| Date | May 2022 | Marks available | 6 | Reference code | 22M.1.BP.TZ0.19 |
| Level | Both SL and HL | Paper | Paper 1 - first exams 2017 | Time zone | TZ0 |
| Command term | Compare and contrast | Question number | 19 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
Source S Louis Sell, a professor of International Studies, writing in the academic book Slobodan Milosevic and the Destruction of Yugoslavia (2002).
Rugova possessed an iron [strong] determination to resist Serbian oppression. His choice of nonviolent tactics came from a desire to avoid the bloodshed that would accompany any effort to oppose the Serbs through violent means. Rugova himself described his approach as “a war without arms [weapons].” …
[However] Rugova’s mistake was in believing in the international community too much and especially the United States—which had a special relationship with Kosovo because of its early support for human rights in the province … Rugova and his Kosovo Albanian supporters experienced delay and disappointment. Once war broke out in the rest of Yugoslavia, Kosovo virtually disappeared from the media and the focus of international peace negotiators. Only when Kosovo Albanians had finally decided “enough is enough” and begun to shoot back at their Serb oppressors, did the international community refocus on Kosovo. By then it was too late for a peaceful solution.
[Source: Louis Sell, “Milosevic Takes Kosovo”, in Slobodan Milosevic and the Destruction of Yugoslavia, pp. 66-94.
Copyright 2002, Duke University Press. All rights reserved. Republished by permission of the copyright holder, and the Publisher. www.dukeupress.edu.
Ibrahim Rugova, La question du Kosovo. Fayard, 1994. p. 126.]
Source T David L Phillips, a university professor, writing in the academic book Liberating Kosovo: Coercive Diplomacy and U.S. Intervention (2012).
Plans to set up a U.S. Information Center in Pristina were announced on January 9, 1996 … “This is a historic day for Kosovo,” said Ibrahim Rugova. “We are for a peaceful solution to the Kosovo problem based on the political will of its people …” Rugova maintained that this was a major diplomatic success for the Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK) in internationalizing the Kosovo issue and gaining recognition … The establishment of the U.S. Information Center was a clear result of the LDK’s internationalization strategy. However, it did not silence Rugova’s critics. The head of the Kosovo Students Union stated, “We thought that the LDK was too passive. It relied too much on international factors. Rugova created the illusion that the international community would resolve the crisis and that independence would come as a gift.” Kosovo Albanians were losing faith in the international community. An increasing number became radicalized as social and economic conditions deteriorated and human rights conditions worsened. It became less likely that their political objectives would be achieved by peaceful means.
[Source: Phillips, David L. foreword by Nicholas Burns., Liberating Kosovo, pp. 66-67 (adapted for exam), © 2012 David L.
Phillips, by permission of The MIT Press.]
Compare and contrast what Sources S and T reveal about Ibrahim Rugova’s methods to achieve Kosovar independence.
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.
Comparison:
- Both sources suggest that Rugova’s methods were nonviolent.
- Both sources suggest that Rugova aimed at internationalizing the conflict.
- Both sources refer to failures in Rugova’s international strategy.
- Both sources suggest that, in time, many Kosovo Albanians lost faith in Rugova’s methods and became radicalized.
Contrast:
- Source S suggests that Rugova’s internationalization strategy was a failure, whereas Source T points to some success, with the announcement of plans to set up the U.S. Information Center in Pristina in 1996.
- Source S suggests that the situation worsened as a result of Rugova’s failure to secure international support, whereas Source T also highlights the importance of other contributing factors.
Examiners report
There has been continued improvement in terms of candidates adopting an appropriate approach to the compare and contrast question. Indeed, a notable number of candidates achieved full marks for this question. The majority had attempted both comparisons and contrasts and had explained the links between the sources clearly. Most candidates were able to identify at least one comparison, for example for Question 11) that both sources find the economic embargo on Japan as significant and for Question 15) that both sources highlight Mandela's role in the establishment of the MK. However, there were some responses that only offered one or two linkage points and a few described each source in end-on accounts without clearly identifying a similarity or difference. Some candidates also described the provenance of each source. Candidates should be reminded that more than one comparison and one contrast are required to attain the top markband, for example two comparisons and two contrasts with development (although there need not be an equal number of each).
