(Suggested Answer)TJC 2024 JC2 H1 History Prelim

1 Temasek Junior College 2024 8838/01/S/2024 H1 History Paper 1 Suggested Pointers TJC Preliminary Examination SBCS Success Criteria SBCS Success Criteria Students can: #1 identify supporting evidence and provide explanations that are clear and accurate, to answer the question directly and obviously. #2 Ask relevant questions about a source’s creation to examine it in its specific historical context e.g., By Whom? When? Why? What was going on at that time that may have influenced the content of the sources? #3 Use other sources and contextual knowledge to reinforce or undermine a source’s views. A. Comparing and contrasting sources as evidence on an issue – Part (a) A1. HOW are the sources’ views similar? (Success Criterion #1) (a) Compare and contrast Sources A and B as evidence of the USSR’s contributions towards easing tensions between the superpowers. Similar view: Both Sources A and B agree that the USSR contributed to the easing of tensions between the US. • A: ‘It is my hope that our fireside summit in Geneva and Mr. Gorbachev’s upcoming visit to America can lead to a more stable relationship.’ This highlights the USSR’s, particularly Gorbachev’s, role in improving diplomatic relations between the US and the USSR. • B: Gorbachev states that the USSR ‘understood that in today’s world of mutual interdependence, progress is unthinkable for any society fenced off from the world by ideological barriers’ and that this prompted them ‘to propose an entirely new concept of

2 Temasek Junior College 2024 8838/01/S/2024 global security’. This emphasises the conciliatory role that the USSR played in transiting the US-Soviet relation from one of ideological hostility to one of cooperation. A2. WHY are the sources’ views similar? (Success Criterion #3 – Contextual Knowledge) Both sources concur that the USSR took steps to ease tensions between the US and the USSR because it is true that from 1985 onwards, Gorbachev had pursued a foreign policy that was friendlier towards the West after he came into power, and this was due in part to how Brezhnev’s era of stagnation had undermined the Soviet economy. This necessitated that the USSR reduced its competition with the US to reduce military spending. The more conciliatory approach towards the West was underscored by Gorbachev meeting with Reagan in the first of four Summits, beginning with the Geneva Summit in 1985 and the Reykjavik Summit in 1986 – when Source B was created – where the USSR expressed a willingness to negotiate and make substantial cuts to its missile production if the US was also willing to reciprocate commensurately. A3. HOW do the sources’ views differ? (Success Criterion #1) Sources A and B differ regarding the degree to which the USSR contributed towards the easing of tensions between the US and the USSR. Source A claims that the US contributed to the easing of tensions more than the USSR. In contrast, Source B highlights the USSR played a greater role than the US. • A: Reagan claimed that US negotiators in Geneva ‘have proposed a radical cut in offensive forces by each side with no cheating’ and that ‘[if] the Soviet Government wants an agreement that truly reduces nuclear arms, there will be such an agreement.’ This suggests that the US had fulfilled its responsibility to de-escalate the arms race and that the onus was on the USSR to reciprocate to allow for the easing of tensions. • B: In contrast, Gorbachev said that the proposal he ‘made on 15 January 1986 to abolish nuclear weapons was met with mistrust’ and that ‘few believed at the time that we would be able to make real progress on the road towards nuclear disarmament, put an end to the Cold War, and bridge the divide separating East from West.’ This hints at the radical proposals made by the USSR that were inadequately reciprocated by the US, suggesting that the Soviets had done what they could to improve relations but the US wa s impeding the improving of relations. A4. WHY do the sources’ views differ? (Success Criterion #2) Sources A and B differ in their views because of the differing contexts within which the authors are espousing their respective messages. • A: Reagan in 1986 still insisted on SDI, a policy that continued and even escalated the arms race. He would then want to justify how the US was more conciliatory than the US to quell criticisms of his aggressive policies. For example, in 1982, nine states, 275 city governments, and 446 town hall meetings passed pro -freeze resolutions – a deafening response towards Regan’s antagonistic overtures that increased military spending to counter the threat posed Soviet Union.

3 Temasek Junior College 2024 8838/01/S/2024 • B: Gorbachev in 1995 would have incentive to elevate his role as peacemaker, possibly to salvage his reputation after his ignominious ousting from power in the USSR after the August Coup of 1991. Contextually, in 1991, the hardliners in the USSR had organised a secret coup to oust Gorbachev from power while he was holidaying in his dacha in Georgia. Despite Gorbachev’s reluctance to relinquish power, he was unceremoniously replaced by Yeltsin and this inglorious exit a leader of the USSR may have motivated Gorbachev to disproportionately highlight his role in ending the Cold War and the burden it was exacting upon the USSR. B. Using all sources to evaluate a given view/hypothesis – Part (b) (b) How far do Sources A -E support the view that the Cold War ended primarily due to nuclear disarmament? [30] B1. Treating Sources as a Set – The Overarching and Respective Arguments of the ‘Support’ Sources (Success Criterion #1 and Success Criterion #3 – Cross-Referencing) Sources A, B and C support the view that nuclear disarmament ended the cold war as it de - escalated the arms race, a fundamental aspect of the Cold War competition. Source A emphatically supports the view as Reagan states that US negotiators in Geneva ‘have proposed a radical cut in offensive forces by each side with no cheating’ and that, ‘If the Soviet Government wants an agreement that truly reduces nuclear arms, t here will be such an agreement.’ This foregrounds the centrality of nuclear disarmament in ending the Cold War, where arms reduction agreements between the superpowers was a fundamental step towards normalising relations. Source B seemingly reinforces Source A’s view where Gorbachev highlights the proposal he ‘made on 15 January 1986 to abolish nuclear weapons [that] was met with mistrust.’ This suggests that the USSR was making key concessions in the realm of nuclear disarmament to reduce tensions with the US and thus, nuclear disarmament could be seen as integral to ending the Cold War. In addition, Source C alludes to the importance of nuclear disarmament in ending the Cold War where it observes that ‘The Russians could never win the arms race, and the Americans could outspend them forever.’ This suggests that nuclear disarmament, in an indirect manner, was central to ending the Cold War where Reagan first sought to apply sustained pressure via the arms race to push the Soviets towards overspending and eventually concede to the US in this critical aspect by opting for nuclear disarmament to salvage its dire economic situation. Overall, the sources that support the view are less reliable. Source A sees Reagan plausibly overstating the importance of nuclear disarmament and the US role in it to placate critics who had become increasingly vocal about Reagan’s escalation of the arms race through controversial policies such as the 1983 Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) that proposed an ambitious anti - missile defence that would render Soviet missiles useless. By 1985, Reagan’s firm insistence on

4 Temasek Junior College 2024 883