| Date | November 2021 | Marks available | 9 | Reference code | 21N.1.BP.TZ0.12 |
| Level | Both SL and HL | Paper | Paper 1 - first exams 2017 | Time zone | TZ0 |
| Command term | Discuss | Question number | 12 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
Source I Adolf Hitler, Führer of Germany, writing in a letter to Benito Mussolini, Il Duce of Italy (25 August 1939).
The relationship of Germany to Poland, as a result of the policies of England, has become more unsatisfactory since spring and in the last few weeks the position has become simply unbearable. The reports about the persecution of the Germans in the border areas are not invented press reports but represent only a fraction of the terrible truth. The current policy of Poland has brought about a complete standstill in Danzig’s entire economic life for the past several weeks and would, if it were continued, destroy the city.
The readiness on the part of the Soviet government to negotiate with Germany has made it possible for me to send my Foreign Minister to Moscow for the conclusion of a treaty which is the most extensive non-aggression pact in existence and whose text will be made public.
[Source: Hitler, A., 1939. Letter from Hitler to Mussolini, August 25, 1939. [online] Available at:
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/ns057.asp [Accessed 14 December 2020]. Adapted.]
Source J Bernard Partridge, a political cartoonist, depicts Hitler and Joseph Stalin [Soviet Leader] after the signing of the Nazi–Soviet Pact in the cartoon “Doubtful Friends” for the British magazine Punch (27 September 1939). The wording on the map says “Poland”.
[Source: Punch Cartoon Library / TopFoto.]
Source K Keith Eubank, a professor of history, writing in the academic book The Origins of World War II (2004).
[German Foreign Minister] Ribbentrop wanted to come to Moscow immediately but [Soviet Foreign Minister] Molotov insisted that the visit to complete the pact should come a week later. Hitler had to resort to a personal message to Stalin in order to extract an invitation for Ribbentrop to come to Moscow sooner. Ribbentrop met Molotov and Stalin in the Kremlin. They rapidly agreed on a non-aggression pact. If one partner went to war, the other promised to remain neutral.
A secret agreement dividing Poland convinced Stalin. Hitler could now be certain that Stalin would not interfere with his plans in the east when he attacked Poland and then turned his attention to Britain and France. Stalin not only had peace but a promise of spheres of influence that Britain and France had denied him …
In a letter to Hitler, [British Prime Minister] Chamberlain vowed that, despite the Nazi–Soviet Pact, Britain would not step down from its obligations to Poland. Chamberlain pointed out to Hitler that war between Britain and Germany would be a disaster and that there was nothing between Poland and Germany that could not be settled peacefully. Chamberlain recommended a truce on both sides …
Hitler telephoned Mussolini to tell him that an attack on Poland was imminent and that he needed the help that Mussolini had promised in the Pact of Steel. Mussolini had to admit that Italy could not go to war unless it received urgently needed supplies …
[Source: The Origins of World War II. Keith Eubank. Copyright © 1969, 1990, 2004 Harlan Davidson, Inc. All rights
reserved. Reproduced with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear.]
Using the sources and your own knowledge, discuss why Germany attacked Poland in September 1939.
Markscheme
Apply the markbands that provide the “best fit” to the responses given by candidates and award credit wherever it is possible to do so. The following material is an indication of what candidates may elect to write about in their responses. It is neither prescriptive nor exhaustive and no set answer is required. While it is expected that there will be coverage of at least two of the sources, candidates are not required to refer to all four sources in their responses.
Indicative content
Source I Hitler claimed that Germans were being persecuted and that Polish policy was ruining Danzig. A more aggressive policy by Germany was thus needed. The Nazi–Soviet Pact also gave Hitler the confidence to attack Poland in September 1939.
Source J Shows the new relationship between Hitler and Stalin in September 1939. They have signed the Nazi–Soviet Pact; guaranteeing their respective spheres of influence and opening the door for a German invasion of Poland.
Source K The Non-Aggression Pact between Germany and the USSR guaranteed the neutrality of either country if war broke out. The secret agreement ensured the establishment of both countries’ spheres of influence. The Pact allowed Hitler to attack Poland without fear of interference from Stalin.
Own knowledge Candidates may refer to Lebensraum and Hitler’s policy of Ostpolitik as background detail, but the main focus should be on events directly leading to the outbreak of war. By the middle of 1939, Hitler had become increasingly confident that Britain and France would remain neutral; due to the policy of appeasement and inaction, with regard to Austria, the Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia. Hitler wanted to achieve his long-term goal of reuniting East Prussia with Germany and abolishing the Polish Corridor.
Some may argue that Hitler’s decision to attack Poland was motivated by the economic situation in Germany. Candidates may also argue that the German High Command had already made plans for the attack on Poland in the summer of 1939. The conclusion of the Nazi–Soviet Pact in August 1939 allowed them to execute their plans. Hitler intended to use Poland as a launchpad for a subsequent attack on the Soviet Union.
Examiners report
Most scripts showed an awareness of the need to give a focused response and refer to / use the sources to analyse the question. Many responses also had a degree of development. Often candidates were able to use the sources to offer an assessment of, for example, why Germany attacked Poland in September 1939 for Question 12, or to discuss the contribution of the Civil Rights and the Voting Act in ensuring that African Americans could exercise their right to vote for Question 16. Furthermore, there was some improvement in the number of candidates effectively applying and synthesizing their knowledge in conjunction with a focused use of the sources.
However, some responses were limited by a wholly descriptive approach and some lacked clear and consistent focus on the set question. A number of responses referred to the source/s but did not effectively use the content to develop or support the analysis. In addition, a number of responses lacked the inclusion of relevant knowledge, and a sizeable minority of candidates did not respond at all to the final question or gave a very limited response.
