World History

Core content: Option B - 2147

The twentieth century: international relations from 1919

The Core content in Option B focuses on six key questions:

1. Was the Treaty of Versailles fair?

2. To what extent was the League of Nations a success?
3. How far was Hitler’s foreign policy to blame for the outbreak of war in Europe in 1939?
4. Who was to blame for the Cold War?
5. How effectively did the United States contain the spread of communism?
6. How secure was the USSR’s control over Eastern Europe, 1948–c.1989?

Compiled & Generated by Muhammad

©️ Copyright Muhammad – All Rights Reserved Fair Use Only

1. Was the Treaty of Versailles fair?
Introduction
The Treaty of Versailles, signed on June 28, 1919, ended World War I. The fairness of the treaty has been a topic of
debate among historians. Here are some arguments for and against its fairness:

Arguments for the Fairness of the Treaty of Versailles:

1. Some believed that Germany was only claiming inability to meet the terms to escape punishment.
2. The treaty punished the defeated countries but also gave them the opportunity to recover.
3. Some people believed it wasn’t harsh enough, especially the French, who were worried Germany would
soon recover enough strength to challenge France again.
4. In 1918, Germany itself had made a treaty with defeated Russia, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, that was much
harsher than the Versailles Settlement.
5. Germany had already agreed to pay reparations in the Armistice of November 1918.
6. At the time, the First World War was the most devastating conflict the world had seen, and people saw it as
the right thing for losing nations to be punished in this manner.
7. ‘History is written by the victors,’ as the saying goes. In most wars it is common for the losers to agree to a
harsh settlement.
8. There were problems with the peace settlement, but the war had a huge impact on the geography of
Europe. The peacemakers had to act quickly before the region became unstable so they did the best job they
could.

Arguments Against the Fairness of the Treaty of Versailles:

1. Some people, particularly in Germany, but also British politicians like J M Keynes, felt the Versailles
Settlement was unfairly harsh.
2. They had expected it to follow Wilson’s 14 Points, but it differed from these significantly.
3. They didn’t believe Germany should accept the blame for the war.
4. They felt it was a revenge treaty, designed to make the Germans suffer.
5. Many people feared it would lead to another war once Germany had recovered enough to take revenge.
6. Six million Germans were displaced and had to live in other countries, despite Wilson’s principle of self-
determination2.
7. The German people felt the treaty was a ‘diktat’, a dictated peace, because they were not allowed to have a
say at the conference.
8. Germany was hugely affected economically by the war and felt it would never recover from the scale of
reparations.
9. The Treaty of Lausanne undermined any arguments about fairness regarding the Versailles Treaty.

In conclusion, the fairness of the Treaty of Versailles is subjective and depends on one’s perspective. While some argue
that it was just, others contend that it was overly punitive and sowed the seeds for future conflict.
Government Officials Drafting the Terms of the Treaty of Versailles.
Focus Points
What were the motives and aims of the Big Three at Versailles?
The “Big Three” at the Treaty of Versailles were David Lloyd George of the United Kingdom, Georges Clemenceau of
France, and Woodrow Wilson of the United States. Each had different motives and aims:

1. David Lloyd George (United Kingdom):

• Lloyd George wanted to ensure that the UK had a share in Germany’s colonies and that Germany’s navy
would be reduced.
• He was under pressure from the British public to punish Germany and make it pay for the damages of the
war (reparations).
• However, he also wanted to keep Germany strong enough to be a useful trading partner for the UK.
• He was unhappy with the final Treaty as he thought it was too harsh and that Germany would want revenge.

2. Georges Clemenceau (France):

• Clemenceau wanted to ensure that France was safe from future attack by Germany and so wanted to impose
arms restrictions on it.
• He also wanted to regain the province of Alsace-Lorraine which was on the border between France and
Germany.
• As France had been so heavily damaged by WW1, he was also seeking significant reparations from Germany.
• He thought the final Treaty was not harsh enough in light of how much France had suffered.

3. Woodrow Wilson (United States):

• Wilson wanted to build a better and more peaceful world.

• He put forward his 14 Points for Peace in January 1918 to help promote peace in Europe.
• Some of the main points included: self-determination (i.e., a country’s right to decide its own future),
movement towards disarmament, no secret treaties between countries, freedom of the seas, and setting up
a League of Nations to promote communication between countries.
• He felt it would be best to help Germany re-build and encourage everyone to focus more on peace.
• He was very unhappy with the final Treaty as he felt it was too harsh.

In conclusion, the Big Three had different aims and motives at the Treaty of Versailles, reflecting their countries’
experiences during the war and their visions for the future.
Why did the victors not get everything they wanted?
The victors of World War I did not get everything they wanted from the peace treaties due to a variety of reasons:

1. Different Goals: The Big Three (Clemenceau of France, Wilson of the USA, and Lloyd George of Britain) had
different outcomes in mind regarding the treatment of Germany. Clemenceau wanted a harsh peace, Wilson
a lenient peace, and Lloyd George a relatively moderate peace. These conflicting goals made it virtually
impossible to devise a settlement that would please all parties.
2. Compromises: Specific demands of each of the Big Three were achieved in the Treaty of Versailles, but not
all. For example, Clemenceau achieved the transfer of some of Germany’s former colonies and demands with
regard to Alsace-Lorraine. However, he believed that Germany would recover her strength and seek changes
to the treaty.
3. Failed Guarantees: Clemenceau wanted a Treaty of Guarantee with his Allied partners, which would commit
Britain and the United States to assist France in the event of future German aggression. However, this treaty
failed to materialize because the American Congress refused to approve the peace settlement and Britain
was unwilling to provide any guarantees to France on her own.
4. Disagreements on the Treaty: President Wilson of the USA believed that the terms of the Treaty of Versailles
were overall too harsh on Germany. There were also particular elements of the Versailles Settlement with
which Wilson was less than happy about.
5. Conflicting Demands: There were also conflicting demands from different groups, such as American Zionists
who wanted Palestine for the Jews versus Arab delegates who wanted Palestine for the Arabs.

In conclusion, the complexity of the situation and the differing goals of the victors led to a peace treaty that did not fully
satisfy any of the parties involved.

What was the impact of the Treaty on Germany up to the end of 1923?
The Treaty of Versailles had significant political and economic impacts on Germany up to the end of 1923:

Political Impact:

1. The leaders of Germany’s new Weimar Republic were unhappy about signing the Treaty of Versailles, which
weakened the Weimar government from the beginning.
2. The signing of the treaty undermined the government’s authority and encouraged several political groups to
try and overthrow it.
3. Right-wing politicians supported attempts to overthrow the government, such as the Kapp Putsch in 1920.
4. Weimar politicians, such as foreign minister Walter Rathenau, were assassinated by right-wing terrorists.
5. Left-wing radicals led rebellions and uprisings across Germany, such as the Spartacist uprising in 1919.
6. Many ex-soldiers joined the Freikorps, an anti-communist vigilante group which was involved in the Kapp
Putsch.
7. In the long term, the Treaty of Versailles led to the rise of the Nazis’ extremist policies as it created bitterness
among the German people.
Economic Impact:

1. Germany lost 16% of its coal production, 48% of its iron production, 15% of its agricultural produce, and 10%
of its manufacturing.
2. The reparations amount for Germany was set in 1921 at £6.6 billion.
3. Germany paid the first instalment in 1921, but claimed to be unable to pay in 1922.
4. This resulted in the French invasion of the Ruhr and contributed to hyperinflation in 1923.
5. In January 1923, 80,000 French and Belgian troops marched into the Ruhr, an industrial region of Germany,
and began to confiscate goods.
6. Unable to fight off the French troops with a limited army, the Weimar Republic instructed workers to go on
strike, and printed money to support them.
7. This led to hyperinflation and the German currency became worthless.
8. Hyperinflation in 1923 made money worthless and prices for goods shot up.
9. Meanwhile, violence broke out frequently between French troops and German workers.

In conclusion, the Treaty of Versailles had a profound impact on Germany’s political and economic stability, leading to
political unrest and economic crisis.

Could the Treaty be justified at the time?

The justification of the Treaty of Versailles at the time can be seen from different perspectives:

1. Punishment for Aggression: The Treaty of Versailles, while harsh in its expectations, was justified as
punishment to the Germans, who had caused much destruction and casualties in Western Europe. The
treaty held Germany responsible for starting the war and imposed harsh penalties on the Germans, including
loss of territory, massive reparations payments, and demilitarization.
2. Precedent: The Treaty of Versailles relied on past precedent, all of which was set by Germany. This included
the peace terms handed to Germany after the Franco-Prussian War, which resulted in Germany’s unification
and its seizure of Alsace and Lorraine provinces from France.
3. Idealistic Vision: U.S. President Woodrow Wilson laid out his idealistic vision for the world after World War I
in his famous Fourteen Points. These emphasized the need for national self-determination for Europe’s
different ethnic populations and proposed the founding of a “general association of nations” that would
mediate international disputes and foster cooperation between different nations.

However, it’s important to note that the Treaty of Versailles was controversial. It humiliated Germany and failed to
resolve the underlying issues that had led to the war in the first place. Economic distress and resentment of the treaty
within Germany helped fuel the rise of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party, as well as World War II. Therefore, while the treaty
could be justified from certain perspectives at the time, its long-term consequences were devastating.
Specified Content
The roles of Wilson, Clemenceau and Lloyd George in the peacemaking process
The roles of Wilson, Clemenceau, and Lloyd George in the peacemaking process:

• Woodrow Wilson (USA): Wilson advocated reconciliation and a sustainable rebuilding of Europe. He
proposed the founding of a “general association of nations” that would mediate international disputes and
foster cooperation between different nations.
• Georges Clemenceau (France): Clemenceau wanted Germany to be severely punished to ensure it was too
weak to attack France again. He accepted the League of Nations but believed it would need to be
strengthened to deal with Germany.
• David Lloyd George (Britain): Lloyd George was torn between wanting to build a strong Germany as a
bulwark against communism, and public pressure to ‘Make Germany Pay.’ He was concerned that a harsh
peace settlement would result in a hostile Germany.

The terms of the Treaty of Versailles:

• Germany had to accept full blame for the war, known as the ‘war guilt clause’.
• Germany had to pay reparations for the damage caused by the war.
• Germany lost 13% of its European territory and all its overseas territories and colonies.
• The German army was limited in size.
• The Rhineland had to be demilitarised.

Social, economic, and political impact of the Treaty in Germany to the end of 1923:
• Politically, the Treaty of Versailles led to political unrest in Germany, with several political groups trying to
overthrow the government.
• Economically, Germany lost 16% of its coal production, 48% of its iron production, 15% of its agricultural
produce, and 10% of its manufacturing. The reparations amount for Germany was set in 1921 at £6.6
billion4. This led to hyperinflation in 1923.

Contemporary opinions about the Treaty of Versailles:

• The Treaty of Versailles was disliked on all sides, particularly in Germany.
• Many people felt that Germany should be made to pay for the damage done.
• Some pronounced it ‘history’s most hated treaty’ and blamed it for paving the way for the Second World
War.
• Others argued that the peacemakers did the best they could in difficult circumstances.
2. To what extent was the League of Nations a success?
Introduction
The League of Nations, established after World War I, had both successes and failures in maintaining international peace.

Successes:

1. Conflict Resolution: The League successfully resolved disputes such as the Aaland Islands dispute between
Sweden and Finland, and the Upper Silesia dispute between Poland and Germany.
2. Promotion of Peaceful Negotiations: The League encouraged nations to resolve conflicts peacefully. If one
country would not negotiate, the League would impose 'economic sanctions’.
3. Preventing Wars: Despite its limited power, there were times when the League’s sanctions did avoid major
wars.

Failures:

1. Lack of Enforcement Power: The League did not have its own army. If the offending nation still refused to
obey the League’s will, the League could not stop them.
2. Non-participation of Major Powers: The United States chose not to join the League, preferring to remain an
isolationist state. Germany and Russia were not allowed to join due to their actions in WWI.
3. Mixed Record of Success: The League had a mixed record of success, sometimes putting self-interest before
becoming involved with conflict resolution.

In conclusion, while the League had some successes in maintaining international peace and resolving conflicts, it also had
significant failures. Its lack of enforcement power and the non-participation of some major powers limited its
effectiveness. The League effectively ceased operations during World War II. Its mixed record of success led to the
establishment of the United Nations, which aimed to rectify some of the shortcomings of the League.
Focus Points
How far did weaknesses in the League’s organization and membership make failure
inevitable?
The weaknesses in the League of Nations’ organization and membership significantly contributed to its failure. Here are
some key points:

Organizational Weaknesses:

1. Lack of an Army: The League did not have an army of its own, which meant it had to rely on member states to
donate troops in times of crisis. This lack of enforcement power made it difficult for the League to ensure
compliance with its decisions.
2. Voting System: The League’s decision-making process required unanimous agreement, which often led to delays
and inefficiencies.
3. Lack of Power of the Permanent Court of Justice: The League’s court lacked the power to enforce decisive action
against those who violated the Covenant, a binding agreement for all member states to settle their disputes
peacefully.

Membership Weaknesses:

1. Absence of Key Superpowers: The League’s membership did not include world leaders like the USA. This
undermined the tools it had to punish countries.
2. Reliance on Powerful Countries: The League excessively relied on intervention by powerful victor countries such
as Great Britain and France.

These weaknesses in the League’s organization and membership undermined its effectiveness and credibility, making its
failure almost inevitable. Despite its noble intentions, the League was unable to prevent the escalation of conflicts that
eventually led to World War II. The League’s inability to enforce its decisions, the absence of key superpowers, and its
reliance on powerful countries for intervention were significant factors that contributed to its failure. Despite its noble
intentions, the League of Nations was unable to fulfill its primary purpose of maintaining global peace. This led to the
establishment of the United Nations after World War II, which aimed to rectify some of the shortcomings of the League.

How did the League of Nations respond to Japan's invasion of Manchuria? (Additional Information)
The League of Nations’ response to Japan’s invasion of Manchuria in 1931 was largely ineffectual. Here’s a detailed timeline:

1. Invasion: Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931, using the excuse of anarchy in the region where it had economic interests. Japan
set up the puppet government of Manchukuo.

2. League’s Response: The League took a year to respond. It established a commission to investigate the situation. This
commission, led by British diplomat Lord Lytton, concluded that Japan had effectively staged a coup.

3. Order to Withdraw: The League ordered Japan to withdraw from Manchuria. However, Japan refused to comply with this
order.

4. Japan’s Withdrawal from the League: In response to the League’s order, Japan withdrew from the League of Nations.

5. League’s Inaction: Despite Japan’s refusal to comply with the order, the League did not take any further action.

This incident exposed the League’s lack of enforcement power and the absence of key superpowers in its membership, which significantly
undermined its effectiveness. The League’s failure to protect China against aggression was a major factor leading to its eventual dissolution.
How successful were the League’s attempts at peacekeeping in the 1920s?
The League of Nations had both successes and failures in its peacekeeping attempts during the 1920s.

Successes:

1. Aaland Islands (1921): The League successfully arbitrated a dispute over the Aaland Islands between Sweden
and Finland. Both countries accepted the League’s decision.

2. Upper Silesia (1921): The League intervened in a dispute over Upper Silesia between Poland and Germany. A
plebiscite was held, and the region was divided between the two countries.

3. Memel (1923): The League helped resolve a dispute over the city of Memel. The city was made an
international territory under the League’s control.

4. Turkey (1922): The League set up camps and fed Turkish refugees during the Greco-Turkish War.

5. Greece and Bulgaria (1925): The League helped resolve a minor dispute between Greece and Bulgaria.
Greece obeyed the League’s orders to pull out of Bulgaria.

Failures:

1. Vilna (1920): The League failed to resolve a dispute over Vilna between Poland and Lithuania. The League
ordered Poland to withdraw, but Poland refused, and the League could do nothing.

2. Invasion of the Ruhr (1923): The League was unable to prevent the French and Belgian occupation of the
Ruhr in response to Germany’s failure to pay reparations.

3. Corfu (1923): The League was unable to prevent Italy’s occupation of Corfu. Italy ignored the League’s orders
to pull out of Corfu, and made Greece pay money to Italy.

4. Bulgaria (1925): The League failed to prevent a conflict between Greece and Bulgaria. The League ordered
Greece to withdraw its troops from Bulgaria, but Greece refused.

The League’s successes in the 1920s showed that it could be effective in resolving disputes and maintaining peace.
However, its failures highlighted its lack of enforcement power and the absence of key superpowers in its membership,
which significantly undermined its effectiveness.
How important was the League’s humanitarian work?
The humanitarian work of the League of Nations was quite significant and is often considered one of the areas where the
League was most successful. Here are some key achievements:

1. Social Problems: The League freed more than 200,000 slaves and brought the death rate in the construction of
the Tanganyika railway in Africa from 50% to 4%.
2. Health: The Health Committee, later renamed the World Health Organization (WHO), worked to improve health
around the world. It provided mosquito nets to the most at risk countries, reducing the number of deaths from
malaria per year.
3. Transport: The League made an international highway code that was adopted by many member countries.
4. Refugees: The Refugees Committee worked to bring refugees back to their homes. Over 400,000 war prisoners
were taken back to their homes by the Refugees Committee.
5. Working Conditions: The International Labour Organization campaigned for better working conditions around
the world. Some of its successes include banning poisonous white lead from paint and limiting the hours small
children could work.

These efforts were based on the principle that if people were happy, they were less likely to quarrel and start a war.
However, the League’s humanitarian work was often overshadowed by its failures in preventing conflicts. Despite these
challenges, the League’s humanitarian work laid the groundwork for future international cooperation in these areas.

How far did the Depression make the work of the League more difficult in the 1930s?
The Great Depression of the 1930s significantly impacted the work of the League of Nations, making its tasks more
challenging:

• Economic Impact: The Depression affected attitudes towards international relations, peace, aggression, and the
League of Nations. Members of the League were not keen to impose economic sanctions because they were
worried about losing trade.

• Rise of Extremism: The poverty and unemployment created by the Depression led to support for political parties
that promised extreme solutions, such as the Nazi party in Germany.

• Rise of Militarism: Nations became more likely to use military force to protect their economies and trade. For
example, the Japanese army began to behave more aggressively in 1931.

• Territorial Ambitions: Nations wanted to find new resources and markets to boost their economies. This meant
they were more likely to try and take land belonging to other countries.

• Attitudes towards Armament: The League was committed to disarmament, but also relied on member armies to
help carry out its work. The Depression affected armament in two ways:

o Governments were under pressure to cut spending on armies and weapons. The League’s members
didn’t have the military power to deal with aggressors.

o As a result of the Great Depression, many governments, such as Germany’s, turned to rearmament as a
way of offering more stability and jobs in a time of crisis.

In conclusion, the Great Depression made the work of the League more difficult by changing the political landscape,
impacting economic stability, and altering attitudes towards peace and aggression.
Specified Content
The structure, aims and membership of the League
The League of Nations was structured into five different parts: The Assembly, The Council, The Permanent Court of
International Justice, The Secretariat, and The Special Commissions. Its aim was to foster international collaboration as
well as international peace and security.

Successes and failures in peacekeeping during the 1920s

• Vilna 1920: The League failed to settle the dispute between Poland and Lithuania over Vilna.
• Aaland Islands 1920–21: The League successfully resolved the dispute between Finland and Sweden over the
Aaland Islands.
• Corfu 1923: The League’s actions were unsuccessful in dealing with the dispute between Greece and Italy over
Corfu.
• Bulgaria 1925: The League successfully resolved the dispute between Greece and Bulgaria.

The League’s humanitarian work

• Refugees: The League helped over 400,000 war prisoners return to their homes.
• Health: The Health Committee of the League worked to improve health around the world.
• Working conditions: The League improved working conditions by banning lead from paint and limiting the hours
that small children were allowed to work.
• Slavery: The League freed more than 200,000 slaves.

The League in the 1930s

The League of Nations faced significant challenges in the 1930s, particularly with the Manchurian and Abyssinian crises:

Manchurian Crisis (1931-1932): The crisis began when Japan invaded the Chinese province of Manchuria in 1931. The
League of Nations objected to this invasion, but it could do little in response. When the League supported China’s
sovereignty, Japan left the League in March 1933. This incident marked the dawn of Japanese military aggression in East
Asia.

Abyssinian Crisis (1935-1936): This crisis originated in a dispute over the town of Walwal, which turned into a conflict
between the Fascist-ruled Kingdom of Italy and the Ethiopian Empire (then commonly known as “Abyssinia”). The League
of Nations ruled against Italy and voted for economic sanctions, but they were never fully applied. Italy ignored the
sanctions, quit the League, made special deals with the United Kingdom and France, and ultimately annexed and
occupied Abyssinia after it had won the Second Italo-Ethiopian War.

These crises, along with other factors, led to the discrediting of the League. The world economic depression encouraged
nations to be more aggressive towards each other. Fascist dictatorships took power in Germany, Italy, and Japan, which
were intent on empire-building and these countries defied the League. The League was powerless to stop Germany after
1935. By the time of the Sudeten crisis of 1938, Britain and France were ignoring the League, and were trying
appeasement instead.

These events highlighted the League’s inability to enforce its decisions and maintain peace, leading to its eventual
dissolution and replacement by the United Nations after World War II.
3. How far was Hitler’s foreign policy to blame for the outbreak of war in
Europe in 1939?
Introduction
Hitler’s foreign policy played a significant role in the outbreak of war in Europe in 1939. Here are some key points:

1. Reversal of the Treaty of Versailles: Hitler aimed to undo the Treaty of Versailles, which he blamed for many of
Germany’s troubles since 1918. He rearmed Germany and occupied the Rhineland and Austria, both of which
were forbidden by the Treaty.

2. Unification of German-speaking people: Hitler aimed to unite all German-speaking people into a Greater
Germany12. This led to the Anschluss with Austria and the annexation of the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia2.

3. Lebensraum: Hitler sought to acquire “living space” to the east of Germany. He believed that the Aryan Germans
were racially superior to the Slavs of Eastern Europe and should expand into their lands.

4. Anti-Communism: Hitler was determined to destroy communism and the Soviet Union.

5. Aggressive Expansion: In 1939, Hitler went beyond simply undoing the Treaty of Versailles and began to expand
Germany. On September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland, leading Britain and France to declare war on
Germany.

Historians like Hugh Trevor-Roper argue that Hitler had a long-term plan for the colonization of Eastern Europe and a war
of conquest in the West. Others suggest that Hitler was an opportunist who took advantage of situations as they arose.

In conclusion, while other factors also contributed to the outbreak of war, Hitler’s aggressive foreign policy was a major
factor in the lead-up to World War II. His actions destabilized the balance of power in Europe and made conflict
increasingly likely. However, the extent to which Hitler’s foreign policy is to blame for the outbreak of war can be a
matter of debate among historians.
Focus Points
What were the long-term consequences of the Treaty of Versailles?

The Treaty of Versailles had several long-term consequences:

1. Loss of Territories and Colonies: Germany was forced to surrender colonies in Africa, Asia, and the Pacific, and
cede territory to other nations like France and Poland.
2. Military Restrictions: The treaty reduced the size of Germany’s military, limiting its army to 100,000 men,
banning conscription, and prohibiting the manufacturing of heavy artillery, tanks, and aircraft.
3. War Reparations: Germany was required to pay war reparations to the Allied countries, which placed a heavy
burden on its economy.
4. War Guilt Clause: The treaty included a clause that held Germany responsible for the war, which caused
resentment among the German people.
5. Weakening of the Treaty: The treaty lacked long-term enforcement mechanisms and was further weakened
when the U.S. Congress refused to ratify it.
6. Rise of Fascism: The harsh terms of the treaty and the economic hardship that followed contributed to the rise
of fascism in Germany and ultimately led to World War II.

These consequences had a profound impact on the political and economic landscape of Europe and contributed to the
conditions that led to the Second World War. It’s important to note that while the Treaty of Versailles played a significant
role, other factors also contributed to the outbreak of World War II.

What were the consequences of the failures of the League of Nations in the 1930s?
The failures of the League of Nations in the 1930s had several significant consequences:

1. Undermining of Authority: The failures of the League were not only due to aggressor nations undermining its authority,
but also due to its own members. Britain and France, the two most influential members, ignored the League in their
efforts to appease Hitler.
2. Aggressor Nations Defying the League: Fascist dictatorships took power in Germany, Italy, and Japan, which were intent
on empire-building and these countries defied the League.
3. Withdrawal of Member Nations: When the League supported China’s sovereignty, Japan left the League in March
1933. Hitler announced that Germany was leaving the League in October 1933.
4. Ineffectiveness in Crisis Management: The League was unable to effectively manage the Manchurian and Abyssinian
crises. This inability to act decisively in these crises led to its collapse.
5. Impact on International Relations: The collapse of the League had a big impact on international relations. There was no
longer anyone to police the world, and dictators were free to continue with their aggressive foreign policy.
6. Outbreak of World War II: The failures of the League arguably contributed to the outbreak of the Second World War.

These consequences had a profound impact on the political landscape of the world and set the stage for the events of
World War II.
Was the policy of appeasement justified?
The policy of appeasement, which was primarily pursued by Britain and France in the 1930s, is a topic of much debate
among historians. Here are some arguments on both sides:

Justifications for Appeasement:

1. Sympathy for Germany: Some British and French politicians felt that the Treaty of Versailles had treated
Germany unfairly.
2. Desire for Peace: The horrors of World War I were still fresh in people’s minds, and many were desperate to
avoid another war.
3. Fear of Communism: Some saw the rise of Fascism as a bulwark against the spread of Communism.
4. Time to Rearm: Britain and France were not ready for war in the 1930s. Appeasement bought them time to
rearm.

Critiques of Appeasement:

1. Encouragement of Aggression: Critics argue that appeasement only encouraged Hitler’s aggression.
2. Moral Cowardice: Some argue that Britain and France should have stood up to Hitler’s violations of the Treaty of
Versailles.
3. Failure to Prevent War: Ultimately, appeasement did not prevent World War II.

In conclusion, whether the policy of appeasement was justified or not is a complex issue that depends on one’s
perspective. While it was seen as a viable strategy for maintaining peace at the time, in hindsight, many argue that it may
have emboldened aggressive powers and contributed to the start of World War II.

How important was the Nazi–Soviet Pact?

The Nazi-Soviet Pact, also known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, was a significant event in the lead-up to World
War II. Here are some key points about its importance:

1. Strategic Importance: The pact was concluded only a few days before the beginning of World War II and
divided Eastern Europe into German and Soviet spheres of influence. It allowed Germany to invade Poland
virtually unopposed by a major power, enabling Germany to deal with the forces of France and Britain in
the west without having to simultaneously fight the Soviet Union on a second front in the east.
2. Political Significance: The Soviet Union had been unable to reach a collective-security agreement with
Britain and France against Nazi Germany. By reaching an agreement with Germany, Stalin hoped to keep the
Soviet Union at peace with Germany and to gain time to build up the Soviet military establishment.
3. Economic Impact: The pact committed the Soviet Union to provide food products and raw materials to
Germany in exchange for products such as German machinery for the Soviet Union.
4. Historical Consequences: The pact shocked the world as it represented an unprecedented turn of events,
with the European rivals of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union agreeing not to take military action against
one another for ten years.

In summary, the Nazi-Soviet Pact played a crucial role in shaping the political and military landscape of Europe at
the onset of World War II.
Why did Britain and France declare war on Germany in September 1939?
Britain and France declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939, in response to Hitler’s invasion of Poland. Here are
the key reasons:

1. Invasion of Poland: Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939. This act of aggression was a clear violation
of Poland’s sovereignty and international law.
2. Alliance with Poland: Both Britain and France had alliances with Poland and had pledged to defend it in the
event of an attack. The invasion of Poland by Germany triggered these alliances.
3. Failure of Appeasement: Prior to the invasion, Britain and France had pursued a policy of appeasement towards
Germany, hoping to avoid war by making concessions to Hitler. However, the invasion of Poland demonstrated
that appeasement had failed, leaving them with no choice but to respond militarily.
4. Threat to Balance of Power: The aggressive expansion of Nazi Germany threatened the balance of power in
Europe. Britain and France declared war on Germany to counter this threat and maintain the balance of power.

The state of war was announced to the British public in an 11 AM radio broadcast by the Prime Minister Neville
Chamberlain. This marked the beginning of Britain and France’s involvement in World War II.
Specified Content
• Hitler’s foreign policy aims: Hitler’s foreign policy had three main aims: revising the Treaty of Versailles,
uniting all German-speaking people, and expanding eastwards to achieve Lebensraum (living space) for the
German people.
• Rearmament: Rearmament refers to the process of equipping military forces with a new supply of weapons.
Germany started rearmament almost as soon as Hitler came to power but announced it publicly in 1935.
• The Saar: The Saar region, rich in coalfields, held a plebiscite in 1935 under the terms of the Treaty of
Versailles. The result was that 90 percent of the people voted to rejoin Germany.
• Remilitarisation of the Rhineland: In March 1936, Hitler ordered the German military to march into the
Rhineland, directly contravening the Treaty of Versailles and the Locarno Treaties.
• The Rome–Berlin Axis and the Anti-Comintern Pact: The Rome-Berlin Axis was an agreement
reached in 1936 between Italy and Germany, linking the two fascist countries. The Anti-Comintern Pact was an
agreement concluded first between Germany and Japan in 1936 and then between Italy, Germany, and Japan in
1937, ostensibly directed against the Communist International (Comintern) but, by implication, specifically
against the Soviet Union.
• German and Italian involvement in the Spanish Civil War: Germany and Italy supported the
Nationalists with planes, tanks, and weapons during the Spanish Civil War.
• Anschluss with Austria: Anschluss refers to the political unification of Austria and Germany, which
occurred in 1938.
• The crisis over Czechoslovakia and the Munich Agreement: The Munich Agreement was a
settlement reached in 1938 by Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy that permitted German annexation of
the Sudetenland, in western Czechoslovakia.
• The Polish crisis and the outbreak of war: The Invasion of Poland marked the beginning of World
War II. The German invasion began on 1 September 1939, one week after the signing of the Molotov–Ribbentrop
Pact between Germany and the Soviet Union.
4. Who was to Blame for the Cold War
Introduction
The question of who was to blame for the Cold War is a complex one and has been a topic of debate among historians.
Here are some perspectives:

USA’s Role: Some historians argue that the USA was mainly responsible for the start of the Cold War for several reasons:

• The Marshall Plan, the Truman Doctrine, the policy of containment, and the creation of NATO were seen as
aggressive moves.
• President Truman was openly anti-communist, which caused greater tension.
• The USA didn’t inform the Soviets about their work on developing the atom bomb. The Soviets found out
through their spies and felt betrayed.
• Both sides participated in the nuclear arms race.

USSR’s Role: Other historians argue that the USSR was mainly responsible for causing the Cold War for several reasons:

• Stalin went against some of the promises he made at Yalta, such as occupying Poland and refusing to allow
eastern European countries to have free elections.
• Instead of free elections in eastern Europe, Stalin ensured communist puppet governments gained power. This
was seen as a threat to capitalism.
• The Red Army’s occupation of eastern Europe was seen as a threat, and an attempt to control the whole of
Europe.
• Both sides participated in the nuclear arms race.

Both to Blame: There are also arguments that both the USA and USSR were to blame:

• Leaders were suspicious of each other and lacked trust.

• They were only interested in their own interests.
• They had so many ideological differences they were bound not to get along.
• Both were involved in the Berlin Blockade and Airlift.

Neither to Blame: Finally, some argue that neither was to blame, and that the Cold War was inevitable due to the vast
differences in beliefs.

In conclusion, the blame for the Cold War is not easily attributed to one side or the other, and the truth likely lies
somewhere in between these perspectives. It’s a complex issue with many contributing factors.
Focus Points
Why did the US–Soviet alliance begin to break down in 1945?
The breakdown of the US-Soviet alliance in 1945 can be attributed to several factors:

Strategic Differences: The alliance between the USA and the USSR was primarily strategic, with the main objective being
to defeat Germany. However, the differences between the USA and the USSR started to re-emerge even before the end
of the war1. Both countries were worried about the other nation’s aims, leading to increased fear and suspicion.

Ideological Differences: The USA emerged more powerful from World War Two than the USSR and was concerned by the
spread of communism in Eastern Europe and the Far East. The USA believed that the Soviet leader, Joseph Stalin, wanted
to convert the rest of the world to communism.

Security Concerns: Stalin’s fear of the USA led him to believe that the USSR needed a buffer zone to protect the Soviet
Union from attack by anti-communist countries. The USSR had been invaded twice in the 20th century by Germany, and
Stalin wanted to avoid this happening again1. He believed for security reasons he had to create a barrier against the
West, a barrier made up of communist-run countries in Eastern Europe.

Perceived Aggression: The new president of the USA, Harry Truman, saw Soviet domination of Eastern Europe not as an
act of defense on Stalin’s part, but as an act of aggression1. He was worried that this meant communism would spread
into Western Europe.

In conclusion, the breakdown of the US-Soviet alliance was a result of strategic and ideological differences, security
concerns, and perceived aggression. It marked the beginning of the Cold War era.

How had the USSR gained control of Eastern Europe by 1948?

The USSR gained control of Eastern Europe by 1948 through a combination of strategic and political maneuvers. Here’s a
country-by-country breakdown:

1. Albania (1945): A communist government took power at the end of World War Two.
2. Bulgaria (1946): The Bulgarian monarchy was abolished and later that year a communist government was
elected and gradually eradicated its opponents.
3. East Germany (1945): East Germany was part of the Soviet zone of occupation agreed at the Yalta Conference
and in 1945 the Soviets set up a communist regime.
4. Romania (1945): In the 1945 elections, a communist-led coalition government was elected. The Communists
gradually removed their coalition partners and abolished the Romanian monarchy.
5. Poland (1947): Fearing that a non-communist government would be elected in 1947, Stalin invited 16 non-
communist politicians to Moscow, where they were arrested.
6. Hungary (1948): Although non-communists won the 1945 election, a communist politician, Rakosi, took control
of the secret police and used it to arrest and execute his political opponents.
7. Czechoslovakia (1948): Czechoslovakia was the last country in Eastern Europe to fully fall to communism in 1948.

These actions were part of a broader strategy by Stalin to create a buffer zone between the Soviet Union and Western
Europe. Despite promises made at the Yalta Conference to allow free elections, Stalin had started turning Eastern Europe
into a buffer zone. This was seen as a defensive measure against possible future attacks. However, these actions were
perceived as aggressive by the West, contributing to the onset of the Cold War.
How did the United States react to Soviet expansionism?
The United States reacted to Soviet expansionism primarily through a policy known as “containment”, which was aimed
at preventing the spread of communism. Here are some key events and policies:
Sure, I can provide more details on how the United States reacted to Soviet expansionism:

1. The Long Telegram (1946): George Kennan, an official at the US Embassy in Moscow, sent a telegram to the
American State Department outlining the Soviets’ activities and intentions in Eastern Europe. Kennan’s response
became known as The Long Telegram because at 8,000 words, it was indeed long! The importance of the Kennan
telegram is that it shows that at this point there was still no concept of a Cold War.

2. The Truman Doctrine (1947): President Truman promised that the USA would provide economic and military aid
for any country struggling against ‘oppression’, effectively splitting the world into ‘free’ and 'unfree’. This
doctrine was seen as a direct response to Soviet expansionism.

3. Marshall Aid (1947): The USA provided loans to struggling countries in Western Europe, requiring them to keep
their economic policies in line with the USA. This was seen as a way to prevent these countries from falling under
Soviet influence.

4. The Iron Curtain Speech (1946): Winston Churchill condemned the Soviet expansion in Eastern Europe in his
famous Iron Curtain speech. This speech highlighted the threat of the USSR and made Truman take some form of
action.

5. NATO Formation (1949): The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was formed as a collective defense
alliance against the threat of Soviet expansion. This was another direct response to Soviet expansionism.

6. Containment Policy: The USA committed to a policy of containment, which meant stopping the spread of
communism into Western Europe. The Americans rejected a policy of rollback, which would have been much
more aggressive and confrontational.

These actions were seen by the USSR as aggressive and confrontational, contributing to the tensions of the Cold War.

What were the consequences of the Berlin Blockade?

The Berlin Blockade had several significant consequences:

1. Increased Tensions: The Berlin Blockade was the first case of direct conflict between the US and the USSR, which
greatly increased tensions between the two superpowers.
2. Formation of NATO: The blockade convinced the Western powers that they needed to cooperate militarily with
other Western countries to protect themselves against the threat of the Soviet Union. This led to the formation
of NATO.
3. Division of Germany: In April 1949, the USA, Britain, and France announced the formation of the German
Federal Republic, which officially divided Germany into Western and Eastern blocs.
4. Continuation of Western Presence in Berlin: Another important consequence of the blockade and airlift was the
continuation of Western presence in Berlin. In the long term, this ensured that Berlin continued to be a hotspot
in Cold War relations, facilitating another crisis with the building of the Berlin Wall in 1961.
5. Propaganda War: The airlift was used as propaganda in the USA to claim victory over the East. This solidified the
importance of Berlin in the propaganda war between East and West, which continued throughout the Cold War.
6. Shortage of Supplies: The blockade resulted in a shortage of food and basic goods like fuel and medicines in
West Berlin.
7. Berlin Airlift: The Western powers used airplanes to fly supplies into West Berlin, with one plane landing every
minute at the Berlin airport.
Who was more to blame for starting the Cold War: the United States or the USSR?
The question of who was more to blame for starting the Cold War, the United States or the USSR, has been a subject of
heated debate among historians. Here are some arguments:

Arguments blaming the United States:

1. The Marshall Plan, the Truman Doctrine, the policy of containment, and the creation of NATO were seen as
aggressive moves.
2. President Truman was openly anti-communist, which caused greater tension.
3. The USA didn’t inform the Soviets about their work on developing the atom bomb.
4. Stalin was not consulted over the formation of Trizonia or the adoption of the Deutschmark.
5. Stalin saw the USA’s refusal to leave West Berlin as a threat.
6. Both sides participated in the nuclear arms race.

Arguments blaming the USSR:

1. Stalin went against some of the promises he made at Yalta, such as occupying Poland and refusing to allow
eastern European countries to have free elections.
2. Instead of free elections in eastern Europe, Stalin ensured communist puppet governments gained power.
3. The Red Army’s occupation of eastern Europe was seen as a threat.
4. Comecon, Cominform, and the Warsaw Pact were seen as aggressive moves.
5. The Berlin Blockade was an extremely aggressive act.
6. Both sides participated in the nuclear arms race.

It’s important to note that these are historical interpretations and the question remains a complex and nuanced issue.
Different historians may place different emphases based on their perspectives.
Specified Content
The origins Of The Cold War:
1. The 1945 Summit Conferences and the Breakdown of the US–Soviet Alliance in 1945–46: The Potsdam Conference in
July 1945 marked the breakdown of the US-Soviet alliance. The main objective of the conference was to finalize a post-
war settlement and put into action all the things agreed at Yalta. However, the conference was fraught with
disagreements due to significant changes that had taken place since the Yalta Conference.

2. Soviet Expansion into Eastern Europe to 1948, and American Reactions to It: Despite the promises made by Stalin at
the Yalta Conference to allow free elections, he started turning Eastern Europe into a buffer zone between the Soviet
Union and Western Europe. The USA and its allies saw this as a major concern as it seemed that the hard-won freedom
from Nazi dictatorship was being replaced by communist dictatorships.

3. The Occupation of Germany and the Berlin Blockade: In 1948, coinciding with the introduction of a new Deutsche
Mark in West Berlin, the Soviet occupation forces in eastern Germany began a blockade of all rail, road, and water
communications between Berlin and the West. This led to the Berlin Blockade, an international crisis that arose from an
attempt by the Soviet Union to force the Western Allied powers to abandon their post-World War II jurisdictions in West
Berlin.

4. NATO and the Warsaw Pact: In 1949, the prospect of further Communist expansion prompted the United States and
11 other Western nations to form the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The Soviet Union and its affiliated
Communist nations in Eastern Europe founded a rival alliance, the Warsaw Pact, in 1955. These two alliances formalized
the political division of the European continent that had taken place since World War II.
5. How effectively did the United States contain the spread of
communism?
Introduction
The effectiveness of the United States in containing the spread of communism is a topic of historical debate. Here are
some points to consider:

Successes in Containing Communism:

1. South Korea remained free from communism1.

2. The creation of SEATO made the growth of communism in Asia less likely1.
3. Communism would have spread further in Asia if the USA hadn’t intervened. For example, Japan, Formosa,
Thailand, Burma, and Malaysia didn’t fall to communism1.
4. Cuba no longer posed a significant military threat as Kennedy prevented nuclear missiles from being placed
there.
5. Early attempts at trying to spread communism into Central and South America failed.
6. Marshall Aid and the Truman Doctrine prevented communism from spreading further in Europe, for example
with Greece in 1947.

Failures in Containing Communism:

1. They were unable to contain communism to North Vietnam. Vietnam became, and remained, a united
communist country.
2. Laos and Cambodia also fell to communism.
3. North Korea remained communist.
4. Cuba remained communist.
5. Some communist ideas spread to Central America.
6. Stalin was able to maintain huge influence over eastern Europe, and many eastern European countries became
communist.

Until the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Truman Doctrine generally succeeded in containing Communism to its pre-
1945 borders with exceptions in southeast Asia, Cuba, and Afghanistan. However, the effectiveness of these containment
policies varied, and the impact and legacy of these actions continue to be subjects of debate among historians.
The United States and events in Korea, 1950–53
The Korean War (1950–53) was a significant event during the Cold War, marking the first major
military intervention by the United States to contain communism. Here are some key points:

1. Start of the War: The war began when North Korea, backed by the Soviet Union, invaded
South Korea in June 1950. The United Nations, with the United States as the principal
participant, joined the war on the side of the South Koreans.
2. US Involvement: The United States, under the banner of the United Nations, sent troops to
aid South Korea. The objective was to repel the North Korean invasion and prevent the
spread of communism.
3. China’s Entry: The war reached international proportions when the People’s Republic of
China came to North Korea’s aid. This led to a stalemate, with neither side able to achieve a
decisive victory.
4. End of the War: The fighting ended in July 1953, with an armistice that roughly restored the
original boundaries between North and South Korea. However, no formal peace treaty was
signed, and technically, the two Koreas remain at war.
5. Outcome: Despite the heavy casualties, the United States and its allies were successful in
preventing the fall of South Korea to communism. However, the war also set a precedent for
the United States’ direct military involvement in global conflicts during the Cold War.

In summary, the United States’ involvement in the Korean War was a significant effort to contain
the spread of communism, albeit at a high cost.
The United States and events in Cuba, 1959–62
The events in Cuba from 1959 to 1962 marked a significant period in the Cold War and in US-Cuba relations. Here are
some key points:

1. Cuban Revolution (1959): Fidel Castro, along with a group of guerrilla fighters, successfully revolted against President
Fulgencio Batista, establishing a revolutionary socialist state in Cuba. The United States, which had supported Batista for
his anti-communist stance, quickly severed ties with Cuba and imposed a trade embargo.

2. Nationalization of American-owned Banks (1960): Castro nationalized all foreign assets in Cuba, including American-
owned banks. This move, along with the establishment of trade deals with the Soviet Union, led to increased tensions
between the US and Cuba.

3. Bay of Pigs Invasion (April 1961): The US, under President John F. Kennedy, deployed a brigade of 1,400 CIA-
sponsored Cuban exiles to overthrow Fidel Castro. However, the invasion failed, with the Cuban military defeating the
force within three days.

4. Full Embargo Announced (February 1962): The Kennedy administration imposed an embargo on Cuba that prohibited
all trade. This had a significant impact on Cuba’s economy, which greatly depended on trade with the United States.

5. Cuban Missile Crisis (October 1962): US spy satellites discovered that Cuba had allowed the Soviet Union to build
nuclear missile bases on the island. This led to a tense 13-day standoff, with the threat of nuclear war looming. The crisis
was resolved when the US agreed to withdraw its nuclear missiles from Turkey in exchange for the Soviet Union
withdrawing its missiles from Cuba.

In summary, the United States’ efforts to contain communism in Cuba during this period were met with significant
challenges and crises. The events of these years had lasting impacts on US-Cuba relations and the broader Cold War.

American involvement in Vietnam, 1955–75

The American involvement in Vietnam from 1955 to 1975 was a significant chapter in the history of the Cold War. Here
are some key points:

1. Start of Involvement (1955): The US began its 4. De-escalation and Withdrawal (1969-1973): Under
involvement in Vietnam in the 1950s, under President President Richard Nixon, the US began to de-escalate its
Dwight D. Eisenhower, to counter the spread of involvement through a process known as “Vietnamization,”
communism in Southeast Asia. The US provided economic which involved building up South Vietnamese forces while
and military aid to South Vietnam. gradually withdrawing US troops.
2. Escalation of Involvement (1961-1965): Under President 5. End of Involvement (1973-1975): The Paris Peace
John F. Kennedy and later Lyndon B. Johnson, the number Accords were signed in 1973, leading to the withdrawal of
of US military advisers in South Vietnam increased the remaining US forces. However, the war continued
significantly. The Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 led to a between North and South Vietnam, and the North
major escalation in direct US military involvement. eventually captured Saigon in 1975, marking the end of the
3. Peak of Involvement (1965-1969): The US deployed war.
hundreds of thousands of combat troops to Vietnam.
Despite having superior weapons, the US was unable to
defeat the local guerrilla forces known as the Viet Cong.

In summary, the US’s efforts to contain communism in Vietnam were ultimately unsuccessful, with the entire country
falling under communist control in 1975. The war had a profound impact on American society and foreign policy,
sparking widespread protest and leading to changes in how future military actions would be authorized.
Specified Content
American reactions to significant events in Korea, Cuba, and Vietnam
during the mid-20th century.
1. The Korean War (1950-1953): The Korean War was a civil war that became a proxy battle between the
superpowers as they clashed over communism and democracy. The United States supported the Republic of
Korea (South Korea) in repelling an invasion from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea). The
United Nations also played a significant role in the conflict. You can read more about the causes and effects of
the Korean War in this article.
2. The Cuban Missile Crisis (1962): The Cuban Missile Crisis was a political and military standoff between the
United States and the Soviet Union over the installation of Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba. The crisis is widely
considered the closest the world ever came to nuclear war. You can learn more about the Cuban Missile Crisis in
this article.
3. The Vietnam War (1955-1975): The Vietnam War was a conflict between North Vietnam and South Vietnam,
with the United States and other anti-communist allies supporting South Vietnam. The war was fought to
prevent the spread of communism in Southeast Asia. The United States employed various tactics and strategies
during the war, including the use of chemical weapons and the deployment of troops.

Aftermath of these Events

The aftermath of these events was significant and varied.

The Korean War (1950-1953): The Korean War ended in a stalemate, with the two Koreas remaining divided along the
38th parallel. The war resulted in the deaths of approximately 2,000,000 Koreans, 600,000 Chinese, 37,000 Americans,
and 3,000 Turks, Britons, and other nationals in the UN forces. The conflict also had a significant impact on the civilian
population, with families being broken up and living on opposite sides of the demilitarized zone.

1. The Cuban Missile Crisis (1962): The Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved when the Soviet Union agreed to remove
its missiles from Cuba in exchange for a US pledge not to invade Cuba and to remove US missiles from Turkey.
The crisis is widely considered a turning point in the Cold War and led to improved communication between the
United States and the Soviet Union.
2. The Vietnam War (1955-1975): The Vietnam War ended with the fall of Saigon to North Vietnamese forces in
1975. The war resulted in the deaths of approximately 58,000 Americans and 3 million Vietnamese. The conflict
also had a significant impact on the United States, with many Americans questioning the government’s decision
to become involved in the war.
6. How secure was the USSR’s control over Eastern Europe, 1948–
c.1989?
Introduction
The USSR’s control over Eastern Europe from 1948 to c.1989 was a complex and multifaceted issue. The Soviet Union
used various methods to ensure that communist governments took power in the Eastern Bloc countries after World War
II 1. These methods included the use of Soviet troops to maintain control, the establishment of puppet governments, and
the suppression of opposition through show trials and other means.

However, the USSR’s control over Eastern Europe was not absolute. There were several instances of resistance and
rebellion against Soviet rule, such as the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 and the Prague Spring of 1968. These uprisings
were met with force by the Soviet Union, which sought to maintain its control over the region.

Despite these challenges, the Soviet Union was able to maintain its control over Eastern Europe until the late 1980s.
However, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War led to the fall of communist governments in the
region and the emergence of democratic governments.

The Soviet Union’s control over Eastern Europe had a significant impact on the region. After World War II, the Soviet
Union used various methods to ensure that communist governments took power in the Eastern Bloc countries. These
methods included the use of Soviet troops to maintain control, the establishment of puppet governments, and the
suppression of opposition through show trials and other means.

The Soviet Union’s control over Eastern Europe led to the establishment of communist governments in the region, which
were often repressive and authoritarian. The Soviet Union also imposed its economic system on the Eastern Bloc
countries, which led to a lack of economic growth and development. The Soviet Union’s control over Eastern Europe also
contributed to the tensions of the Cold War, as the United States and its allies sought to contain Soviet influence in the
region.

Despite these challenges, the Soviet Union was able to maintain its control over Eastern Europe until the late 1980s.
However, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War led to the fall of communist governments in the
region and the emergence of democratic governments.
Focus Points
Why was there opposition to Soviet control in Hungary in 1956 and
Czechoslovakia in 1968, and how did the USSR react to this opposition?
The opposition to Soviet control in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 was due to a variety of factors. In
Hungary, the Soviet Union’s control over the country was met with resistance from the Hungarian people, who sought
greater political freedom and democracy. In Czechoslovakia, the opposition was driven by a desire for greater political
and economic reform, as well as a desire for greater independence from the Soviet Union.

The Soviet Union reacted to this opposition with force, using military intervention to suppress the uprisings. In Hungary,
Soviet troops were sent in to crush the rebellion, resulting in the deaths of thousands of Hungarians. In Czechoslovakia,
the Soviet Union and its allies invaded the country to put down the uprising.

Despite the Soviet Union’s efforts to maintain control over Eastern Europe, the opposition to Soviet rule continued to
grow. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War led to the fall of communist governments in the
region and the emergence of democratic governments.

The United States and events in Korea, 1950–53: The Korean War was a civil war that became a proxy battle between
the superpowers as they clashed over communism and democracy. The United States supported the Republic of Korea
(South Korea) in repelling an invasion from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) . The United
Nations also played a significant role in the conflict. The Korean War ended in a stalemate, with the two Koreas
remaining divided along the 38th parallel. The war resulted in the deaths of approximately 2,000,000 Koreans, 600,000
Chinese, 37,000 Americans, and 3,000 Turks, Britons, and other nationals in the UN forces. The conflict also had a
significant impact on the civilian population, with families being broken up and living on opposite sides of the
demilitarized zone.

The United States and events in Cuba, 1959–62: The Cuban Missile Crisis was a political and military standoff between
the United States and the Soviet Union over the installation of Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba. The crisis is widely
considered the closest the world ever came to nuclear war. The crisis was resolved when the Soviet Union agreed to
remove its missiles from Cuba in exchange for a US pledge not to invade Cuba and to remove US missiles from Turkey.
The crisis is widely considered a turning point in the Cold War and led to improved communication between the United
States and the Soviet Union.

American involvement in Vietnam, 1955–75: The Vietnam War was a conflict between North Vietnam and South
Vietnam, with the United States and other anti-communist allies supporting South Vietnam. The war was fought to
prevent the spread of communism in Southeast Asia. The United States employed various tactics and strategies during
the war, including the use of chemical weapons and the deployment of troops. The war ended with the fall of Saigon to
North Vietnamese forces in 1975. The war resulted in the deaths of approximately 58,000 Americans and 3 million
Vietnamese. The conflict also had a significant impact on the United States, with many Americans questioning the
government’s decision to become involved in the war.

Specified content: The case studies of American reactions to North Korea’s invasion of South Korea, the involvement of
the UN, the course of the war to 1953; American reactions to the Cuban Revolution, including the Missile Crisis and its
aftermath; and American involvement in the Vietnam War, including reasons for involvement, tactics and strategy,
reasons for withdrawal.
The aftermath of these events: The aftermath of these events was significant and varied. The Korean War ended in a
stalemate, with the two Koreas remaining divided along the 38th parallel. The war resulted in the deaths of
approximately 2,000,000 Koreans, 600,000 Chinese, 37,000 Americans, and 3,000 Turks, Britons, and other nationals in
the UN forces. The conflict also had a significant impact on the civilian population, with families being broken up and
living on opposite sides of the demilitarized zone. The Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved when the Soviet Union agreed
to remove its missiles from Cuba in exchange for a US pledge not to invade Cuba and to remove US missiles from Turkey.
The crisis is widely considered a turning point in the Cold War and led to improved communication between the United
States and the Soviet Union. The Vietnam War ended with the fall of Saigon to North Vietnamese forces in 1975. The
war resulted in the deaths of approximately 58,000 Americans and 3 million Vietnamese. The conflict also had a
significant impact on the United States, with many Americans questioning the government’s decision to become
involved in the war.

The impact of Soviet control on Eastern Europe: The Soviet Union’s control over Eastern Europe led to the
establishment of communist governments in the region, which were often repressive and authoritarian. The Soviet
Union also imposed its economic system on the Eastern Bloc countries, which led to a lack of economic growth and
development. The Soviet Union’s control over Eastern Europe also contributed to the tensions of the Cold War, as the
United States and its allies sought to contain Soviet influence in the region. Despite these challenges, the Soviet Union
was able to maintain its control over Eastern Europe until the late 1980s. However, the collapse of the Soviet Union and
the end of the Cold War led to the fall of communist governments in the region and the emergence of democratic
governments.

The opposition to Soviet control in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 was due to a variety of factors. In
Hungary, the Soviet Union’s control over the country was met with resistance from the Hungarian people, who sought
greater political freedom and democracy. In Czechoslovakia, the opposition was driven by a desire for greater political
and economic reform, as well as a desire for greater independence from the Soviet Union.

The Soviet Union reacted to this opposition with force, using military intervention to suppress the uprisings. In Hungary,
Soviet troops were sent in to crush the rebellion, resulting in the deaths of thousands of Hungarians. In Czechoslovakia,
the Soviet Union and its allies invaded the country to put down the uprising.

Despite the Soviet Union’s efforts to maintain control over Eastern Europe, the opposition to Soviet rule continued to
grow. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War led to the fall of communist governments in the
region and the emergence of democratic governments.
How similar were events in Hungary in 1956 and in Czechoslovakia in
1968?

Similarities Differences
1. Both events were the result of long-standing 1. Whilst Hungary was influenced by foreign events,
resentment. such as the uprising in Poland, Czechoslovakia was
2. Both countries wanted to reduce communist motivated by domestic issues, such as the
control and give their people more rights. economic depression.
3. Both involved protests. 2. Hungary wanted to withdraw from the Warsaw
4. The USSR intervened because it was worried about Pact, but Czechoslovakia did not.
the impact of changes on its control of the eastern 3. In Hungary, the people acted first. However, in
European bloc. Czechoslovakia the people followed the lead of
5. In both cases, the uprisings led to mass emigration. Dubček.
6. In both Hungary and Czechoslovakia, the leader 4. The Hungarian Uprising was a rebellion against the
was removed from power. Soviets, whereas the Prague Spring challenged the
7. In both cases, the wider world was critical of the nature of communist rule itself.
Soviet response. 5. In Hungary, the people fought against the Soviets.
However, the Czechs did not, although there were
some suicides in protest.
6. Some Warsaw Pact members were shocked by the
Prague Spring, and complained about the Soviets’
actions.

Why was the Berlin Wall built in 1961?

The Berlin Wall was built in 1961 by the Communist government of the German Democratic Republic (GDR, or East
Germany) to prevent people from defecting to West Berlin and to keep capitalism and spies from the West out. The wall
was a guarded concrete barrier that encircled West Berlin of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG; West Germany) from
1961 to 1989, separating it from East Berlin and the German Democratic Republic (GDR; East Germany). The official
purpose of the wall was to keep so-called Western “fascists” from entering East Germany and undermining the socialist
state, but it primarily served the objective of stemming mass defections from East to West. The Berlin Wall stood until
November 9, 1989, when the head of the East German Communist Party announced that citizens of the GDR could cross
the border whenever they pleased. That night, ecstatic crowds swarmed the wall. Some crossed freely into West Berlin,
while others brought hammers and picks and began to chip away at the wall itself. To this day, the Berlin Wall remains
one of the most powerful and enduring symbols of the Cold War.
What was the significance of Solidarity in Poland for the decline of Soviet
influence in Eastern Europe?
The Solidarity movement in Poland was a significant factor in the decline of Soviet influence in Eastern Europe. Solidarity
was a trade union that was established in 1980 in response to the economic crisis in Poland. The movement was led by
Lech Walesa and quickly gained widespread support, with 10 million people joining the union by 1981. Solidarity was
unique in that it was an independent trade union, not controlled by the Communist Party, and it demanded greater
political freedom and democracy in Poland. The movement was able to survive despite coordinated attempts to repress
it, demonstrating the weakness of the ruling Communist party in Poland and contributing to the collapse of ruling
Communist parties throughout Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union itself. In 1989, Solidarity played a key role in the
peaceful transition to democracy in Poland, which was a major turning point in the decline of Soviet influence in Eastern
Europe.

Certainly! The Solidarity movement in Poland was a significant factor in the decline of Soviet influence in Eastern Europe.
Solidarity was a trade union that was established in 1980 in response to the economic crisis in Poland. The movement
was led by Lech Walesa and quickly gained widespread support, with 10 million people joining the union by 1981.
Solidarity was unique in that it was an independent trade union, not controlled by the Communist Party, and it
demanded greater political freedom and democracy in Poland. The movement was able to survive despite coordinated
attempts to repress it, demonstrating the weakness of the ruling Communist party in Poland and contributing to the
collapse of ruling Communist parties throughout Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union itself. In 1989, Solidarity played a
key role in the peaceful transition to democracy in Poland, which was a major turning point in the decline of Soviet
influence in Eastern Europe.

The significance of Solidarity in Poland was that it demonstrated that popular movements with huge support were a
threat to communist governments and were capable of achieving their demands from them. Solidarity was able to
survive despite coordinated attempts to repress it, demonstrating the weakness of the ruling Communist party in Poland
and contributing to the collapse of ruling Communist parties throughout Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union itself.
Solidarity’s success was due to its organization, demands, and methods. Solidarity had a committee, spokespeople, and a
newspaper (Solidarnosc) which allowed them to spread their message effectively. Demands were national issues not just
local ones - this secured support from a range of the population. Solidarity never used violence in case it encouraged
harsh punishments from the government. By 1981, 10 million people (students, workers, intellectuals) joined the trade
union i.e. 80% of Poland’s workforce were members.

What was the impact of Soviet control on Eastern Europe? (Additional Information)
The Soviet Union’s control over Eastern Europe had a significant impact on the region. After World War II, the Soviet
Union used various methods to ensure that communist governments took power in the Eastern Bloc countries. These
methods included the use of Soviet troops to maintain control, the establishment of puppet governments, and the
suppression of opposition through show trials and other means.
The Soviet Union’s control over Eastern Europe led to the establishment of communist governments in the region, which
were often repressive and authoritarian. The Soviet Union also imposed its economic system on the Eastern Bloc
countries, which led to a lack of economic growth and development. The Soviet Union’s control over Eastern Europe also
contributed to the tensions of the Cold War, as the United States and its allies sought to contain Soviet influence in the
region.
Despite these challenges, the Soviet Union was able to maintain its control over Eastern Europe until the late 1980s.
However, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War led to the fall of communist governments in the
region and the emergence of democratic governments.
How far was Gorbachev personally responsible for the collapse of Soviet
control over Eastern Europe?
Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, played a significant role in the decline of Soviet influence in
Eastern Europe. Gorbachev became Soviet leader in 1985 and initiated a policy known as ‘perestroika’ to re-energize the
Soviet economy after years of stagnation. This plan sought to loosen the previously tight restrictions on how enterprises
ran and give more independence to workers’ collectives. He also ushered in ‘glasnost’, a period of unprecedented
cultural openness and freedom of speech. For the first time, citizens felt able to criticize the Soviet system, while some
prominent dissidents were released from prison. Gorbachev’s reforms emboldened socialist states to determine their
own affairs, and, in 1989, Gorbachev explicitly declared that Moscow would not “restrict the sovereignty of states”. The
weakening of the Communist Party’s control over the Soviet Union would have international consequences, paving the
way for the disintegration of the Eastern Bloc (the socialist states under Moscow’s influence). However, it is important to
note that the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War was a complex process that involved many factors
beyond Gorbachev’s control.

Certainly! Mikhail Gorbachev’s policies of perestroika and glasnost were significant factors in the decline of Soviet
influence in Eastern Europe. Perestroika sought to re-energize the Soviet economy after years of stagnation by loosening
the previously tight restrictions on how enterprises ran and giving more independence to workers’ collectives. Glasnost
was a period of unprecedented cultural openness and freedom of speech. For the first time, citizens felt able to criticize
the Soviet system, while some prominent dissidents were released from prison. Gorbachev’s reforms emboldened
socialist states to determine their own affairs, and, in 1989, Gorbachev explicitly declared that Moscow would not
“restrict the sovereignty of states”. The weakening of the Communist Party’s control over the Soviet Union would have
international consequences, paving the way for the disintegration of the Eastern Bloc (the socialist states under
Moscow’s influence). However, it is important to note that the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War
was a complex process that involved many factors beyond Gorbachev’s control.
Specified Content
Soviet Power in eastern Europe
• Resistance to Soviet power in Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968): The Hungarian Uprising of 1956 and
the Prague Spring of 1968 were both uprisings against Soviet control in Eastern Europe. The Hungarian Uprising
was a rebellion against the Soviets, whereas the Prague Spring challenged the nature of communist rule itself.
Both uprisings were met with force by the Soviet Union, which sought to maintain its control over the region.
• The Berlin Wall: The Berlin Wall was built in 1961 by the Communist government of the German Democratic
Republic (GDR, or East Germany) to prevent people from defecting to West Berlin and to keep capitalism and
spies from the West out. The wall was a guarded concrete barrier that encircled West Berlin of the Federal
Republic of Germany (FRG; West Germany) from 1961 to 1989, separating it from East Berlin and the German
Democratic Republic (GDR; East Germany). The wall was brought down in 1989, which was a major turning point
in the decline of Soviet influence in Eastern Europe.
• Solidarity in Poland: Solidarity was a trade union that was established in 1980 in response to the economic crisis
in Poland. The movement was led by Lech Walesa and quickly gained widespread support, with 10 million people
joining the union by 1981. Solidarity was unique in that it was an independent trade union, not controlled by the
Communist Party, and it demanded greater political freedom and democracy in Poland. The movement was able
to survive despite coordinated attempts to repress it, demonstrating the weakness of the ruling Communist
party in Poland and contributing to the collapse of ruling Communist parties throughout Eastern Europe and the
Soviet Union itself. In 1989, Solidarity played a key role in the peaceful transition to democracy in Poland, which
was a major turning point in the decline of Soviet influence in Eastern Europe.
• Gorbachev and the collapse of Soviet control over Eastern Europe: Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the
Soviet Union, played a significant role in the decline of Soviet influence in Eastern Europe. Gorbachev became
Soviet leader in 1985 and initiated a policy known as ‘perestroika’ to re-energize the Soviet economy after years
of stagnation. This plan sought to loosen the previously tight restrictions on how enterprises ran and give more
independence to workers’ collectives. He also ushered in ‘glasnost’, a period of unprecedented cultural openness
and freedom of speech. For the first time, citizens felt able to criticize the Soviet system, while some prominent
dissidents were released from prison. Gorbachev’s reforms emboldened socialist states to determine their own
affairs, and, in 1989, Gorbachev explicitly declared that Moscow would not “restrict the sovereignty of states”.
The weakening of the Communist Party’s control over the Soviet Union would have international consequences,
paving the way for the disintegration of the Eastern Bloc (the socialist states under Moscow’s influence).

Certainly! Mikhail Gorbachev’s policies of perestroika and glasnost were significant factors in the decline of Soviet
influence in Eastern Europe. Perestroika sought to re-energize the Soviet economy after years of stagnation by loosening
the previously tight restrictions on how enterprises ran and giving more independence to workers’ collectives. Glasnost
was a period of unprecedented cultural openness and freedom of speech. For the first time, citizens felt able to criticize
the Soviet system, while some prominent dissidents were released from prison. Gorbachev’s reforms emboldened
socialist states to determine their own affairs, and, in 1989, Gorbachev explicitly declared that Moscow would not
“restrict the sovereignty of states”. The weakening of the Communist Party’s control over the Soviet Union would have
international consequences, paving the way for the disintegration of the Eastern Bloc (the socialist states under
Moscow’s influence). However, it is important to note that the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War
was a complex process that involved many factors beyond Gorbachev’s control.