| Date | May 2022 | Marks available | 9 | Reference code | 22M.1.BP.TZ0.16 |
| Level | Both SL and HL | Paper | Paper 1 - first exams 2017 | Time zone | TZ0 |
| Command term | Evaluate | Question number | 16 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
Source M Tom Lodge, a professor of history, writing in the academic book Mandela: A Critical Life (2006).
Even though several African National Congress (ANC) leaders, including Nelson Mandela, had at least thought about the possibility of an armed offensive against apartheid for several years, they still encountered considerable opposition to their proposal. At the end of June 1961, Mandela argued his case at a meeting of the ANC’s National Working Committee … Albert Luthuli was reluctantly persuaded [by Mandela] to approve the establishment of a new military organisation called the MK (Umkhonto we Sizwe – “Spear of the Nation”) that would function separately from the ANC, although ultimately it would be subject to the ANC’s authority … Mandela suggested the name for the new organisation: “we must have an African name” he said … It was agreed that Mandela would form the MK and appoint his own staff. For the time being, it was decided, the MK would engage only in very carefully controlled sabotage operations designed to avoid any casualties … Mandela was not a direct participant in any of the sabotage … [The ANC decided] to send Mandela abroad to persuade African governments to help with weapons and training facilities that the MK would need.
[Sources: Tom Lodge, Mandela A Critical Life © Tom Lodge 2006. Reproduced with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear.
Matthew, Joe (1994) Interview with Philip Bonner, Cape Town, 18 August 1994. Transcript held at the William Cullen Library, University of the Witwatersrand.]
Source N Photograph of an anti-apartheid demonstration outside the court in Pretoria in support of Nelson Mandela and his colleagues on the day of the Rivonia Trial verdict in 1964. The sign reads “Our future is bright”.
[Source: AP Images/ANP.]
Source O Kenneth S Broun, a professor of Law, describing the Rivonia Trial 1963–1964 in his book Saving Nelson Mandela: The Rivonia Trial and the Fate of South Africa (2012).
Mandela’s defence lawyer announced: “The defence case will commence with a statement by Nelson Mandela who personally took part in the establishment of the MK, and who will be able to inform the court of the beginnings of that organisation.” … A few minutes after beginning his speech, Mandela made an admission [to the court] sufficient to condemn him to death: “Some of the things so far told to the court are true and some are untrue. I do not, however, deny that I planned sabotage”. However, he argued, planning for it was “a result of calm and sober assessment of the political situation that had arisen after many years of tyranny, exploitation, and oppression of my people by the Whites” … [Mandela stated that] from its formation in 1912, the ANC had wanted political relief from the oppression of black people in South Africa until 1961. The government rejected all of its attempts … “It was only when all else had failed, when all channels of peaceful protest had been barred [blocked] to us, that the decision was made to embark on violent forms of political struggle, and to form the MK.”
[Source: Kenneth S. Broun Saving Nelson Mandela The Rivonia Trial and the Fate of South Africa Copyright
© 2012 by Kenneth S. Broun. Reproduced with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear.]
Using the sources and your own knowledge, evaluate the significance of Nelson Mandela to the struggle against apartheid up to 1964.
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 M Mandela was significant in persuading the President of the ANC to agree to the establishment of the MK. Mandela was instrumental in naming the new organization and appointed his own staff. Mandela was sent abroad to persuade African governments to help with weapons and training.
Source N Mandela and his colleagues enlisted some multi-racial support within South Africa. The Rivonia Trial became a focus for protests against apartheid.
Source O Mandela was involved in planning sabotage. Due to the failure of nonviolent protest, Mandela supported embarking on violent struggle and the formation of the MK.
Own knowledge Candidates may refer to the widespread international support that Mandela gained, especially after his speech from the dock in the Rivonia Trial. All over the world anti-apartheid organizations were set up, and another measure of Mandela’s significance was the Commonwealth’s vilification of the South African regime which in turn led to South Africa leaving the Commonwealth in 1961. Candidates may also mention Mandela’s inclusion of South African Communist Party members in the leadership of the MK opened the way for military support from the communist bloc.
Candidates may evaluate also the significance of actions by Mandela such his involvement in the Defiance Campaign.
On the other hand, candidates may refer to the fact that key anti-apartheid figures were either imprisoned or exiled in the aftermath of the Treason Trials of 1956. Thus, they may argue that Mandela’s methods had achieved little. Moreover, answers may refer to the fact that there were other key actors in the anti-apartheid struggle.
Candidates may argue that by 1964 the South African Government had successfully repressed both the ANC and the MK, organisations in which Mandela played a leading role.
Examiners report
Many candidates provided a focused and developed response to the final question. It was pleasing to find that most candidates demonstrated a sound understanding of the question and attempted to refer to source content in their analysis. There were some excellent essay-style responses which, for example, discussed the reasons for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, discussed the view that Ibrahim Rugova's methods contributed to the origins of the war in Kosovo or evaluated the significance of Nelson Mandela to the struggle against apartheid up to 1964. However, as noted above, some responses to the final question were too brief or clearly incomplete apparently due to the candidate not reserving sufficient time for the final question. Although well informed, others were excessively descriptive in nature, requiring the examiner to infer the relevance of such information to the set question. Most candidates referred to at least one source, but many did not include relevant knowledge. A sizeable minority tended to list the content of each source with a general point addressing the question at the end. On the other hand, there were candidates who did not refer to the sources at all in their response.
Candidates should be reminded that for the top markband responses must maintain focus on the set question and clearly reference and use the sources as evidence to support the analysis. In addition, for the final question there must be synthesis of accurate and relevant own knowledge.
