The student answers that follow will have brief examiner's comments after some paragraphs, [indicated by italicized text inside brackets]. Those parts of a student's answer that are particularly strong and well focused will be highlighted in green. Errors/confusions/loss of focus will be highlighted in red. In this way, you should find it easier to follow why marks were - or were not - awarded.

Sample Question #1: Evaluate the role of two non-superpower states on the development of the Cold War in the period 1950-70, each chosen from a different region. [15 marks]

[Look carefully at the wording of this question, which asks for an evaluation of the role/impact of two non-superpower states, each from a different region, on the development of the Cold War from 1950-70. All aspects of the questions will need to be addressed if high marks are to be achieved. Remember, don't just describe what happened; you need to provide explicit analysis and explanation, with some precise supporting own knowledge.]

Student answer:

Although the Cold War began as a conflict in Europe between the USA and the USSR immediately after the end of the Second World War, it soon spread to other regions of the world. Both Korea (in Asia) and Cuba (in the Americas) played significant toles in the development and deepening polarization of the Cold War. The conflicts or crises involving these two states (the Korean War and the Cuban Missile Crisis) also led to the development of the nuclear war strategy known as 'Mutually Assured Destruction' (MAD). [This is a clear and well-focused introduction, showing a good grasp of the key requirements of the question.]

After 1945, Korea was split into North and South along the 38th parallel. As the Cold War began, this division into two states became permanent - the North became a communist one-party state, allied to the Soviet Union, while the South was an undemocratic capitalist state, supported by the US. Both states wanted to bring about reunification - but on their own terms. After several border clashes, the North invaded the South in June 1950.

This war involved the UN, as the US was able to get the UN approval for its military action in support of the South. This was because the USSR was boycotting the UN Security Council in protest at the USA's refusal to allow Communist China a seat in the UN. The involvement of the UN - with several member states, including Britain, sending troops under US command - polarized the Cold War. At first, the USSR gave military equipment to the North and then began to send military advisors.

However, both superpowers tried to avoid direct conflict between their military personnel. Relations worsened when the US ignored Chinese warnings not to invade North Korea (this was an act beyond the original UN brief) and approach the border with China. Communist China then sent in thousands of military 'volunteers' to fight US/UN forces. For a time, this brought the Soviet Union and China closer together, and so made the divisions between capitalist and communist countries even deeper. Eventually, a stalemate developed and an armistice was signed in 1953 - but not a permanent peace. [There is accurate supporting own knowledge, explicitly linked to the significance of the effects/results of the Korean War on the Cold War.]

Cuba's role in the Cold War also helped deepen Cold War suspicions and hostilities. This began in 1959, after Castro led a successful revolution against Batista, the dictator of Cuba, who had been a US ally. The US did not accept Cuba's right to complete independence, and increasingly came to see developments in Cuba as part of a Soviet plot for extending its influence in the world. As disagreements between Cuba and the US deepened, following Castro's economic policies and his increasingly close relations with the Soviet Union, the US decided to take action. The US - which saw the whole of the Americas as its sphere of influence (its 'own backyard') - at first applied economic sanctions. In 1961, in the Bay of Pigs fiasco, it tried to overthrow Castro via a plan originally drawn up by the CIA under Eisenhower, but actually given the go-ahead by Kennedy, the newly elected US president. The failure of this attempted invasion, by US-trained and equipped anti-Castro Cuban exiles, led Castro to appeal to the USSR for protection - so increasing Cold War tensions.

Khrushchev's decision to install nuclear weapons on Cuba, to protect Castro and to counter US missiles close to the USSR in Turkey, sparked off the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, when US spy planes noticed the new sites.

Though the crisis was eventually averted without a nuclear Third World War, and actually led to a Test-Ban Treaty and the establishment of a hot-line between Washington and Moscow, its net result was to deepen Cold War suspicions on both sides. [Again, there is accurate supporting own knowledge, with explicit comments on the effects/results of developments in Cuba on the Cold War as a whole.]

In addition, both the Korean War and the Cuban Missile Crisis had an impact on military strategy, resulting in the emergence of MAD (mutually assured destruction). This policy (similar to Eisenhower's 'massive retaliation') came to replace the idea of 'counterforce', which had earlier been developed by Kennedy's advisors. MAD was based on the idea that no nuclear war would take place because both superpowers knew that if they fired nuclear weapons, the other side would retaliate with such force that both sides - and the world - would be destroyed.

In fact, both superpowers had adopted a similar approach, as both feared nuclear war. In Korea, Truman had dismissed MacArthur when he had suggested using nuclear weapons against China, and Khrushchev had decided not to place warheads in Cuba once he knew Kennedy had put US ICBMs on nuclear alert. [There is more accurate supporting own knowledge, clearly focused on the impact of these crises on nuclear weapons strategy.]

Overall, both Korea and Cuba, though quite different crises indifferent regions of the world, helped increase Cold War polarization and contributed to the development of new nuclear strategies. These two crises showed the Cold War had become truly global. [There is then a brief but well-focused conclusion, drawing out the impact of these two states on the development of the Cold War.]

[This is a good, well-focused and analytical answer, with some precise and accurate own knowledge tosupport thepoints made. The answer is thus good enough to be awarded the mark at the very top of the second band - 12 marks. However, not all aspects are addressed. To reach the top band, some comments on the effect of the Korean War in gaining the support of the US Congress for the big increases in military expenditure and a more aggressive US Cold War policy, suggested by NSC-68, would have been useful, as would comments about it helping to spark off a more serious arms race - both nuclear and conventional. More importantly, it would have been very useful to have some mention of relevant specific historians/historical interpretations.]

Sample Question #2: Examine the reasons for, and the consequences of, the Second World War allies becoming post-war enemies. [15 marks]

[Look carefully at the wording of this question, which asks for consideration of a range of reasons and consequences in relation to the emerging tensions between the allies after 1945. Just focusing on one reason will prevent you scoring top marks.]

Student answer:

The Second World War allies - Britain, the USA and the USSR - joined together in a Grand Alliance in 1941 solely to defeat Nazi Germany; thus it was a 'marriage of convenience'. The two Western powers were capitalist states, and before 1941 had been hostile to the Soviet Union, which had the opposing ideology of communism. It was mainly these ideological differences which broke the allies up after 1945. This clash of ideologies created two polarized and opposed superpowers. Policies such as the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, and crises such as the Berlin Blockade and Airlift, created further divisions and rifts between the former allies. [This is a well-focused introduction, clearly identifying ideology as an important factor, and identifying some consequences - though rather lacking in specific information/dates in relation to the policies and crises mentioned.]

The political ideology of the West was based on individualism and individual rights (such as free speech, free elections), with the minimum of state intervention in the economy. This capitalist economy was based on private ownership and free trade, and was actively promoted by the US after 1945. Although Roosevelt shared these views, he also appreciated Soviet security fears - but ideological differences became greater after Truman took over.

Until 1953 the Soviet Union was led by Stalin, who had developed his own version of communism, called 'Marxism-Leninism'. Under him, the USSR was a one-party dictatorship and the beliefs about individual rights and he economy were completely different to those in the West. In particular, the USSR was based on state ownership and control of the economy. Although the constitution spoke of individual rights, these were often ignored by the state, and there was only one party to vote for in elections.

Although these ideologies were diametrically opposed, they did not affect the wartime coalition against fascism, which was the common enemy. Despite the terror which had existed for some time in the USSR, Stalin was portrayed as 'Uncle Joe' in the West during the war. This was because defeating Nazi Germany was the main priority.

Tensions began to appear once Germany was defeated, and the question of who was to control Europe became an issue. The first issue was over Germany itself, including Berlin. Eventually, both Germany and Berlin were split into four sectors, controlled by the US, Britain, France and the USSR. The Cold War proper can be seen as starting when Stalin began his blockade of Berlin, to try to force the West out of their part of Berlin, which was in the Soviet sector of Germany. The US and its allies then organized the Berlin Airlift to deliver food to the Eastern bloc and West Berlin. This was all the result of clashing ideologies. [There is some supporting own knowledge to describe the different ideologies but it is not always fully relevant, and is rather narrative-based in sections. In addition, there are errors, and the answer lacks precision on the actual disagreements - for instance, the early disputes of 1945-46 are muddled up with the later Berlin Crisis of 1948-49.]

This clash of ideologies can also be seen as the two superpowers tried to impose their respective spheres of influence in Europe. In the Marshall Plan of 1947, the USA provided aid to a war-devastated Europe. The public reason for this was to get Europe back on its feet, but there were many other motives. Firstly, in line with the Truman Doctrine, it was a way to contain communism, and to counter the growing popularity of communist parties in states such as France and Italy. In fact, it mostly aided Greece and Turkey, which were both facing strong challenges from their communist parties. In addition, it was a way to ensure customers for US companies and, according to the USSR, was also a way of ensuring US political as well as economic dominance over Western Europe. For this reason, the Soviet Union rejected Marshall Aid for itself and its Eastern European satellites, because of the pro-capitalist policies acceptance of it entailed. [Again, there are some inaccuracies in supporting own knowledge, and the approach is rather narrative-based.]

In conclusion, differing ideologies were the main reason for the tensions between the USSR and the USA (along with the other former allies). These differences resulted in mutual distrust and the attempt to extend their respective spheres of influence in Europe, especially in Germany. The result of these ideological clashes was the Cold War, which was vastly different from the Second World War in which the two superpowers had fought side by side.

[This answer attempts to explicitly address both reasons and consequences, but it is not well-supported by precise/correct own knowledge; in addition, the approach is too narrative in several places. There are also some confusions/errors and it is rather unbalanced, in that differing ideologies is the main focus - the other reasons are not really touched on. The answer is good enough to be awarded a mark at the top end of the middle band - probably 9 marks. To reach the higher bands, some specific details on other reasons (such as the second front, Poland, German reparations, the US nuclear monopoly and Soviet actions in East Europe) would be helpful. More importantly, the the top scoring band, it would be necessary to have some mention of relevant specific historians/historical interpretations - there are several to choose from on this topic.]

Sample Question #3: Evaluate the role played by differing ideologies in the origin of the Cold War. [15 marks]

[Look carefully at the wording or this question, which asks for the part played by differing ideologies in the origin of the Cold War to be evaluated - this means that other factors also have to be addressed. All aspects of the question will need to be covered to achieve top marks. Remember, don't just describe what happened, what's needed is explicit analysis and explanation, with some precise supporting own knowledge.]

Student answer:

The Cold War was certainly due to differing ideologies, and this contributed to the collapse of the wartime alliance and the emergence of the Cold War. However, it is also true to say that other factors were important - such as mutual distrust, and clashes over what should happen in Europe at the end of the war. [This is a clear and well-focused introduction, and suggests that ideology will be assessed alongside 'other factors' in a multi-causal approach, which is exactly what this question requires.]

The differences in ideology between the capitalist USA and communist USSR played a part in the origins of the Cold War, but not necessarily a very important one. Stalin was a realist in foreign affairs, and put Soviet security above the spreading of communist revolution elsewhere. However, he was also an opportunist, ready to take advantage of any opportunity to further the cause of communism in another country - provided it didn't risk Soviet security. This increased the concerns of the capitalist states of the West, who feared the spread of communist revolution to war-devastated Europe, and to countries in the rest of the world where they had important economic or strategic interests. [This is still focused on the question, but the treatment of differing ideologies is rather too brief here.]

However, there are many other reasons why the Cold War began. Before 1941, relations between the USSR and the West (the US and Britain) had often been poor. This was in large part the result of the intervention of Britain and the US on the side of the Whites in the Russian Civil War, and of the USA's refusal to recognize the USSR until 1933. Britain's appeasement of Hitler, and then Russia's Non-Aggression Pact with Nazi Germany in 1939, also caused bad feeling. After 1941, although these three countries joined in a Grand Alliance to fight Nazi Germany, they all remained suspicious of each other's motives. In particular, Stalin's repeated calls for a second front from 1942 were ignored until 1944 - making him think the West wanted the USSR weakened more than it wanted to defeat Nazi Germany. Thus the history of relations between 1917 and 1945, and the various suspicions each side had about the other, all contributed to poor relations. [There is accurate supporting own knowledge here, referring to the historical context before 1945, and identifying several other reasons for mutual mistrust and so why the Cold War began.]

Another reason for the start of the Cold War was the Soviet Union's desire for reparations and a 'buffer zone' in Central and Eastern Europe. Unlike the USA and Britain, the USSR was the only one of the 'Big Three' allies to have been invaded and occupied. About 30 million Russians died in the war, and much of the industry developed in the 1930s had been destroyed, or shipped back to Germany by the Nazis. As Russia had been invaded through Poland three times since 1914, Stalin insisted on a buffer zone of friendly states along the USSR's western border. However, the West saw - or said it saw - this as the first step in spreading communism to the whole of Europe. While Roosevelt, at the Yalta Conference in February 1945, had been prepared to accept some steps in this direction, the Potsdam Conference in July 1945 - where Truman replaced Roosevelt - saw greater differences emerge over Poland. In particular, Stalin was determined to have Poland firmly in the USSR's sphere of influence, even if this meant not carrying through his promises to hold free elections and to accept the 'pro-Western London Poles' as well as the 'pro-Russian Lublin Poles' as part of a coalition government. [Again, there is accurate supporting own knowledge, with explicit references to a range of 'other factors', such as Soviet security concerns and the significance of the West's anger over Poland, leading to the start of the Cold War.]

Potsdam also saw Truman go back on Roosevelt's idea of withdrawing US troops from Europe within two years of the end of the war. Truman decided to keep them present. There was also the issue of the US nuclear weapons monopoly after August 1945, and Truman's decision not to share the technology with the USSR. In general, Truman's attitude to the Soviet Union and its representatives was much colder and harsher than Roosevelt's had been. All these issues helped start the Cold War.

However, the factor that was probably the most important one in starting off the Cold War was Germany. The USA and Britain, as capitalist countries, wanted an economically strong Germany to trade with - and as a block to the USSR. However, Stalin wanted to keep Germany weak, so it would never be a threat to the Soviet Union again (as it had in 1914 and again in 1941). The introduction of the Marshall Plan in 1947, and then the unilateral introduction of a new currency in the Western zones of Germany, made Stalin very suspicious. These issues led to the Berlin Blockade and Airlift, and it was these events that led to the real start of the Cold War. [There is accurate supporting own knowledge, clearly focused on yet another factor, which is judged to be the most important. However, some aspects of this are not touched on or developed (for example, de-Nazification, reparations, and so on.]

Overall, although differing ideologies contributed to the origins of the Cold War, the most important factor in my opinion was the mutual distrust and fear, and the lack of understanding of each other's motives, which caused the former allies to drift into the Cold War. Also important was the past history of the 'Big Three', and the fact that both the West and the USSR were determined to set up their own spheres of influence in Europe and the rest of the world. To a large extent, their aims were incompatible. [There is then a brief but well-focused conclusion, which makes a judgement about the most important factor(s).]

[This is a good, well-focused and analytical answer, with some precise and accurate own knowledge to support the points made - the student has clearly understood the demands of the question. However, it is rather unbalanced, in that ideology is not sufficiently developed, and not all aspects of the 'other factors' are sufficiently dealt with. The answer is thus good enough to be awarded a mark towards the bottom of the second-highest band - probably about 10 marks. To reach the highest band, some developed comments on aspects of these other factors, and greater depth on ideology, are needed. In addition, a topic like this calls for some mention of relevant specific historians/historical interpretations.]