HISTORY PAPER 1 GRADE 12 NSC PAST PAPERS AND MEMOS FEBRUARY/MARCH 2017
ADDENDUM
QUESTION 1: HOW DID THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE SOVIET UNION RESPOND TO THE ECONOMIC CRISIS IN EUROPE AFTER 1945? SOURCE 1A The extract below focuses on the reasons for the Marshall Plan (USA) and the COMECON (USSR).
The Marshall Plan (or the European Recovery Programme) was a direct consequence of the Containment Policy. It was an economic and social reconstruction (rebuilding) plan for Europe designed to speed up recovery in the countries still suffering the effects of World War II. The plan was named after Secretary of State George Marshall, who presented the theory behind the plan in a commencement address at Harvard in 1947. He (Secretary of State George Marshall) believed that economic stability was key to political stability, and crushing Soviet influence in Europe. Once talks began to put the plan in place, all of the Allies, including the Soviet Union, in an effort to gain Stalin's trust, were invited to a meeting in Paris to negotiate the terms of American aid in Europe. Unsurprisingly, Stalin was extremely sceptical (doubtful) of the plan and believed it would create an anti-Soviet bloc. Though the aid was open to all European countries, Stalin ordered those under his Eastern Bloc to reject American aid and created a Soviet plan as a response to the Marshall Plan. In 1948 President Truman asked Congress to facilitate the implementation of the Marshall Plan in 16 Western European countries. Aid under the Marshall Plan first went to Greece and Turkey to continue to crush communist influence there … Money from the Marshall Plan was mostly used to buy American imports, like food and fuel, as local sources had been wiped out by the war … The Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON) was founded in 1949 by the Soviet Union, Bulgaria, Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. It was the Soviet Union's and Eastern Bloc's reaction to the Marshall Plan and the Organisation for European Economic Cooperation in Western Europe.
SOURCE 1B This extract focuses on Everett Bellows' view of the Marshall Plan. He was the Assistant Executive Officer who was responsible for the implementation of the Marshall Plan.
It was, of course, the great and original initiative. It was unheard of – as far as I know, and I do read some history – for any victorious nation to go in and rebuild the battlefields, to reconstitute (modify) the economy; it was done with a dual purpose. The immediate beneficiaries (receivers), the Europeans, needed the help. Secondly, from the United States' point of view, it was important that they not collapse and fall within the Soviet Union's sphere of influence. So there was a great deal of political purpose behind it. The other thing that people should know about the Marshall Plan was that the Europeans did the job themselves. What we did was give them the tools to do it. One of the tools was the counterpart fund*. We should take a moment to explain what happened. When we shipped coal, wheat, iron, steel, whatever, to the Europeans, it was because they didn't have the dollars to pay for it. They could have paid for it in their own currency. Moreover, those purchases were made in the United States. The receiving governments put up the equivalent (same) cash in their own currencies. So it had a double impact. The materials were there. The dollar gap was closed by being set aside. The resulting counterpart fund gave them the funds to rebuild bridges, highways, hospitals, airports, schools, the kinds of things that no industrialist does either here or there. It was a tremendous economic, psychological and political manoeuvre (plot), and it was tremendously successful.
*Counterpart fund: Refers to the currency that some of the European countries used. It was of lower value to the US dollar, but was used as if it was equal to the US dollar rate.
SOURCE 1C The source below is an extract from the Soviet Foreign Minister, Andrei Vyshinsky's speech that he presented at the United Nations Assembly on 18 September 1947.
The so-called Marshall Plan is a particularly glaring (obvious) example of the way in which the principles of the United Nations are violated, of the way in which the organisation is ignored. The United States has moved towards a direct renunciation (rejection) of the principles of international collaboration (partnership) and concerned action by the great powers and towards attempts to impose its will on the other independent states, while at the same time obviously using the economic resources distributed as relief to individual needy countries as an instrument of political pressure … The United States also counted on making all these countries directly dependent on the interests of American monopolies, which are striving to avert (turn away) the approaching depression by an accelerated export of commodities and capital to Europe. It is becoming more and more evident to everyone that the implementation of the Marshall Plan will mean placing European countries under the economic and political control of the United States and direct interference by the latter in the international affairs of these countries. Moreover this plan is an attempt to split Europe into two camps and, with the help of the United Kingdom and France, to complete the formation of a bloc of several European countries hostile to the interests of the democratic countries of Eastern Europe and, most particularly, to the interests of the Soviet Union.
[From http.//www.slantchev.ucsd.edu/courses/nss/documents/vyshinsky-criticism-of-truman doctrine.html. Accessed on 8 June 2016.]
SOURCE 1D This cartoon by Herb Block (an American cartoonist), entitled 'IT'S THE SAME THING WITHOUT MECHANICAL PROBLEMS', was published in the Washington Post on 26 January 1949. It depicts his perspective of the 'Marshal Stalin Plan'. [From http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/00652193/. Accessed on 5 June 2016.]
QUESTION 2: WHAT WERE THE CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF CUBA'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE BATTLE OF CUITO CUANAVALE BETWEEN 1987 AND 1988? SOURCE 2A This extract by historian Edgar Dosmann, focuses on why the Angolan government requested help from Cuba.
South Africa's Operation Modular was unleashed two days later on 14 September (1987); instead of victory, the Angolan army suffered a humiliating (embarrassing) defeat at the Lomba River at the hands of the SADF and its ally UNITA … Pretoria (South African government) was now openly leading the war in Angola rather than merely supporting UNITA. SADF units were deep inside the country and General Malan visited his troops there to demonstrate that they intended to stay. In fact, the SADF drew up military plans for two new operations, Hooper and Packer, to build on Modular's success with the purpose of moving on Cuito Cuanavale and destroying the FAPLA (Angolan army) brigades which had escaped at Lomba … In short, PW Botha (President of South Africa) had regained the initiative in the Border War. On 11 November, Angola's independence day, Botha sent another message to the Angolan leader by flying into Jamba for victory celebrations with Savimbi; it was a display of South African power … Dos Santos' (President of Angola) 'fight and talk' strategy had utterly failed and his Soviet advisors were discredited (disgraced) … There was nowhere else to turn but to Castro … knowing that, in this extraordinary relationship, Cuba always came through in the end.
[From Countdown To Cuito Cuanavale: Cuba's Angolan Campaign by EJ Dosmann]
SOURCE 2B This is an extract from a speech by Raúl Castro, Commander in Chief of the Cuban army. It focuses on Cuba's involvement in Operation Carlotta during the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale.
Towards the end of 1987 thousands of South African soldiers were deployed against FAPLA (Angolan army) that was carrying out an important operation in south-eastern Angola. As the unequal battles developed, part of the Angola unit came close to being surrounded and annihilated (destroyed) at Cuito Cuanavale … After rigorous (thorough) consultations with the Angolan government and meticulous (detailed) planning … we (Cuba) made the historic decision to reinforce our troops in the People's Republic of Angola. This force, as you know, reached a total of fifty thousand soldiers. It was entrusted with the mission of fighting alongside Angolan troops to defeat the invading South African forces … By the time the South African strategists realised what we were doing, we had doubled our overall forces and increased them many times over on the Southern Front. That gave us control of the skies there for the first time in twelve years … We deployed a strike force on this front that included 998 tanks, more than 600 armoured vehicles and 1 600 artillery, mortars and anti-aircraft defence weapons. From Cuba … Compañero (Comrade) Fidel Castro imbued (instilled) in all of us the determination to achieve victory with a minimum of casualties, combining boldness, and heroism with the philosophy (belief) of not risking the life of a single man without first exhausting all alternatives … Cuito (Cuanavale) held out. All the South African attempts to advance were pushed back. Their sophisticated long-range artillery (canons) kept bombing day and night. But it didn't frighten the Angolan-Cuban forces and turned out to be ineffective …
[From Operation Carlotta is Over! A Victory for Cuban Internationalism by R Castro]
SOURCE 2C This photograph shows the statue that was erected to commemorate the fallen heroes at the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale. It shows two soldiers, one Angolan and one Cuban, holding up a map of Angola with a star marking the village of Cuito Cuanavale where the battle was fought between 1987 and 1988. SOURCE 2D [From http://www.bradtguides.com/media/wysiwyg/destinations/africa/angola/cuito_cuanvale_ angola.jpg. Accessed on 10 June 2016.]
The extract below is part of a speech that was delivered by former South African President, Nelson Mandela, in Cuba on 26 July 1991.
We in Africa are used to being victims of countries wanting to carve up (divide) our territory or subvert (overthrow) our sovereignty. It is unparalleled in African history to have another people rise up in our defence … The crushing defeat of the racist army (SADF) at Cuito Cuanavale was victory for the whole of Africa! The overwhelming defeat of the racist army allowed the struggling people of Namibia to finally win their independence! The decisive defeat of the apartheid aggressors broke the myth (fable) of the invincibility (strength) of the white oppressors! The defeat of the apartheid army was an inspiration to the struggling people inside South Africa! Without the defeat of Cuito Cuanavale our organisations would not have been unbanned! … Cuito Cuanavale was a milestone in the history of the struggle for southern African liberation! Cuito Cuanavale has been a turning point in the struggle to free the continent and our country from the scourge (torment) of apartheid!
[From How Far We Slaves Have Come! South Africa and Cuba in Today's World by N Mandela and F Castro]
QUESTION 3: WHAT IMPACT DID THE CLOSURE OF HIGH SCHOOLS HAVE ON THE COMMUNITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS, IN 1958? SOURCE 3A This is an extract from a speech that Governor Orval Faubus delivered in Arkansas on 18 September 1958. It focuses on his decision to close high schools in Little Rock.
I am fully aware of the deep concern of the parents for the continued proper education of their children, and I am fully aware of the inconvenience to the learners in the interruption of the proper educational processes … It was with a heavy heart that I found it necessary to sign the bills of the Extraordinary Session of the General Assembly and to close the high schools in the city of Little Rock. I took this action only after the last hope of relief from an intolerable situation had been exhausted and to prevent the integration of schools. The Supreme Court shut its eyes to all the facts, and in essence said integration at any price, even if it means the destruction of our school system, our educational processes, and the risk of disorder and violence that could result in the loss of life, perhaps yours. This price, you as a people are unwilling to pay. This price I could not see you pay without first offering to you a legal plan whereby a catastrophe (disaster) can be avoided and still provide the opportunity of an education of our children. This plan I now explain to you in detail. This plan is within the law … First. The federal government has no authority to require any state to operate public schools. Second. The federal government has no authority to tell a state government for what purposes it may levy taxes, or how the tax money may be expended (used). Third. In all the cases involving the public schools and integration, the federal courts have said only that an agency of the state cannot maintain segregated schools. This ruling does not apply in any way to private schools. Private schools are not affected by these decisions, even though the schools receive aid from state and federal sources.
SOURCE 3B The source below explains how both black (African American) and white American learners were affected by Governor Faubus' decision to close high schools in Little Rock, Arkansas, in 1958.
Perhaps the greatest consequences (results) were the effects on displaced learners and their families … The number of displaced white learners was 2 915. Of those, thirty-five per cent found public schools to attend in the state. Private schools in Little Rock took forty-four per cent of the displaced white learners. A total of ninety-three per cent of white learners found some form of alternative schooling. This was not the case for displaced black learners. Among the 750 black learners who were displaced, thirty-seven per cent found public schools in Arkansas to attend. However, fifty per cent of displaced black learners found no schooling at all. The NAACP (National Association for Advancement of the Coloured People), through Roy Wilkins, stated that opening private high schools for displaced black learners would defeat their intent to gain equal access for all learners to public education. Interviews with many former learners indicate lifelong consequences because of this denial of a free public education. Throughout the Lost Year several groups organised either to support closed schools or to open them. The Lost Year ended with a recall (withdrawal) of three segregationist members of the Little Rock School Board on 25 May 1959. Voters in Little Rock, after a year of closed public high schools and after the firing of teachers, were finally willing to accept limited desegregation. The federal courts followed on 18 June 1959, when a three-judge federal district court declared unconstitutional Arkansas's closure of schools and withholding of funds.
SOURCE 3C The photograph below shows learners from Little Rock watching a televised lesson. This was after Governor Faubus decided to close schools in 1958.
In September 1958 a group of women met to form the Women's Emergency Committee to Open Our Schools (WEC) … they formed the first organisation to publicly condemn the school-closing action and to support reopening the schools under the Little Rock School District's desegregation plan. … WEC members continued to advocate (support) reopening the schools and its members became the targets of outspoken segregationists, who labelled them 'integrationists'. This climate of intimidation made it difficult for white and black leaders to meet openly to try and resolve the crisis. While their efforts made them targets for harassment (provocation), the WEC persevered (continued). As the year progressed, attitudes among Little Rock parents, particularly those with teenage children, began to shift towards accepting the desegregation of schools if it meant the reopening of schools. Along with the citizen's group, Stop This Outrageous Purge (STOP), and other community organisations, the WEC called for a special election to recall (withdraw) the segregationist board members. By contacting registered voters and visiting door to door, the WEC was able to create enough support to recall the three segregationist board members and to retain the three moderate ones. After the successful election, the Little Rock public high schools reopened on 12 August 1959 with limited desegregation … the reopening of the schools in the fall of 1959 brought to a close an important chapter in the history of public education in Little Rock.
