MGS 2026 HIST PRELIM P2 MS

METHODIST GIRLS’ SCHOOL Founded in 1887 PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION 2026 Secondary 4 HISTORY Paper 2 Developments in the post-World War II world: The Cold War and 2174/02 decolonisation in Southeast Asia, 1940s-1991 Levels of Response Marking Scheme (LORMS) 1

Section A: Source-Based Case Study Case Study: Was the Malayan Union fair? 1 (a) Study Source A. What does Source A suggest about how the Malay rulers agreed to the Malayan Union treaty? Explain your answer. [5] Level (L) Descriptor Mark L1 Answers based on undeveloped provenance or valid but unsupported inference i.e., only about the content or the surface message e.g., Source A suggests that the Malay rulers agreed to the Malayan Union treaty by signing it. [1] L2 Valid inference about how the Malay rulers agreed, supported by source content Award the higher mark for more developed answers. e.g., Source A suggests that some rulers agreed willingly and without difficulty . Source A states that Sultan Ibrahim of Johor was "openly agreeable", declared "These are all right by me", and that at the second meeting "there was no hitch or awkwardness" before he signed. This implies that the Malay rulers' agreement appeared voluntary and cooperative. [2-3] L3 Answers based on a holistic interpretation of how the Malay rulers agreed Award the higher mark for a holistic point of tensions interpreted, supported. e.g., Source A suggests that the Malay rulers' agreements were more reluctant and pressured than it outwardly appeared, differing from ruler to ruler . Although Sultan Ibrahim seemed "openly agreeable", the Sultan of Kedah signed only to say, "it was the most distressing and painful moment of his whole life" and that he would "lose the loyalty, respect, and affection of his subjects, and be pursued with curses towards his grave." This implies that behind the signatures lay deep distress and a sense that the rulers had little real choice. The Malay rulers agreed under moral and political pressure rather than through genuinely free negotiation, which was why the Malay Union scheme was so bitterly resented once its implications were understood. [4-5] 2

(b) Study Sources B and C. Having read Source B, how useful is Source C as evidence of the way the British secured the Malay Rulers' agreements? Explain your answer. [6] Level (L) Descriptor Mark L1 Answers based on undeveloped provenance e.g., Source C is useful because it is from the British Colonial Secretary speaking in Parliament. [1] L2 Answers based on only the usefulness of Source C in content Award the higher mark for more developed answers. e.g., Source C is useful as it shows the British claim that the Rulers agreed freely, without coercion . Source C states that "no threat of deposition was used" and that "there was no time limit, nor was there a threat about deposition." This implies that, officially, the British secured the Sultans' agreement through proper and voluntary negotiation. [2] L3 Answers based on comparison of Sources B and C to determine Source’s usefulness e.g., Source C is not useful because, when read against Source B, it contradicts the British government's own private intentions . Source C publicly denies any threat, stating "no threat of deposition was used." However, Source B reveals the opposite intention in private , stating that MacMichael's "hand should be strengthened by the firm assurance that he can, if necessary, make it clear to any recalcitrant Sultan that we intend to carry our proposal through." This implies that Source C cannot be trusted as a literal account of how the agreements were secured, since the government had privately resolved to apply pressure. Since Source C is unreliable, it is limited/not useful. [3] L4 Answers that evaluate the usefulness of Source C by cross-referencing to Source A or contextual knowledge Award the higher mark for more developed answers. Note: An answer that uses Source A only to support Source C is capped at L4/4. L4/5 requires candidates to weigh the contradictory Kedah evidence in Source A rather than rest on Sultan Ibrahim's agreement alone. e.g., Source C is reliable, and therefore useful, because it is supported by Source A . Source C denies that any coercion was used, stating "no threat of deposition was used" and there was "no time limit." Source A supports this for Johor. Source A states that Sultan Ibrahim was "openly agreeable", declared "These are all right by me", and signed with "no hitch or awkwardness." This implies that at least some rulers did agree freely and without threats, which corroborates Source C's account and makes it reliable and useful as evidence of how the agreements were secured. [This answer is capped at L4/4 as it rests on Sultan Ibrahim alone and overlooks the Sultan of Kedah's distress in Source A, which contradicts Source C's specific denials.] [4-5] 3

Level (L) Descriptor Mark e.g., Source C is reliable, and therefore useful, once it is cross-referenced with Source A . Source C insists that "there was no time limit" and "no threat about deposition", presenting the negotiations as calm and proper. However, Source A challenges this claim. Source A shows that MacMichael "agreed to a delay of two days, but no longer", which suggests a time limit was in fact imposed, and that the Sultan of Kedah signed only to call it "the most distressing and painful moment of his whole life." This implies that Source C's denial is untrue; the rulers signed under real pressure and distress, so the Colonial Secretary's account is unreliable and of limited use as evidence of how the agreements were genuinely secured. [L4/5] L5 L3 + Answers that evaluate the usefulness of Source C through a critical analysis of its provenance/purpose e.g., [As L4 plus ] Source C is of limited use once its provenance and purpose are weighed against Source B . Source C is a statement made by the Colonial Secretary in Parliament on 6 March 1946, when reports of coercion were causing embarrassment; its purpose was to reassure Parliament and defend the government's reputation , which is exactly why it dismisses talk of a time limit or deposition as "misrepresentations of fact" . Source B, however, is a secret Cabinet memorandum from 4 October 1945 — written for internal eyes only, with no reason to conceal the truth. Precisely because it was confidential, Source B is the more candid record of British intentions , and it shows the government privately resolved that MacMichael could "make it clear to any recalcitrant Sultan that we intend to carry our proposal through." Set against this frank private memorandum, Source C's public denial is exposed as self-serving and unreliable, making it not useful . While Source C is not useful, its limited use is mainly for revealing how the British