| Date | November 2016 | Marks available | 6 | Reference code | 16N.1s1a.BP.TZ0.2 |
| Level | Both SL and HL | Paper | Paper 1 (Peacemaking, peacekeeping—international relations 1918–36) - last exams 2016 | Time zone | TZ0 |
| Command term | Compare and contrast | Question number | 2 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
Source A
FP Walters, a member of the League of Nations Secretariat (1919–1940), writing in an academic book, A History of the League of Nations (1952).
The first consequence of the invasion of Abyssinia had been an unexpected rally of the members of the League. It was their declared purpose to bring such pressure on Italy as would force her to make peace with Abyssinia on terms consistent with the Covenant (the charter of the League of Nations). If they succeeded in that aim the Covenant would have become the effective guarantee of world peace … But the Hoare-Laval Pact, which broke the unity and confidence of the League action was, for the Nazis, a signal that the way was clear for further advance. It [the pact] marked the weakness and division of France and Britain … During January and February 1936 there were many indications of growing sympathy between Germany and Italy. Meanwhile, the German press was filled with attacks on the Franco-Russian Treaty and the rumour grew that Hitler’s next objective was to get rid of the demilitarized zone in the Rhineland.
Source C
Christopher Culpin, a history teacher and author, and Ruth Henig, an academic historian, writing in a book for students, Modern Europe 1870–1945 (1997).
Neither France nor Britain was willing to engage in military hostilities with Italy on behalf of the League of Nations. France wanted Italian support for an anti-German alliance. Britain was facing the prospect of Japanese hostility in the Far East and the threat of an aggressive Germany in Europe … While the government in Britain pledged itself [promised] to uphold the authority of the League in the general election of 1935, it then tried to negotiate a compromise deal with Mussolini, which would have given him much of the Abyssinian territory he wanted, through the Hoare-Laval Pact. However, a public protest in Britain against the Pact forced the British and French to abandon it … Thus the Abyssinian dispute revealed, as had the Manchurian crisis earlier, that the leading League powers were not prepared to enforce the Covenant against another major League power who was not directly threatening their own interests … Thus ironically the only outcome of the League’s limited attempts to combat Italian aggression over Abyssinia was to drive Mussolini into the arms of Hitler.
Compare and contrast the views expressed in Sources A and C about the importance of the invasion of Abyssinia.
Markscheme
For “compare”
- Both sources indicate that Britain was initially committed to uphold the League of Nations.
- Both sources claim that the failure of the Hoare-Laval Pact damaged the League of Nations.
- Both sources show that relations between Germany and Italy improved.
- Both sources indicate that Germany would be more aggressive in the future.
For “contrast”
- Source A indicates that its members would support the League of Nations and the Covenant whereas Source C states that members were not prepared to enforce the Covenant.
- Source A suggests that there was a division between France and Britain whereas Source C sees them as working cooperatively in trying to resolve the Abyssinian crisis.
- Source A suggests that the Hoare-Laval Pact was responsible for the League’s failure in Abyssinia whereas Source C suggests that the League failed because France and Britain had other foreign policy priorities.
Do not demand all of the above. If only one source is discussed award a maximum of [2]. If the two sources are discussed separately award [3] or with excellent linkage [4–5]. For maximum [6] expect a detailed running comparison/contrast. Award up to [5] if two sources are linked/integrated in either a running comparison or contrast.
[6 marks]
