Unit 1 - TOV

Syllabus Cambridge IGCSE™ History 0470
Year 11 History Mocks revision list - January 2022

The Guide to Paper 1
Unit 1 - Were the peace treaties of 1919-23 fair?

Background:
As soon as the First World War came to an end in November 1918, a peace conference was to be held in Paris
during 1919. This conference produced a number of peace treaties that are referred to collectively as the
Versailles Settlement.
Every country concerned wanted a peace settlement that would maintain the peace. However, this could be
achieved in a variety of ways, hence led to strong disagreement regarding policies such as: punishing the
defeated countries / rewarding the victorious countries → Disagreement led to compromise with the result
that the Versailles Settlement, and especially the TOV, soon became the focus of criticism and debate.
Paris conference was attended by 32 states (excluding the Soviets and the defeated nations)
Main peacemakers were the countries primarily responsible for the defeat of Germany and its allies:
France Italy USA Britain Japan
What were the motives and aims of the Big Three at Versailles?
George Clemenceau (Prime Minister of France)
Characteristics: A hard-headed, tough, and uncompromising politician. His unforgiving attitude towards
Germany developed following the German invasions of France in 1870 and 1914. Wanted a harsh peace to be
imposed on Germany.
Motives:
- Insurance of the future security of France. He thought Germany has to be sufficiently weakened to
prevent any additional invasions of France and Europe as a whole.
- He thought Germany will reinvade through the Eastern frontier
- France shared a common border with Germany (which is not defined by a natural frontier such as a
river)
- The invasion of France in August 1914 was the second time in 50 years that France had been invaded
by Germany. On the first occasion in 1870, during the Franco-Prussian war, France had lost the
province of Alsace-Lorraine.
- Suffered greater than Britain and the US → national desire for revenge (bolstered by the provocative
behavior of the German army e.g. damaging villages/flooding mines.etc)
Aims:
- Permanent disarmament of Germany (navy/airforce)
- Very high reparations
- Return of Alsace-Lorraine to France
- Reward of German colonies to France
- Rhineland area to be formed into an independent state (no need to share border with Germany
anymore)
- Saar Basin to be transferred to France
Thomas Woodrow Wilson (President of the US)
Characteristics: Idealist who took America into WW1 to make the world ‘safe for democracy’. Devised the 14
points in early 1918 which he hoped would form the basis for a peace settlement. Was the main inspiration
behind the LON.
Did the US suffer?: NO

-America had not declared war on Germany until April 1917 and was not fully involved in the war until more
than a year later
-Less American territories were invaded / fewer casualties
-The war had provided profitable trading and business opportunities for the US
Lack of national grievance = Wilson could step back and take a more detaches view of the peace proceedings
→ wanted to be known as a guiding spirit of ‘fair and lasting peace’ → believed his 14 points will achieve the
worldwide peace
Wilson believed that:

- Secret treaties had led to misunderstandings and suspicion → open diplomacy and no secret treaties
- The build-up of armaments had led to war → disarmament of all states (maintaining army for basic
defence)
- Hoped to promote long-term stability in Europe by ‘self-determination’ = allowing national groups to
form independent states
14 points: Important
No secret treaties
Free navigation of seas in peacetime and wartime
Removal of economic trade barrier
Reduction of armaments for all countries
Impartial settlement of colonial disputes taking into account the interests of both the colonial populations and
the governing countries
German troops to leave Russia
Independence of Belgium
Return of Alsace-Lorraine to France
Readjustment of Italian frontiers in line with nationality
Self-determination for people of Austria-Hungary
Evacuation and restoration of invaded Balkan countries
Self-determination for people in the Turkish Empire
Establishment of an independent Poland with access to the sea
Establishment of a general association of nations
Wilson’s approach to the peace was based on ideals hence clashed with the self-interested ambition of Britain
and France (especially regarding acquiring Germany’s colonies)
David Lloyd George (Prime Minister of Britain)
Characteristics: A dynamic, persuasive, and unconventional politician. Acclaimed as the man who won the war.
More of a realist than an idealist. Wanted a peace which would punish Germany but not too harshly.
His views in Nov/Dec 1918:

Britain was likely to share the French desire for a harsh peace settlement to be imposed on Germany as →
- Britain suffered direct attacks on her mainland
- Lots of casualties
- Economy crashed
- Was concerned about the security of France’s eastern frontier because if that were to be crossed by
hostile troops Britain would be under risk as well
- The Britain public insisted on revenge on Germany (in the general election of Nov 1918, he had to
reflect these views regarding Germany to get re-elected)
- Therefore he insisted that Germany should pay the full cost of war (also wanted Germany’s colonies)
His views in Jan 1919:

As he arrived in Paris in Jan 1919, he decided that a more moderate peace settlement was in British interests as
→
- He noticed that British economy is dependent upon the economic revival of Europe (Germany was
Britain’s most important European customer prior to 1914)
- If Germany was deprived of Rhineland, where much of its industry was located, Germany would not
be able to afford British goods (same applies to high reparations)
- Weak Germany = provision of inadequate barrier against the spread of communism from the east
- Cruelty of the TOV could lead to attempts to overturn the Treaty.
Lloyd George’s impact on Clemenceau

Geroge persuaded Clemenceau to →
Abandon the idea of an independent Rhineland state
Abandon the idea of charging extreme reparation of Germany
Abandon the idea that the Saar Basin on the border shared by Germany and France should be transferred to
France
Abandon the idea that Danzig be handed over to Poland
These concessions by the French brought advantage for Britain that German domination in Europe would not
be replaced by French domination. It was Britain’s interest to maintain a balance of power in Europe for this
would help preserve Britain’s position as a world power.
Main terms of the TOV

● War guilt clause (article 231) - Germany and her allies had to accept total responsibility for starting the
war
● Reparations - Germany had to accept liability for reparations, the amount of which would be decided
by a Reparation Commission
● Disarmament of German army
● Demilitarisation of Rhineland
● German colonies of Africa were taken away
● Alsace-Lorraine back to France
● Danzig become a free city controlled by LON (Poland could use this port for its external trade)
● No union between Austria and Germany
● Germany had to accept the covenant or constitution of LON even though it was excluded from the
original membership
Why did all the victors not get everything they wanted?
France:
Achieved
- The TOV satisfied a number of Clemenceau's specific demands with regard to Alsace-Lorraine and the
transfer of some of Germany’s former colonies
- France was the major recipient of German reparations
- France would be secure on her eastern frontier providing Germany with military regulations
- Demilitarisation of Rhineland
- Versailles deprived Germany of a significant proportion of her land, population, and resources which
reduced its economic/military capacity
Not Achieved
- Clemenceau was worried as he thought this would not be enough to weaken Germany, therefore
requested Anglo/American guarantee in which to support France in case of Germany’s re-invasion
- Rejected as:
(i) American congress refused to approve the peace settlement and America withdrew into diplomatic
isolation
(ii) Britain was unwilling to provide any guarantees to France on her own
The United States:

Wilson had mixed feelings about the peace settlements
Achieved
- He was pleased that he had successfully persuaded his partners to accept that the covenant or
constitution of the LON should be included in all the peace treaties → would make the new
peacekeeping organisation become a reality
- Wilson was also partly satisfied by the requirement in all the peace treaties that the defeated powers
should disarm
- Rhineland is not being converted to a separate state (remain part of Germany) / not too high
reparation for Germany → reduce the potential harness of the peace / more likely that Germany
would remain a major economic power able to do business with the US
- Recreation of an independent Poland together with the two entirely new “successor states”,
Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia
Not Achieved (Wilson thought the TOV is too harsh)

- At the insistence of Britain, the free navigation of the seas was abandoned
- Britain/France/Japan had rewarded themselves with Germany’s former colonies even though officially
these colonies were to be governed as mandated territories on the behalf of LON
- While national self-determination for the people of the former Austro-Hungarian empire was broadly
implemented there were some noticeable exceptions →
- Austria was not allowed to unite with Germany
- Sudeten Germans were not considered about their future
Britain (probably the most satisfied):

Achieved: → punishing Germany while maintaining peace/economic balance of Europe (good for British
business and also prevents spread of communism)
- Successfully persuaded Clemenseau to adopt a more moderate approach towards Germany by
offering him an Anglo/American guarantee against future German aggression (which was not done at
the end but yeh)
- Directly promoted British interests by extending her colonies
Not achieved:
- Placement of German-speaking people under French or Polish rule
Impact of the peace treaty on Germany up to 1923
Germans thought the TOV was too harsh as:

High reparations:
Deprivation of resources that were needed to pay for the reparations
However, Germany imposed a harsh treaty on Soviets in March 1918, so it could be argued that Germany was
now getting a taste of its own medicine.
Diktat:
Germany claimed that the TOV was a diktat as German statesmen and officials were excluded from the
negotiations and were threatened to sign the treaty to prevent the allied naval blockade from restarting the
war.
Wair guilt clause:

Legal basis for reparation which rubbed salt on Germany’s wound./ They were not convinced that the fault of
starting the war is completely on them → argued that the first military action that led up to conflict was the
Russian mobilisation of July 1914
Political impact of TOV on Germany:

The Weimar government signed the TOV on 28 June 1919 as they had no choice but to sign it as they were
threatened by the allies (said they would restart war if Germany refuses to sign) → TOV was the symbol of
Germany’s dishonour and humiliation and the gov signed it = built distrust and was deprived of much-needed
support during its early years
- Right-wing politicians/activists attempted to overthrow the government (e.g. Munich Putsch of Nov
1923)
- Right-wing extremists carried out a number of assassinations of government ministers
- Left-wing extremists promoted rebellions (e.g. such as in the Rhur of March 1920)
- Members of the army who disliked the disarmament clauses of TOV, joined the Freikorps → gov tried
to disband this group in March 1923 due to the allied pressure, Freikorps led by Wolfgang Kapp staged
a coup in Berlin and declared a new national gov (army refused to intervene and Weimar republic
nearly collapsed, saved by the general worker’s strike)
Economic impact of TOV on Germany:

- Figure of 6.6 billion euro was announced in 1921 by the reparation commission → Germany said
that’s too much too pay and they cannot afford it (probably lying, but can be true)
- Reparation caused inflation/unemployment/poverty/homelessness/deprivation of resources
- Germany paid first reparations in 1921 and said that they cannot make the 1922 payment
- Frech/Belgium thought they are lying and in Jan 1923, they occupied the Rhur to seize coal and
resources to the value of the missed payments
- German gov wasnt in the position to callup the military, so they ordered passive resistance (strike
action)
- French expelled 100,000 Germans and killed over 130
- German government hence faced a situation in which its expenditure had increased, due to th need to
feed and displace the Rhur population, yet its income had declined due to the ending of Rhur taxation
receipts → therefore printed more money → HYPERINFLATION
- In August 1923 Gustav Stresemann became Chancellor and ended the passive resistance in Rhur
- In October he introduced new currency (Rentenmark) → Germany’s finance sabilised
- Dawes plan of April 1924 provided more flexible repayments schedule
- Five years later young plan reduced reparation to 2 billion euro
Impact of TOV on defeated countries: No need to know everything tbh just note that
● the defeated countries had to disarm
● they had to pay reparations
● they lost land to other countries
Could the treaties be justified at the time?

Harsh:
Not harsh enough:

Fair:
Unit 2 - To what extent was the League of Nations a success?
Background -
After the First World War, it was believed by a number of statesmen that a broad-based organisation
that would address a wide range of international issues as well as meet to sort out disputes and
crises was needed to stop another war.
The statesmen were Jan Smuts of South Africa, Lloyd George of Britain and Woodrow Wilson of the
United States. Their idea formed the League of Nations.
The Covenant of the League of Nations’ primary purpose was to ensure world peace, but also to
promote international cooperation on issues such as economic and social problems as well as
disarmament. It proved effective for a while, but most people believe that it failed in its main
purpose as war was to break out again in 1939.
How successful was the League in the 1920s?

Successes -
- Aaland Islands, 1921
Sweden and Finland both claimed the rights to a group of islands (the Aalands) situated in
the Baltic Sea. Most wanted to be ruled by Sweden - but the League investigated and
awarded the Islands to Finland but with some safeguards (including demilitarisation).
Sweden accepted the decision.
- Upper Silesia, 1921

A valuable industrial area, Upper Silesia was situated on the border between Germany and
Poland. Poland was given the land under the terms of the draft Treaty of Versailles, but the
Germans protested against this. It was determined that a plebiscite would be held (a vote on
a single issue). The results of this election were divided - the overall results suggested it
should be given to Germany but some rural parts had an overwhelming majority in favour of
Poland. The League suggested a partition was made after riots and protests, and therefore
Eastern Upper Silesia was given to Poland and Western Upper Silesia was given to Germany.
- Mosul, 1924
In 1924, Turkey claimed the Kurdish-populated province of Mosul as their own. It was owned
at the time by the British-mandated territory of Iraq. A ruling was given by the League after
some investigation and a decision was eventually rewarded in favour of Iraq. Turkey accepted
the judgement.
- Greece v Bulgaria, 1925

In south-east Europe, Greece was ordered to pay £45,000 in compensation to Bulgaria after
its invasion of Bulgarian territory. This was judged a disproportionate response after the
shooting of a Greek troop in an exchange of fire. Greece accepted the ruling but felt it had
been treated unfairly after the Corfu incident with Italy previously.
Failures -
- Teschen, 1919/20
Poland and Czechoslovakia fought over an area rich in coal. The League researched the issue
and decided to split the area between both countries. Neither were happy.
- Vilna, 1920
After the Versailles Treaty was signed, Vilna, with a largely Polish population, was made the
capital city of the new sovereign state Lithuania. A Polish army seized the city in 1920,
causing Lithuania to appeal. The League asked Polish troops to withdraw while a plebiscite
was held. They didn't. The matter was passed on to the Conference of Ambassadors (a group
of senior Allied diplomats, also involved in the Corfu dispute), who awarded Vilna to Poland.
- Ruhr, 1923
Germany defaulted on its reparations payments in 1922. This should have been deferred to
the League, but it wasn’t - instead, France (supported by Belgium) decided to take unilateral
action to occupy the Ruhr in January 1923. This was the industrial heartland of Germany.
This action made the League seem like a winners’ club designed to pursue winners’ interests.
- Corfu, 1923
This was probably the most important League dispute during the 1920s, as it exposed their
weaknesses in dealing with a major power. Italy was led by Mussolini at the time, a dictator
who ordered the invasion of the Greek island of Corfu in response to the killing of an Italian
general and some of his staff. They had been on patrol on the border between Greece and
Albania. The murders had taken place on Greek soil. Mussolini wanted 50 million lira in
compensation for the murders, and when Greece was unable to supply this, Italy took direct
action.
Greece appealed to the League who at first condemned the invasion, but Mussolini ordered
that the issue be passed on to the Conference of Ambassadors, who decided that Greece
should pay the compensation and Italy should withdraw its troops from Corfu.
In effect, this was seen globally as a sign that the League couldn’t deal with bullies. Partly to
do with the result of the weaknesses exposed by this incident in the League, the British and
French devised the Geneva Protocol to strengthen the League, which stated that all disputes
that could not be negotiated by the countries themselves had to be taken to the
International Court of Justice. This however was never passed, as following a change in the
British government, the scheme was never approved.
Incidents resolved outside the League

- French security
France was worried about their border security, and did not trust the new League security
system. They signed mutual assistance agreements with Poland and Czechoslovakia as well
as other Eastern European countries, so in case of German aggression, they would come to
each other’s aid. This broke the no secret treaties rule of the Treaty of Versailles.
- The Locarno Treaties

These were treaties signed between France, Belgium and Germany to ensure that their
shared borders were fixed. This was the first time since 1918 that Germany would be treated
on the same level as other countries in Europe. This did not cover the Eastern European
borders however.
- Kellogg-Briand Pact
In 1927, Briand (French Foreign Minister) and Kellogg (the American Secretary of State)
signed a pact renouncing war. By 1928, it had 65 more countries signed on including
Germany, Italy and Japan. It amounted to little more than a statement of good intentions -
although if the League was to fail it would be seen as a backup plan.
How far did weaknesses in the League’s organisation make failure inevitable?
The structure of the League
Assembly - met once a year, considered general matters concerning the League (membership, budget
etc.) Every member had one vote.
Council - the executive body. Met 4-5 times a year and more
in times of crisis. Had permanent and non-permanent
members (Germany added as permanent in 1926).
PCJ (Permanent Court of Justice) - Offered to settle

disagreements between countries in dispute. Provided legal
advice to the Council. Staffed by 11 judges and 4 deputies.
ILO (International Labour Organisation) - Designed to

promote good working conditions and practises. Seen as one
of the few successes of the League.
Committees (Health, Refugee etc.) - designed to tackle

specific issues based around their founding. Health still exists
today as the WHO (again seen as one of a few successes).
Membership of the League

Wilson wanted all countries to be represented - they weren’t. This became one of the core issues to
do with the League’s downfall.
- The USA
Originally, they refused to join. This was because a majority of the US Senate believed that
they would become too heavily involved in future disputes that shouldn’t have involved
them. This meant that the League was deprived of the single most powerful country in the
world - this came as a heavy blow to them.
- Germany
They were not allowed to join the League originally until they had demonstrated their
peaceful intentions, even though they had to sign the Covenant as part of the Versailles
Treaty. They were allowed to join in 1926 but this was short-lived due to Hitler’s foreign
policy of taking Germany out of the League in 1933.
- USSR
They were not invited to join the League due to their ideological beliefs about Communism
vs Capitalism. The Soviets didn’t desire to join them as well - the Brits, France and Japan had
been supporting the counter-revolution during the Russian Civil War in the late 1910s to
early 1920s. They did eventually join the League in 1934, but were expelled in 1939 due to
the Soviet invasion of Finland.
- Japan
They were founding members of the League, until they left in 1933 over their invasion of
Manchuria.
- Italy
Another founding member, they left in 1937 following their invasion of Abyssinia and the
imposition of sanctions.
- Britain and France

They were the only major countries to be members throughout the existence of the League
of Nations. They had the responsibility of making the League work, but due to their damage
from the First World War it took second place in the minds of the British and French
politicians.
Collective Security
These were three stages to stop an aggressive power.
Note - All decisions taken by the Assembly or Council had to be unanimous - but to enforce the last
point, the League had no army - they had to rely on other member states to send armies which
meant the military sanctions were rarely taken seriously.
Moral disapproval ● Following an aggressive act the Council would meet to vote on
whether to condemn the action.
● The aggressor may feel that the world’s opinion against them was
too much and drop the action.
Economic sanctions ● If the above failed the Council would impose economic sanctions.
● This involved organising a trade boycott and refusing credit.
Military sanctions ● If the above failed, as a last resort, military sanctions would be
imposed.
● This may involve sending an army to assist the victim of the
aggression.
How successful was the work of the League’s agencies? (Pg 29, Cantrell)
Refugee Organisation
They originally had to tackle the issue of the thousands of prisoners of war stranded mainly in the
USSR, Poland, France, Germany and Turkey. This organisation helped these prisoners of war back to
their home countries or to different homes, and were very successful.
Health Organisation
This is regarded as one of the most successful League agencies. Ludwig Rachjman and his team
managed to link the League to non-member states and give all of them timely public health advice.
Specifically, one of their biggest wins was to stop a typhus epidemic in Siberia by giving Russians
basic health advice. They also developed vaccines for diseases such as diphtheria, tetanus and
tuberculosis. They still exist today as the World Health Organisation, affiliated with the UN. They
were successful.
Economic and Financial Organisation

After World War I, a lot of countries were in economic crisis. This could be due to new borders or just
other issues to do with the economy in general. The League devised a plan to stop countries going
into debt and this involved controlling interest rates, the circulation of banknotes etc. This was
successful.
International Labour Organisation

During the 1920s, their main goal was to improve working conditions for people globally. It collected
data on worldwide employment practices, published the results and tried to make governments
deliver on actions. It published information on safety in the workplace, for example the dangers
involving the use of lead in printing. They advised countries to raise the minimum employment age,
and they established other popular benchmarks on top of this. They did well at forcing countries to
take action.
Slavery Commission
Their prime aim was to completely wipe out slavery. In some countries they were successful, using
reports and pressuring to make countries enact change - in some they weren’t, as it in part still exists
today.
Disarmament Commission
It has been said that the Disarmament Commission made the most disappointing progress of all.
They were aiming for most countries to disarm permanently - the ones who did only because they
were forced to by peace treaties - the others didn’t as such (WW2 happened soon after). The biggest
failure of them all for this was the World Disarmament Conference of 1932-34, after which Hitler
began rearming Nazi Germany.
How far did the Depression make the work of the League more difficult?
In October 1929, the Wall Street Crash marked the beginning of a universal economic recession.
There was a dramatic rise in unemployment and fall in production. Every capitalist country was
affected, including the USA and more importantly Germany, where the unemployment rate was the
largest in the world.
Consequences of the Wall Street Crash
In short, the Depression made the League’s work considerably more difficult.
How successful was the League in the 1930s?

The positive aspects of the League’s work in the ‘30s included -
- The continuing work of the agencies, committees and commissions. The Saar Commission,
for example, successfully organised the plebiscite that led to the return of the Saar to
Germany in January 1935.
- The contribution towards border disputes in South America between Bolivia and Paraguay
over the Chaco and between Peru and Colombia over Leticia.
But mostly, the League was disastrous during the 1930s - and there were three main events that led
to their downfall.
1) The Japanese Invasion of Manchuria
2) The failure of the World Disarmament Conference
3) The Italian invasion of Abyssinia
By 1936, the League had become largely irrelevant to most of Europe.
Japan’s invasion of Manchuria

Manchuria was a province of North-East China near its border with Korea, where Japan had been in
control since 1905. There were a few trading routes running through Manchuria that were owned by
the Japanese to ensure a steady stream of supplies for Korea. There were Japanese guards stationed
along the track, in position with their rights.
Japan had been badly hit by the Depression - it was not self-sufficient and depended on imports to
feed its growing population. These imports were paid for by exporting silk, but as demand fell Japan
had to act. This is why they invaded Manchuria.
(also had a line that went to Vladivostok in Russia, but this was the important one)
The Mukden Railway Incident

Japanese soldiers staged an incident along the railway in September 1931 and blamed the Chinese
for it. They used this as an excuse to invade the local area - and when China appealed to the League
they promised to withdraw. They didn’t and invaded the entire area. In March 1932 it was renamed
Manchukuo.
What was the response of the League?
There wasn’t really one. The European powers did not want to fight, or reduce trade, or have their
colonies invaded. Therefore, they set up the Lytton Commission to research the issue, and the
research concluded that although the Japanese were provoked, there was no reason for an attack.
This report was accepted - and Japan terminated its membership of the League.
This showed that the League needed to respond faster - a successful challenge by a European power
would have been considerably more effective.
Why did the World Disarmament Conference of 1932-34 fail?

Before the First World War began there had been an arms race - which it had been thought that it
made the war more likely. After 1918, disarmament was seen as a key point to promote world peace,
and as one of Wilson’s fourteen points was one of the key passages of the Treaty of Versailles, even if
only defeated powers needed to disarm.
The Disarmament Commission arranged this conference so the issues surrounding disarmament
could be debated and resolutions adopted.
Why did the members fail to agree?

- France, Poland and Czechoslovakia felt the need to have arms to protect themselves against
future attacks from Germany.
- France was willing to disarm, but only with guarantees from the US and the UK, neither of
which were given.
- Hitler exploited France’s fear and withdrew.
- The exit of Japan showed that disarmament was a long way off.
Soon after, most countries withdrew and started rearming in the buildup to World War 2.
Did Italy’s invasion of Abyssinia destroy the League?

Abyssinia was the last remaining independent
state in Africa and had minor economic value,
as it was generally rocky wasteland. It was
surrounded by other Italian territories, and
the Italians had tried and failed to invade
once before - they were searching for
revenge. The Abyssinian army was
outmatched - leading to Mussolini’s decision
to invade.
Following an incident at Wal Wal border in

December 1934, Mussolini built up forces in
Eritrea and Somaliland. They launched an attack without a declaration of War.
The League responded with sanctions that did not involve essential war materials and kept the Suez
Canal open - leading to very little change. To avoid embarrassment the British and the French made
the Hoare-Laval Pact, which gave ⅔ of Abyssinia to the Italians in return for peace. There was
backlash to this in Britain and France, so it never got signed. The Italians captured the capital in May
1936, and sanctions were lifted in June of that year. This was a death blow to the League, which
although it continued, was of very little importance for the rest of its short lifespan.
Unit 4 - Who was to blame for the Cold War?
(ok so im js gonna summerise for yall) - also some of my “n”s and “h”s r missing cuz my laptop is
broken
Basically by the end of 1945 the cold war bega to emerge (the cold war = is generally speakig of te
tesio betwee USSR and US ok)
The world was split into 2 : bitches who were cotrolled by USSR and bitches who loved US
USA & USSR blamed eachotehr cuz US thought : USSR = trying to take over the world by spreading
communism and we hate that” USSR though = US r tryinng to build a ‘global ecoomic empire’ with
themselves being the centre
There were a couple of reasons for this tension:
1. Ideological diff
So political ideology diff first :
USSR = commuism/1 rule dictator ship/democratic/socialist type shit ( everyone equal) - oh
also they’re economy is state control u gotta know that & very little political rights
USA = capitalist ok everyone freedom (freedom speech business’ r owned by individuals/
multiparty electios)
Then on oct 1917 - the Russian Civil war happend (against communnists) and dumb british
bitches helped so more tension
Also stalin had this randomass idea that “britain and france wanted Germany to expand
(hitler imeant)
So bc of that he signed the Nazi-Soviet pact on Aug 1939
2. Wartime disagreements
So here they kina become besties ( short term) : The allies and USSR have the same goal : to fuck up
Germany and defeat Nazism or some shit like that so tey cooperated ( you don’t need to know any
further)
So distrust arose from there - Stalin didn’t trust the bitches the bitches didn’t trust stalin. Oh also
Engima happend wich was like developing tis macihine thing fo code breaking and tey didn’t tell
USSR.
3. Attitude towards Germany in post-war

So y the end of 1944 churchill and stalin became besties cuz churchill is trying to cooperate
(unlike truman in future u need to know they’re differences). Ok so they discuss abt making
tis “sphere of influence” which is a “territory where one country has political or economic
conntrol”. And the Big three so stalin churchill and roosevllit meet onn 1945 (Feb) to discuss
yalta conference
Yalta is rlly important u slhd know tihs one.
Ok yalta summary : yalta goal - to discuss 4 things
1. What they’re gonna do w Germay after defeated

2. Future of Poland
3. Getting USSR involved in war with Japan ( i have no idea why tf japan is involved)
4. EStalishing the UN
So what agreements were made :
unconditional surrender of Germany & no separate peace

Berlin = divided into 4 occupation zones
Germany’s easter border → moved to west
REparations need 2 be payed (amount is $20billion) - also half is going to USSR
Second one:
Initially the UN was gonna consist of all states at war with Ger
The security countil (idk if this is diff to UN) would consist of permanent memers (5) and tey have
this thing called veto power
Tey made arrangements to assemble the UN in San francisco
Last one poland one:

I have no idea wtf this means so im just gonna copy this:
“A provisional gov would e establishhed incorporating members of the pro-soviet “lublin” gov and
exiled “london” poes woh fled from Ger and soviet armies in 1939”
Also free and fair multi party elections held asap
Thats it for Yalta
Ok now Potsdamn also vv important this oe was July 1945

So the diff is the members r diff cuz rip roosevelt hes replaced with truman
Ok so members for potsdam is : truman, stalin and attlee??? (who tf-)
Ok ad then asically US and britain were hiding shit from Stalin ab the Manattan project (this is
importnat) whic was the development of an atomic bomb and they were keeping it secret from stalin
But stalin actually knew cuz he has spies
So more distrust
And then theres a lot of disagreements that take place during this time period cuz the allies basically
don’t agree with stali at all
Disagreements :
- The allies disagree over future of Polands’ gov so it says as the soviet-controlled gov at lublin
- Stalin wants to disember germany to prevent it from developing its own industries but the
allies reject
- USSR wants to gain like a secure position in Japan for some random reason and it gets
rejected
- Also USSR is a selfish bitch ok the mf wants to make use of Germany’s industrial heartland
ain the Ruhr but its rejected obviously
But some agreements were made:

Agreements
1. Polish/german border is established
2. Germany = denazified & war crimes r held inn Japan and germany
3. Germany would e goverbed y allied control council in berlin and also none of the occupying
powers can make a decision on Germany’s future without an agreement from the other
powers
4. Each country = allied t take reparations and USSR gets special treatment they can take
equipment from industrialised western zones
5. Council of foreign ministers is formed ( CFM) wich is for dealing with defeated european
powers like ger
So thats it and then basically USSR are sbeing selfish bithces and USSR continues to piss of
the allies for reasons :
1. They prioritise gettting reparations for like domestic rebuild and shit
2. So they basically leave US and britain to suffer and Britain basically have to like
produce shit for germany bc USSR won’t help and US have to also help and britain
have to introduce rationing and shit. In may 1946 clay stop thhis bbs and yeah more
tension
How did USSR gained control over Eastern Europe?
Trigger:
- political vacuum and anarchy, want to restore law and order
Steps of gaining control

- Red Army occupied Eastern Europe according to Percentages Agreement (right) spheres of
influence.
- Stalin wanted to occupy more and wanted a buffer zone after loss of 20 million lives.
- July 1945, USSR controlled Baltic States, Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria,
Romania.
- In 1945, communists took power in Albania, Bulgaria (elected by coalition, executed
opposition), & E Germany
- In 1947, communists took over Romania (abolished monarchy), Poland (arrested opposition,
won by election)
- Hungary – arrested and executed opposition using secret police churches were attacked.
- In 1948, communist leader Gottwald took power in Czechoslovakia by controlling the radio,
army, police and arresting opposition. Non-communist minister Masaryk committed suicide.
- 1949, GDR was established
How did the USA respond to Soviet expansionism?
- US gave aid to Greece and Turkey during their civil wars when Britain withdrew (Feb 1947) to
prevent
- Marshall Aid offered to all countries including USSR & discussed during Paris Conference (July
1947) but Stalin forbade communists to go. Started Cominform (Oct 1947) and COMECON to
support iron curtain economies.
- Iron curtain speech led to an atmosphere of tension, recrimination and mutual
demonization.
Aims for the Marshall plan

- To aid rebuilding of Europe
- To restore economy and curb communism’s appeal and spread capitalism
- Form allies close to USSR & extenuate their foothold
- Expand markets to prevent worldwide slump
- Dominate Europe by making them dependent on $
Communism based aims:

- Spread revolution and provide assistance to Soviet satellites & communist parties
- Defend satellites against US influence o Keep a close eye on satellites
- Ensure loyalty
- All Eastern European countries must be communist
Consequences for the Berlin blockade

- Germany permanently divided. Iron curtain concept strengthened. An open confrontation of
the cold war, tensions got much worse. NATO formed in 1949 and Warsaw Pact in 1955 - two
armed camps. Arms race also began set up a ‘tense balance’ with no hot war which was
symbolic of the cold war period. Tensions increased as allies merged zones (1946 – Trizonia),
new currency/new countries/iron curtain speech, Berlin blockade, Marshall Aid. (1945- 1949)
Irony in in Stalin and his policies
- Policy started by Khrushchev during the era of peaceful coexistence. Tito (Yugoslavia) was
allowed autonomy to ease relations, who then left Warsaw Pact. Closed down Cominform as
a part of his policy of reconciliation with Tito. Khrushchev thought Stalin was inhumane so he
invited Tito to Moscow and dismissed Molotov, executed Beria (head of state secret police),
set free political prisoners, pulled out of Austria, met western leaders at post war summits
(July ’55) and criticized Stalin’s Purges, terror, tyranny on 20th party congress, eased relation
with China, reduced arms expenditure, improved living standards. Main aim did not change:
must create buffer against attack from West through Warsaw Pact.
Who was more to blame for the cold war?

- Blame USSR for radical ideology dedicated to world revolution and justifies perception of
threat
- Blame USA for underestimating USSR’s loss and misperceiving defense as hostility
- Blame both for miscommunication, tension, and ideological differences.
Unit 5 - How effectively did the USA contain the spread of Communism?
After WW2, the greatest threat the USA saw as danger was Communism. The Russian Revolution in 1917, then
followed by communists taking power in China led to the US becoming more and more concerned about
communism spreading over the world. Russia’s plans to dominate Europe and the world with a group of
countries with a communist background posed a great threat to America’s economy, politics, and ideological
interests.
In the event that moral, economic, and diplomatic pressure fails to deter an aggressor, the UN allows to use
armed forces. Since 1945 there has been one occasion when these extreme measures have been used: Korea.
1910-1945:
- Korea was controlled by Japan
1945:
- Japanese troops based in Korea surrendered to the Soviet Russians in the North and to the Americans
in the South
July 1945:
- 38th parallel, a line that divides between the Soviet and American zones was set
1947:
- The UNO called for free nationwide elections to elect a democratic government for the whole of Korea
1948:
- Elections were held in the South under UNO supervision. The Republic of Korea was set up under the
presidency of Syngman Rhee, with a capital Seoul
- Soviets established the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea under the dictatorship of Kim Il-Sung,
with its capital at Pyongyang
- Both governments claimed to be the legitimate government of the whole of Korea
Why did North Korea invade South Korea in June 1950?

- Kim Il-Sung wanted to unite Korea under communist rule. By June 1950 he had good reason to
presume that an invasion of South Korea would be successful and enable him to achieve his ambition.
- Kim had the support of both the Soviet and Chinese leaders, Stalin and Mao Zedong
- North Korea’s armed forces, supplied with tanks, heavy artillery, and planes by Soviet Russia, were
much stronger than South Korea
- Kim thought that an American response was unlikely now that China was communist and Soviet Russia
had the atomic bomb
- Leading American politicians had made public statement that seemed to suggest that Korea was not a
major American defence priority
How did UNO become involved?

- The UNO had been closely associated with the establishment of the new anti-communist government
of South Korea, though it had been excluded from events leading up to the formation of the
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. When North Korean troops crossed the border into South
Korea on 25 June 1950, the Security Council met the same day.
- The 1st resolution of calling for the cessation of hostilities and withdrawal of North Korean forces was
passed, and was possible due to the absence of Soviet (cuz USA did not allow communist China into
UNO), if they were present the resolution would have been vetoed.
- As the North had no intention to withdraw, security council established the 2nd resolution.
→ Recommends that the members of the UN furnish such assistance to the Republic of Korea as may
be necessary to repel the armed attack and to restore international peace and security in the area
- Further resolution passed 10 days later made clear how the military forces were to be organised and
led
→ Recommends that all members providing military forces and other assistance pursuant to the
aforesaid Security Council resolutions make such forces and other assistance available to a unified
command under the United States of America (troops of the US and 15 diff countries were sent to
South Korea)
What was the attitude of the USA to the invasion of South Korea?
- USA had been closely associated with the establishment of the Republic of Korea
- The USA was determined to halt any further communist expansion under their policy of
containment
- The Americans regarded world communism as a single force directed from Moscow. The
North Korean action was, therefore, assumed to be part of a soviet plan
- The USA thought that a successful conquest of South Korea would encourage Chinese attack
on Formosa. If South Korea and Formosa fell to the communist then the position of Japan
could also be threatened. Japan was America’s key interest in the Far East.
- In the American view, the fall of South Korea, Formosa, and Japan to the communists would
represent a major shift in the power balance between the communist and capitalist world.
- It was argued that the most effective way to prevent such a shift from happening was to
make a firm response to the first sign of communist aggression; this meant opposing North
Korean invasion of South Korea
- If the UNO had failed to act over this issue then there is no doubt that the Americans would
have acted on their own
- As it was, the UNO action was overwhelmingly American in character: the UNO forces were
commanded by the American General MacArthur; half of the ground forces were American;
more than 90 percent of the air forces were American and 85 percent of the naval forces
were American
What were the results of the Korean War for the UNO?
- UNO action over Korea showed that it was more purposeful than the LON has ever been. Military
sanctions had been used to reverse an act of aggression supported by two major powers (Soviet
Russia and China)
BUT
- The UNO failed to achieve its objective of a ‘unified, independent and democratic government’ for
Korea
- The UNO operation was scarred by both major misjudgments (as when MacArthur assured President
Truman that the Chinese would not intervene in the war just before UNO forces crossed the 38th
parallel in October 1950) and substantial damage to both property and life. Approximately four million
Koreans died as a result of the war, and countless others were made homeless and destitute
- UNO action had only been possible as a result of America’s refusal to admit communist China to the
UNO and Soviet’s protest against this decision between Jan and Aug 1950
- Military action was made possible by the presence of large numbers of American troops that had been
stationed in Japan since 1945
- It could be argued that the USA used the UNO to reinforce its foreign policy over the Korean issue. The
USA was determined to end the aggression of North Korea in June 1950. The Security Council
resolutions and the UNO flag gave the enterprise the appearance of an international coalition against
aggression. The Soviets claimed that the UNO had been used as a capitalist tool against communism
Why did America become involved in Cuba?

- In the Treaty of Pairs in 1898, Cuba gained its independence from Spain.
- Under Cuba’s new constitution, the USA had the right to intervene in Cuban affairs and to supervise its
finances and foreign relations
- Cuba served an economic purpose for America as it forced the Cubans to sell raw materials for low
prices. The USA also made sure that Cuba bought American manufactured goods, and by 1914
three-quarters of Cuban imports can from the USA.
- The USA also invested heavily in the Cuban economy: the railway industry was run by the USA, and
two-thirds of all arable land was under American control.
- The USA also took control of Guantanamo Bay and made it an important base for the US navy.
Cuba in the 1950s

- After 50 years of independence but under heavy American influence, discontent started to spread in
Cuba. Unhappiness at American involvement in Cuba was evident among the people.
- The USA had a huge influence over Cuban politics. No Cuban government would be elected unless
they were willing to implement policies favourable to the USA.
- In return for their cooperation, government ministers in Cuba received payments from American
businessmen.
- The attractiveness of Cuba to visiting Americans increased. Cuba became a holiday island for rich
Americans. It was a place where they could enjoy pleasures that were illegal in many states in North
America. These included drinking, gambling, and prostitution.
- The relaxed gov of Cuba enabled American Mafias to control the gamblings in Cuba. Often the Mafia
even had agreements with the president of Cuba to protect their interests.
How did tensions develop between Cuba and America?

- In 1959 Cuba underwent a revolution. The unpopular regime of President Batista was overthrown by
the revolutionary Fidel Castro. Castro promised to restore power in Cuba to its people and to end the
American corruption in the country.
- Fidel Castro
Pre-political career
- Born to a wealthy Cuban family with American links. Graduated as a lawyer
Political career
- Campaigned against Batista’s regime in Cuba and managed to overthrow it with a guerrilla
force.
- Gained support by promising to give the land back to the people and to defend the rights of
the poor.
Character and outlook
- A divisive figure, Castro gained support and fame by being someone who managed to stand
up to America
How did the USA react to the Cuban revolution?
- Changes made by Castro reduced American influence in Cuba → America resented its loss of control
over the country, but was also concerned about the spread of communist ideas so close to America
- Castro nationalised lots of industries, causing American firms in Cuba that dominated the area for a
while to withdraw
- President Eisenhower began economic sanctions, stop trading with Cuba, and refused to buy Cuban
raw materials and sugar. (to undermine the Castro regime and to force changes in economic policies
- On 17 March 1960, President Eisenhower approved a plan at the meeting of the US National Security
Council to remove Castro
The bay of Pigs invasion

- The CIA set up training camps in Guatemala and by November the operation had trained a small army
for an assault landing and guerilla warfare. A leading exiled politician, Jose Miro Cardona was lined up
to become the new president if the plan succeeded
Plan failed
- The bay of Pigs invasion was a disaster. America failed in both objectives: Castro was not removed and
the USA had to admit responsibility for the attacks
- Poor secrecy: Despite government efforts to keep the invasion plans covert, it became common
knowledge among Cuban exiles in Miami. Through Cuban intelligence, Castro learned of the guerrilla
training camps in Guatemala and was therefore prepared for an attack
- Failure to control the air: The plan started to unravel from the very first action. The airstrikes missed
many of their targets and the public knew the American support of the mission (Photos of American
planes painted as Cuban planes became public)
- Failure to gain support: When the invasion forces landed on the beaches along the Bay of Pigs they
immediately came under heavy fire. Some escaped through the sea, others were killed or captured.
Very few, if any, of the Cuban population joined the invaders.
- Response: Castro ordered roughly 20 000 troops to advance toward the beach and Cuban air force
continued to control the skies. Without American air support and with such small troops numbers the
invasion failed
The aftermath:
- The captured troops were paraded by Castro and used as propaganda. His popularity increased as he
repelled an American invasion. Eventually, after 20 months in prison, the USA negotiated a deal to
exchange the prisoner for goods scarce in Cuba, with Castro receiving baby food and medicine worth
$53 million.
The Cuban Missile crisis

- The attempted American invasion in Cuba showed how vulnerable Castro’s new government was to
American influence.
- The USA had made it clear that they wanted to remove Castro and install a more USA-friendly ruler.
- Castro’s country was not capable of long-term defence against American aggression, however with
support from other communist countries they would be more likely to survive.
Why were there nuclear missiles in Cuba?

- There are several reasons why Russia deployed weapons in Cuba
(i) Political reasons
- Some within the Soviet Union felt Khrushshv was not aggressive enough towards America. They felt he
was weak and in the past had appeased the Americans.
- A message needed to be sent out that he was strong. Cuba was an ally of the Soviet Union. Missiles
there would act as a deterrent against another attack like the one in the previous year.
(ii) Military reasons
- The Soviet Union did not have a close enough base from which to strike America. As Cuba was only 90
miles away missiles placed on the island would be able to reach the USA.
- The USA had recently placed missiles in Turkey which bordered the Soviet Union. Placing missiles in
Cuba would give the USA less of an advantage.

Unit 1 - TOV

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Unit 1 - TOV

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Syllabus Cambridge IGCSE™ History 0470

Year 11 History Mocks revision list - January 2022

Unit 1 - Were the peace treaties of 1919-23 fair?

George Clemenceau (Prime Minister of France)

Thomas Woodrow Wilson (President of the US)

Did the US suffer?: NO

Wilson believed that:

David Lloyd George (Prime Minister of Britain)

His views in Nov/Dec 1918:

His views in Jan 1919:

Lloyd George’s impact on Clemenceau

Main terms of the TOV

The United States:

Not Achieved (Wilson thought the TOV is too harsh)

Britain (probably the most satisfied):

Impact of the peace treaty on Germany up to 1923

Germans thought the TOV was too harsh as:

Wair guilt clause:

Political impact of TOV on Germany:

Economic impact of TOV on Germany:

Could the treaties be justified at the time?

Not harsh enough:

Unit 2 - To what extent was the League of Nations a success?

How successful was the League in the 1920s?

- Upper Silesia, 1921

- Greece v Bulgaria, 1925

Incidents resolved outside the League

- The Locarno Treaties

PCJ (Permanent Court of Justice) - Offered to settle

ILO (International Labour Organisation) - Designed to

Committees (Health, Refugee etc.) - designed to tackle

Membership of the League

- Britain and France

Economic and Financial Organisation

International Labour Organisation

Consequences of the Wall Street Crash

How successful was the League in the 1930s?

Japan’s invasion of Manchuria

The Mukden Railway Incident

Why did the World Disarmament Conference of 1932-34 fail?

Why did the members fail to agree?

Did Italy’s invasion of Abyssinia destroy the League?

​Following an incident at Wal Wal border in

Unit 4 - Who was to blame for the Cold War?

There were a couple of reasons for this tension:

So bc of that he signed the Nazi-Soviet pact on Aug 1939

3. Attitude towards Germany in post-war

Yalta is rlly important u slhd know tihs one.

Ok yalta summary : yalta goal - to discuss 4 things

1. What they’re gonna do w Germay after defeated

So what agreements were made :

unconditional surrender of Germany & no separate peace

Tey made arrangements to assemble the UN in San francisco

Last one poland one:

Thats it for Yalta

Ok now Potsdamn also vv important this oe was July 1945

Ok so members for potsdam is : truman, stalin and attlee??? (who tf-)

But stalin actually knew cuz he has spies

But some agreements were made:

How did USSR gained control over Eastern Europe?

Steps of gaining control

How did the USA respond to Soviet expansionism?

Aims for the Marshall plan

Communism based aims:

Following an incident at Wal Wal border in