN (1928 - 1932) emphasised heavy industry - coal, iron, steel, oil and electricity -

to lay the foundation for future industrial growth. Stalin’s had three main reasons for developing industry:

To provide the machinery (tractors) to mechanise farming and produce more food. Industrial independence - to make Russia less dependent on western industrial good. To develop a strong industry capable of producing arms for defense.

Targets (set by GOSPLAN) were ambitious and unrealistic, but remarkable results were achieved - coal and iron productiondoubled and electric power almost tripled. Each factory, refinery or foundry and mine was set its own targets. Managers could be prosecuted if targets were not met.

The USSR was rich in natural resources so whole cities were built from nothing (over 100) and workers taken out to the new industrial centres in remote areas like Siberia.

Huge new steel mills appeared at Magnitogorsk in the Urals and Sverdlovsk in central Siberia - 1500 new industrial plants built.

New dams and hydro-electric power fed industry’s energy requirements.

FYI - SECOND and THIRD FIVE YEAR PLANS: Second Five Year Plan (1933 - 1937) Built on the achievements of 1st 5 year plan and still focused on heavy industry. Other areas were also developed - mining for lead, tin, zinc and other minerals intensified as Stalin further

exploited Siberia’s rich mineral resources. Transport and communications were also boosted - new railways and canals were built, and the most

spectacular was the Moscow underground railway The production of tractors and other farm machinery increased dramatically, helping agriculture. Third Five Year Plan (1938 - 1941) Some factories were to switch to the production of consumer goods. As war approached, more resources were put into developing weapons. However, this plan was disrupted by the

Second World War.

118b. What was Magnitogorsk? (4)• It was called the “city near the magnetic mountain” on the Siberian side of the Ural Mountains. • It had huge reserves of iron ore and a steel plant was build. • The workforce typically had few industrial skills and little industrial experience. To solve these issues, foreign

specialists arrived to direct the work.• Planners aligned living and production spheres so workers would live in a sector closest to the sector of the industrial

band in which they worked.• It was Russia’s model steel town according to Stalin’s Five-Year-Plans of the 1930s, producing over 10 million tons of

cast iron by 1934, and over 15 million tons after 1937. • Stalin used it to develop his industry, provide the USSR with iron ore for production and used it as PROPAGANDA to

promote industrialisation.

119. How successful was Stalin in modernizing the Soviet Union by 1941? Explain. (10) To some extent Stalin was very successful in modernizing the Soviet Union by 1941, but his methods

caused great hardship for the people of the USSR. Stalin began his modernization when he ended the NEP in 1928. SUCCESSFUL: Stalin was determined to modernize the USSR, which he estimated were 100 years behind the West. The Five-Year Plans made the Soviet Union the second greatest industrial power in the world. He improved industry and introduced collectivisation. His industrialisation policies, and strong leadership, saved Russiafrom defeat in the Second World War as

planes and tanks were available. Five Year Plansand turned Russia into the second greatest industrial power in the world in just 30years.

Factories and mines developed all over the Soviet Union. Coal and iron production doubled and electric power almost tripled. Over 100 new cities and towns were built from nothing. Huge new steel mills and 1500 new industrial plants built. New dams and hydro-electric power fed industry’s energy. There were advances in education and medicine - enormous numbers learned to read and write.

By the 1930s living standards were beginning to rise very slowly. Even Stalin’s own words reveal successes of the Five Year Plans - he was quoted in 1932 saying:

We did not have an iron and steel industry. Now we have one. We did not have a machine tool industry. Now we have one. We did not have a modern chemicals industry. Now we have one. We did not have a big industry for producing agricultural machinery. Now we have one.

Collectivisation brought many successes. USE PPQ #110. Introduced modern methods with tractors and fertilisers to farming. Grew more food in the 1930s and bred more cows and pigs. More food production freed up more workers for industrial projects. By 1940 agricultural production was beginning to exceed 1928 levels.

FAILURE: He was, however, ruthless in his quest.

The Soviet Union was certainly transformed but could have been achieved by less drastic measures. The use of targets in the Five Year Plans produced quantity at theexpense of quality. There were not



He caused the death of millions of people during collectivisation and the purges. He got rid of some of the Soviet Union's best brains - thinkers, writer, artists - people who could have

produced brilliant work in manyfields. He destroyed the Communist Party by turning it into an organization for carrying out his orders.

He got rid of old Communists who might have been able to steer theSoviet Union towards a more humane form of socialism.

He was responsible for 30 years of terror and fear turning Russia into a totalitarian state.

120. Describe the ‘Great Terror’. (4) It was period during the 1930s when Stalin sought to eliminate ‘perceived’ enemies and secure his control. He targeted Kulaks because of their opposition to Collectivisation. It started with the trials of Zinoviev and Kamenev in 1936. Both were shot. It was followed by show trials in 1937– 1938 when old Bolsheviks admitted a variety of

imaginary crimes against the state. Most were found guilty and shot, although a few cheated Stalin’s plans by committing suicide.

In 1937, Stalin turned against the generals of the Red Army. It is estimated that 90% were executed forsupposedly plotting against Stalin and overall, 40,000 officers executed.

Stalin then turned on the general population, focusing on managers, officials, scientists and engineers. He later purged the NKVD because they knew of all the atrocities committed under Stalin. It is estimated that 1 million were executed and another 2 million died in labour camps, but

official Soviet records show that at least 700,000 people were executed during the Great Terror.

121. Why did Stalin introduce a new Constitution in 1936? (6) Stalin likely did it for a number of reasons, all of which were to strengthen his power and control. Maybe he wanted to give the impression of a more democratic constitution. Stalin was shown to be popular to the world by near unanimous votes. This was introduced to convince Soviet citizens and the outside world that the people of the USSR lived in a

‘free’ society and had universal human rights. It allowed people to vote by secret ballot to choose members of the national assembly known as the

Supreme Soviet – but in fact the democracy was an illusion because the elections held every four years were notcompetitive. There was only one candidate to vote for in each constituency and it was the Communist Party candidate.

In practice, all the power lay in Stalin’s hands and the new constitution merely confirmed it.

122. The Purges were more effective than the cult of personality in allowing Stalin to control the Soviet Union.How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (10)

Both were used by Stalin to control the USSR. Once the Purges were complete, Stalin ‘recreated the history of the revolution’ and his role in it through the ‘Cult of Stalin.’

There is no doubt that terror was effective, and both the Purges and the ‘cult of Stalin’ helped Stalin controlthe USSR.

The media was controlled by the state and the Purges removed opponents. Stalin held show trials, resulting with millions being sent to labour camps / gulags.

The Purges Stalin was not prepared to accept challenges to his authority and he planned to purge the top of the Party

membership to clear out his opponents. He targeted Kulaks because of their opposition to Collectivisation. It started with the trials of Zinoviev and Kamenev in 1936. Both were shot. It was followed by two show trials in 1937– 1938 when old Bolsheviks admitted a variety ofimaginary crimes against

the state. Most were found guilty and shot, although a few cheated Stalin’s plans by committing suicide. In 1937, Stalin turned against the generals of the Red Army. It is estimated that 90% were executed for

supposedly plotting against Stalin and overall, 40,000 officers executed. Stalin then turned on the general population, focusing on managers, officials, scientists and engineers. He later purged the NKVD because they knew of all the atrocities committed under Stalin. It is estimated that 1 million were executed and another 2 million died in labour camps, but official Soviet records

show that at least 700,000 people were executed during the Great Terror.

The cult of personality Stalin used propaganda to create the ‘cult of Stalin’ in which he was worshipped as aleader. Pictures and statues of him were everywhere and places named after him. Atmeetings, people had to clap when his name was mentioned. The state told people what to think - Radio, films and newspapers were all controlled by the state. Schools taught communist versions of history and science, and all praised Stalin.

123. The peacemakers of 1919–23 coped successfully with the problems they faced. How far do you agree with this statement on the treaties made with the defeated powers? Explain your answer. (10)

The peacemakers included the Big Three, as well as officers and diplomats working for the foreign ministers of the Allied powers.

Coped Successfully: At the time it was likely the best that could be achieved. The message had to be sent to aggressive powers that punishments would be severe and the TOV

accomplished that - and could have been harsher. The ‘other’ four treaties –Treatyof St. Germain,1919; Treaty of Neuilly, 1919; Treaty of Trianon, 1920; and the Treaty

of Sevres, 1920 - were not negotiated by the Big Three but by officers and diplomats working with the foreign ministers of the Allied powers.

Many think a reasonable job was done as the problems faced were very complex withstrong demands for the Treaty to be even harsher against Germany as Germany had forced a much harder peace on Russia under the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.’

In the Armistice, the Germans agreed to reductions in their armed forces, losses of territory and the principal of reparations. They should not have been surprised when these were included in the peace treaty.

Many at the time thought it was about right. A more generous treaty would not have been acceptable to the people of Britain and France who wanted compensation for loss of lives and damage.

DID NOT Cope SUCCESSFULLY: You could argue that the treaties failed to deal with the problems and war broke out again in 1939, with the

treaties acting as long-term causes. The treaties also failed to encompass the Fourteen Points, especially SELF DETERMINATION. The treaties also failed the countries of central Europe and left defeated countries very bitter and

determined to get revenge. This is particularly true of Germany where Hitler gained support to overthrow the Treaty. The treaties failed in Central Europe as they created too many states of minority nationals, thus weakening and

making Czechoslovakia, Poland and Yugoslavia vulnerable to attack. Turkey was treated unfairly to satisfy France, Britain and Greece, and the Treaty of Sèvres only lasted three

years before it was replaced by the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923. The Treaty punished the ordinary German people rather than those responsible. Many thought it would have been

better to keep Germany relatively happy and as a buffer against CommunistUSSR. It was wrong to put the sole blame on Germany as other countries had followed aggressiveimperialism

including Britain and France. Sharing the blame was likely the fairest approach.

Gosplan - the state planning agency set up in 1921 for the development of the Soviet economy by setting ambitious targets, especially in vital heavy industries of coal, iron, steel, oil and electricity.Planned for investment to create future wealth and expansion, including in agriculture.

Stakhanovites- workers who were praised and used as role models because of astounding feats of production during the Five Year Plans. The image of Stakhanovites was constantly bombarded through propaganda, posters, slogans and radio broadcasts to motivate workers to meet strict targets. Many were fined if they did not meet them.

Gulag - Prison/labour camps used to enforce Stalin’s agricultural, economic, social and political plans. Prisoners were sent to camps where there were extremes of temperature, harsh discipline, shortages in food and often a shortened life expectancy.

- WordPress.com … · Web view10.07.2013 · These are not answers. They are outlines that can...

Documents

Transcript of - WordPress.com … · Web view10.07.2013 · These are not answers. They are outlines that can...