RVHS H2 HIST P1 Ans

1 Question “Nationalist movements have only themselves to blame for the lack of achievements in the pre-war period.” How far do you agree with this statement? Question Topic Origins, nature and development of pre-World War II nationalism. Question Focus Successes and limitations of pre-war nationalist movements. Definitions “Themselves to blame”  Candidates should reference this phrase to the internal failings of the pre-war nationalist movements.  Such internal failings could include: (i) Factionalism (ii) Over-ambition/radicalization (must be seen in the context of far superior politico-military colonial strength and resolve). (iii) Over-reliance on individual nationalist leaders/lack of sound party and mobilisational structures. (iv) Narrow scope and support (must be linked to physical size and capability of nationalist groups against colonial powers).  Candidates who wish to argue against the given factor can do so by highlighting the overwhelming quality of colonial resolve to hold on to their colonies, backed up by superior military and police forces deployed for effective suppression. “Lack of achievements”  Candidates should highlight that none of the nationalist groups in the pre-war period achieved the ultimate aim of independence and the overthrow of the colonial powers, and go about accounting for that (internal failings Vs external suppression).  Candidates can also choose to question the assumption behind this phrase as a form of (final) higher evaluation. For this, they would have to identify and explain developmental aspects that could be considered as successes. These could be: (i) Expansion of membership numbers and proliferation of nationalist groups. (ii) Intensified nationalist agitation against colonial powers, eliciting a greater military response from the latter (“small successes”). (iii) Politicisation of the masses (at least for the urban masses). (iv) Growth of a “national” mindset (greater inclusiveness). Possible Arguments Candidates can argue: (i) Agree. In this argument, candidates will have to focus on the structural weaknesses of the nationalist movements. They will have to highlight points of internal weaknesses, such as factionalism, over-

2 reliance on leaders, over-ambition and lack of politico-military capability, and show that these issues devastated the groups to that point that they never stood a chance against the colonial powers, even before the colonial suppression came in. Colonial suppression, under this argument, then becomes the final nail in the coffin, though not the underlying reason for the lack of achievements. (ii) Disagree. In this argument, candidates have a dual task in showing that the nationalist groups were decently organised, and their lack of achievements were instead due to overwhelming colonial superiority. In this argument, candidates can acknowledge that there were some weaknesses on the part of the nationalist groups, but did not amount to structural decay. What was a more important factor was the colonial resolve and military suppressive capability that led to the failure of groups. Question “Confrontation was the most viable path towards independence in the post-war era.” Discuss. Question Topic End of colonial rule. Question Focus Different routes taken by Southeast Asian countries to achieve independence. Definitions “Confrontation”  Candidates should equate the term to hostile, physical and violent agitation against the colonial powers. The terms does allow for connotations of illegality. Such agitation could come in the form of: (i) Prolonged open war (e.g. Vietnam). (ii) Limited war (e.g. Indonesia). (iii) Street demonstrations/protests/strikes (e.g. Indonesia and Burma).  For candidates who wish to argue against the given factor, a possible alternative strategy that the nationalists adopted with that of reform and negotiation with the colonial powers. This would also connote legality and constitutionalism. “Most viable path”  Candidates should tie the term with a connotation of practicality/workability, and must be seen in the context of colonial attitudes based on: (i) Post-war domestic (Europe) conditions. (ii) Attitudes towards imperialism and empire (colonial retention). (iii) The Cold War.  Candidates can also judge the issue from the perspective of the nationalists through an assessment of their

3 movements’ politico-military strength and legitimacy. Possible Arguments Candidates can argue: (i) Confrontation was the most viable path. In this argument, candidates will have to focus on the fact that most of the colonial rulers were still uncompromising in holding on to their colonies in the post-war period (provide context). As such, in order for the fulfillment of the ultimate aim of independence, nationalist groups had to force the issue through hostile action. The resultant effect could be in the form of immediate independence or an accelerated decolonisation timetable. Philippines would be the exception case study in this argument as the decolonisation process there was overwhelmingly constitutional, based on negotiation and peaceful. (ii) Reform and negotiation was the most viable path. In this argument, candidates will have to focus on the fact that international circumstances, and in some cases even the colonial powers, were already forcing the issue of decolonisation. Nationalist forces recognised this global shift and maneuvered their way through legal and constitutional means (through negotiation) towards the achievement of their aims of independence. While it can be acknowledged that some acts of violence were involved, these paled in comparison to the diplomatic and political efforts in securing independence. Vietnam would be the exception case study in this argument as the decolonisation process their was overwhelmingly confrontational and violent. Question “The rise of authoritarian regimes was largely due to historical, rather than circumstantial, reasons.” How valid is this statement in relation to independent Southeast Asia? Question Topic Search for political structures. Question Focus Rise of authoritarian regimes. Definitions “Rise of authoritarian regimes”  Authoritarian regimes would refer to any one of the following (candidates should seek to deal with all): (i) Military governments. (ii) Maximum governments (heavy military involvement). (iii) Illiberal/paternalistic democracy.  The time period of focus would be in the years of democratic experimentation leading to the collapse of initial democratic governments. “Historical”  Connotes a more long-term factor accounting for the rise

4 of authoritarianism.  In the context of Southeast Asia, this would refer to the persistence and permeation of traditional political culture, such as patrimonialism, with its authoritarian slants. Candidates should show the resurfacing of such authoritarian tendencies during the democratic experimentation phase through the role and action of key governmental leaders in subverting and dismantling democracy and maneuvering an authoritarian-styled government into power. “Circumstantial”  Connotes more short-term, immediate factors accounting for the rise of authoritarianism.  This would mostly refer to the failures of democratic governments and the incompatibility of democracy in meeting the needs of independent Southeast Asia, thus further discrediting the political ideology and system of governance. Possible Arguments Candidates can argue: (i) Valid. In this argument, students would have to focus on traditional political culture, how it affected both the elites and masses (the authoritarian slant), and how key governmental leaders always had a preference for it (did not believe in democracy) and set about working towards the establishment of authoritarian sta