YIJC JC1 H1 History WA2 Suggested Approach 2025

YISHUN INNOVA JUNIOR COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES - HISTORY UNITH1 INTERNATIONAL HISTORY 8838/01 JC1 / Term 3 / 20251 JC1H1 Weighted Assignment 2 (Term 3) Suggested Perspectives*Note that I have included the part (a) question as well and the answers to it – even though your LA was only the part (b) question. This is so that you can use the part (a) question for practice too if you wish!**I have also included a tab at the side which provides some additional explanation and explains my thinking/what I am doing at each point of the essay, in accordance with the principles and frameworks that you have been taught for writing SBQ part (a) questions that we have covered since Term 2. ***Do also note that this answer is longer than usual as I went heavily into the context/purpose of the sources in order to demonstrate that there are actually A LOT of things you can potentially say! But as always, you do not need to mention every single thing here to score well! 1a. Compare and contrast Sources A and B as evidence that the Cuban Missile Crisis was shaped by superpower rivalry. How are the sources similar? (1 similarity on the surface)Both sources are similar in pointing towards the Cuban Missile Crisis being shaped by superpower rivalry in the greater cold war context, with Cuba being a focal point for the superpowers in their competition for influence as well as in the arms race. This is seen from Source A as Castro claims that “Khrushchev told me that after the missiles have been deployed in Cuba, Kennedy would have to swallow it”, implying that Khrushchev’s (and the Soviet Union’s) objective in Cuba was to further their Cold War aims against the US. Source B also brings this outs, as the Soviet government warns the US that “Cuba belongs to the Cuban people” and that “in carrying out the measures (like the naval quarantine) announced by President Kennedy, it is recklessly playing with fire…”, suggesting that once again, the crisis over Cuba had become inteimately linked to the overall Cold War rivalry between the two sides. State the point of similarity, quote and explain.*Note that I skipped “why similar” in this answer. Not ideal but sometimes it happens. How are the sources different? (1 difference on the surface)However, sources A and B differ in terms of their perspectives on the USSR’s justification for intervening in Cuba. Source A focuses on suggesting that the USSR’s motive for intervening in Cuba was for their own political and security purposes in the context of their Cold War rivalry with the US. It implies that the Crisis had to do with the “correlation of forces at that time” – implying the strategic nuclear balance between the US and USSR, and also claims that the Soviet Union “needed that measure to ensure their own security” - to counter the Jupiter missiles in Turkey. Source B however suggests that the USSR’s motives were altruistic, that their intervention was just to defend Cuba and the Cuban Revolution, as seen from how it repatedly claims that the US was trying to “deprive the Cuban people of the freedom and independence it had won” and so the USSR was “duty-bound to seriously warn the government of the United States” against it. State the point of difference, quote and explain.Why are the sources similar/different? (Compare the context, author, purpose/motives)The reasons for these differing perspectives can be detected from the differing context and purpose of both sources. Source A is from Castro’s reflections on the Crisis to Soviet officials in charge of USSR-Cuban relations in 1987. Despite this, Castro was actually quite critical of the fact that Khrushchev’s (and the USSR’s) engagement in the Crisis was not in the interests of aiding Cuba, but out of a greater concern to use Cuba as a pawn to protect their own political and security interests, as part of their superpower rivalry with the United States. This criticism of Khrushchev could be a reflection of the decline in Address “why different” by contextualizing Source A through examining its Context, Author, Purpose (C-A-P)

YISHUN INNOVA JUNIOR COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES - HISTORY UNITH1 INTERNATIONAL HISTORY 8838/01 JC1 / Term 3 / 20252 Cuban-Soviet relations post-1962 after the Cuban Missile Crisis, as Castro was unhappy with Khrushchev’s decision to strike a deal with Kennedy and withdraw the missiles without even consulting him, and also because much of the course and outcome of the Crisis was determined between the US and USSR, with Castro mostly sidelined. Furthermore, 1987, when this source was created, was in the midst of Gorbachev’s attempts to reform the Soviet Union, with the climate of ‘Glasnost’ (openness) then perhaps further giving Castro the impetus to speak his mind about the Cuban Crisis to the Soviets. Thus, Castro’s purpose here was perhaps to use this opportunity to absolve himself of blame in the Crisis, portraying himself as the reasonable one – “it was possible to achieve the same goals without deploying the missiles in Cuba”, and helpful ally – “we were ready to make sacrifices for the Soviet Union”, while pinning most of the blame for it upon Khrushchev who “caused that Crisis by his stubbornness”. There could even be an element of face-saving by Castro here, as he claims “he cannot take the credit for the resolution of the crisis”, instead shifting most of the responsibility to Khrushchev, while in reality Castro simply did not have much of a role at all in the negotiations throughout the actual 13-day Missile Crisis. These possible motives in Source A are in direct contrast to source B, which markedly differs from A in its context and purpose. Rather than being a thoughtful reflection by one of the key players (Castro) in the Crisis years after as the Cold War was ending - that might also have the motive of absolving himself from blame, Source B is an urgent statement issued by the Soviet government to respond to the USA’s actions at that point in time in October 1962, with the probable goal of wanting to justify Soviet intervention and criticize US actions. Further contextualizing the Source, Source B’s specific purpose seems to be in response to the USA’s “Naval Quarantine” on Cuba announced on 22nd October 1962. It is a lot more critical and condemnatory in its tone compared to Source A, perhaps reflecting the urgency of the situation then as the world was at the brink of nuclear war. It directly blames the USA for their actions to impose the blockade, and also appears to have the motive of disguising the Soviets’ real intention in Cuba – which was to counter US Jupiter missiles in Turkey and re-establish strategic nuclear parity, under the excuse of generously helping Cuba, a country in need, against the USA’s aggressive actions.As such, while both sources do highlight how the Cuban Missile Crisis was shaped by superpower rivalry, they differ in terms of what the USSR”s real motives in the Crisis were. Source A, Castro’s take on the Crisis years later with the possible motive of clearing himself from blame, sees the Soviets getting involved due to their interests in the Cold War arms race. Source B, on the other hand, sees the Soviets’ motives as altruistic, of helping out Cuba against an aggressive US, possibly as it was a statement released during the Crisis itself that clearly seeks to justify Soviet intervention in Cuba. Address “why different” by contextualizing Source B through examining its Context, Author, Purpose (C-A-P). Conclude on the similarities and differences and why this is the case.

YISHUN INNOVA JUNIOR COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES - HISTORY UNITH1 INTERNATIONAL HISTORY 8838/01 JC1 / Term 3 / 20253 1b. How far do sources A-E support the evidence that the Soviet Union was merely using Cuba as a tool for their own Cold War interests?*Note that I have written this in a somewhat more “advanced” style – keeping the core principles of treating the sources as sets and contextualizing them accordingly, but also be