Question
Examine the strengths and weaknesses of British policy in Palestine between 1922 and 1939.
Answer/Explanation
Ans:
Candidates are required to consider the strengths and weaknesses of British policy during the Mandate. Reference to contradictory wartime promises (the Hussein-McMahon Correspondence and the Balfour Declaration) should be linked to actual policies adopted by Britain as the mandatory power. Key issues such as immigration and land purchase may be identified and policy examined in relation to them.
Indicative content
Strengths:
• For the 1920s, attempts at institution-building (the Jewish Agency and the attempts to establish an Arab Council) could be mentioned. The 1922 White Paper tried to regulate immigration and some local self-government was established.
• British policy attempted to balance the demands of the Zionists with the possible impact of these demands on the Arabs. This was successful as the mid to late 1920s were relatively peaceful.
Weaknesses:
• Policy alternated rapidly after the Wailing Wall Riots (1929), for example, the Passfield White Paper proposed restrictions on land purchase and immigration but this was rapidly rescinded by the MacDonald Letter (or Black Letter) so there was little clarity for either Arabs or Jews.
• Between 1935 and 1939 the lack of clarity continued as tensions increased because of rising Jewish immigration and contradictory attempts to establish political stability. For example, there was a plan to establish a legislative council (which failed), followed by the Peel Commission and the 1939 White Paper.
• Candidates may argue that whatever policy Britain chose to pursue it was unlikely to be successful because both Arabs and Jews felt that Britain had let them down.
The above material is an indication of what candidates may elect to write about in their responses. However, it is not exhaustive and no set answer is required.
Examiners and moderators are reminded of the need to apply the markbands that provide the “best fit” to the responses given by candidates and to award credit wherever it is possible to do so.
Question
“Atatürk made Turkey a modern, secular, democratic state.” Discuss.
Answer/Explanation
Ans:
Candidates must focus on the statement and offer a considered and balanced review of how far it could be applied to Turkey as a result of Atatürk’s leadership. There may be some reference to the perceived backwardness of the Ottoman state in order to reach a judgment on the extent of change.
Indicative content
• Democratic policies such as the constitution granted equal rights, but women did not actually gain the vote until 1934. However the Republican People’s Party (RPP) dominated politics and Atatürk faced little opposition to his dominant rule.
• Other areas to consider are the development of new industries such as the textile industry via statist policies and the encouragement of urbanization and education. However, economic activity was still dominated by agriculture and there were still considerable levels of illiteracy.
• In order to secularize Turkey, the Caliphate was abolished, Sharia law was replaced by civil law, the fez was forbidden and Latin script was introduced.
• It may be argued that the extent to which these various policies had an impact throughout Turkey was variable; that secularization was much more successful in towns than in rural areas where change was slow and the Ulema remained influential.
• Atatürk’s policies were a break with the past. He established Ankara as the capital and his policies led to the development of a Turkish national identity.
The above material is an indication of what candidates may elect to write about in their responses. However, it is not exhaustive and no set answer is required.
Examiners and moderators are reminded of the need to apply the markbands that provide the “best fit” to the responses given by candidates and to award credit wherever it is possible to do so.
Question
Evaluate the factors that led to the creation of the State of Israel.
Answer/Explanation
Ans:
Candidates may choose to consider both long- and medium-term factors as well as those arising in the post-Second World War period. Others may concentrate on the years 1945 to 1948. Reasons for Israeli victory in the 1948/1949 conflict are not relevant here.
Indicative content
- Long-term factors could include the growth of Zionism in the 19th century and/or the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which seemed to encourage increased Jewish immigration to Palestine after the First World War with the promise of a homeland for Jewish people.
- Medium-term factors could include the increasing violence between Jews and Arabs in the 1920s and 1930s, which led to the consideration of the partition of Palestine and thus raised the notion of a separate Jewish state. Candidates may discuss the various White Papers, although by 1939 Britain appeared to be against partition.
- Short-term factors could include Jewish determination to establish a Jewish state after events in Europe before and during the Second World War; an aim for which there was significant international sympathy. Truman, for example, announced his support for the Biltmore Program.
- Violence between Jews and Arabs in the post-war years meant that some sort of partition was almost inevitable. The attack on the King David Hotel and international criticism after events such as the Exodus affair influenced Britain’s decision to withdraw from the Mandate, which meant that an alternative state structure had to be established by 1948. The UN Resolution of November 1947 supported the establishment of a separate Jewish state.
The above material is an indication of what candidates may elect to write about in their responses. However, the list is not exhaustive and no set answer is required.
Examiners are reminded of the need to apply the markbands that provide the “best fit” to the responses given by candidates and to award credit wherever it is possible to do so.
Question
Evaluate the nature of Reza Shah’s regime (1925–1941).
Answer/Explanation
Ans:
The key word in the question is “nature” and answers should appraise the aims and the extent of change in the social, economic and political areas of Reza Shah’s regime.
Indicative content
- Politically the regime was highly authoritarian as Reza Shah relied heavily on the army for the maintenance of power.
- Elections were carefully managed and parliament had no effective powers. Trade unions and the Communist Party were banned and the press censored. Political opponents were arrested and often executed. Centralized control was imposed on the nomadic tribes who were forced to settle.
- Attempts were made to westernize society, and to that effect secular education and law codes were introduced. Western clothes were worn and women were not allowed to wear the veil. Attempts were made to reduce the influence of the ulama, but this was only partially successful (notably in the cities where the new elite, bureaucrats and army officers dominated).
- Reza Shah attempted to modernize the economy by developing the infrastructure, roads and railways and establishing a National Bank. However, the oil industry remained under foreign control (Anglo-Persian Oil Company) and profits went abroad. Other industries were limited in scale and often inefficient. Agriculture was the main economic activity but it continued to be backward and unproductive.
The above material is an indication of what candidates may elect to write about in their responses. However, the list is not exhaustive and no set answer is required.
Examiners are reminded of the need to apply the markbands that provide the “best fit” to the responses given by candidates and to award credit wherever it is possible to do so.