Download LORMS for Elective History Test 4 - The-Historic

4a
Which of the following factors was most important in leading to the
break up of the Soviet Union? Explain your answer.
[12]
- Rise of Nationalism
- The Policy of Perestroika
- The Policy of Glasnost
L1
Writes about the break up of the Soviet Union but without focus on
the question
[1-2]
L2
Describes 1 or 2 factors
[3-4]
-Agree or Disagree, and describes one factor– 2m
-Agree and Disagree, and describes at least 2 factors– 3m,
3 factors – 4m
The breakup of the Soviet Union was the result of the combination of
factors – the rise of nationalism amongst the non-Russian soviet
republics, as well as the policies of perestroika and glasnost.
However, it was the policy of glasnost, which allowed for greater
openness, and critical assessments of the Soviet system that took
on an impetus of its own, and ended up undermining the authority of
the Communist Party to rule, thus leading to the break up of the
Soviet Union which had previously been held together by the
punitive might of the Communist Party.
Comments: (You must explain the link between the failure of the
CPSU and the breakup of the USSR. Cannot take the relationship
as a given. As the USSR was essentially a construct of the CPSU,
therefore the demise of the CPSU would lead to the collapse of the
USSR, as the latter would be devoid of its only proponent.)
L3
Explains one factor
4 marks for example
5 marks for analysis
The rise of Nationalism was an underlying factor in leading to the
break up of the Soviet Union, as a multi-national state, as the nonRussian Soviet Republics sought to break away from the Soviet
[4-5]
Union and to achieve national independence. (Point)
The Baltic soviet republics of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia which
had been taken over against their will by the Russians in 1940 were
encouraged by the successful anti-Soviet, pro-nationalist
movements in Eastern Europe (which began with the Solidarity
Movement in Poland), and proceeded to declare independence from
the USSR. Moreover, the Soviet Union was unable to stop the
fighting between Azerbaijan and Armenia which had stemmed from
the desire of the Nargorno-Karabakh (a small Christian autonomous
republic within Azerbaijan) to be seceded to Christian Armenia.
(Example)
These examples clearly illustrate that the desire for nationalism had
overwhelmed the Kremlin (central government in Moscow), and that
the union of socialist soviet republics, which had hitherto been held
together by force was increasingly being undermined by the inability
of the Kremlin to act. Even the deployment of Soviet troops to Latvia
and Lithuania in July 1990 failed to solve the problem but instead
triggered mass demonstrations against the forced union. Overtures
made by Gorbachev to concede a measure of self-rule through the
Union Treaty also failed to satisfy the strong desire for nationalism in
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which wanted a clean break from the
USSR. Thus the breakup of the Soviet Union was caused by the
underlying nationalistic sentiments of the non-Russian soviet
republics, which could no longer be suppressed by force, nor
contained within a looser federation. (Analysis)
Comments: Satellite states (in Eastern Europe) of USSR ≠ Soviet
Socialist Republics. (within USSR)
OR
The policy of perestroika also contributed to the breakup of the
Soviet Union, as it failed to meet the expectations that it had set for
itself and had caused widespread resentment. (point)
Although Perestroika introduced small-scale private enterprise that
was intended to replace the slow and inefficient services provided by
the state, and to improve the lives of the people, thus strengthening
the USSR; the law of state enterprise, which sought to decentralize
the management of the economy, ironically led to the shortage of
basic consumer goods, as factory managers tried to maximize
profits by producing more luxury goods. This led to strikes that
numbered half a million workers in 1989, by coal miners in Siberia,
Kazakhstan and Ukraine, who found that there was no soap to wash
after their shift. (example)
Perestroika, that was intended to strengthen the USSR ended up
causing great resentment amongst the people, who felt that the
Kremlin had failed to provide for them, and thus increasingly turned
against the regime, and resorted to mass demonstrations aimed at
increasing local autonomy that further weakened the authority of
the Kremlin, thus undermining their control over the USSR and
making it more likely to breakup from within. (analysis)
OR
However, the policy of glasnost was the most important reason
behind the break up of the Soviet Union, as it unleashed a torrent of
criticisms against the government, which damaged its prestige and
ultimately questioned its legitimacy to rule. (point)
Glasnost brought about an ‘openness’ in society and took the form
of rehabilitation of dissidents, the critiquing of past soviet mistakes,
exposure of official corruption and unprecedented freedom in news
reporting. Although this was intended to improve society and to
make it more humane, it took on an impetus of its own and soon
turned against the party. (elaboration)
By publicizing the internal problems of the Party and the disasters
(e.g. Chernobyl) that the country was facing, Glasnost exposed the
weakness of the Party to the people and made the latter doubt the
ability of the former to rule. Gorbachev’s intention to educate public
opinion so as to win support for his efforts to eradicate corruption
and inefficiency within the party backfired, as public opinion could
not be so easily manipulated and soon became out of control as
many different groups took advantage of this new openness to
pursue their own nationalistic agendas. The exposure of the
incompetence of the Kremlin convinced these people that they were
better able to rule themselves, thus leading to the break up of the
Soviet Union. (specific example + analysis)
OR
Glasnost allowed for free elections to take place in 1989, and this
led to the rise to power of Boris Yeltsin, as President of the USSR in
11th June 1990. This is significant as it was Yeltsin who
subsequently defeated the August 1991 coup by conservative
hardliners who wanted to restore the USSR, by calling for mass
demonstrations and strikes which crippled Moscow, and pressured
the hardliners to succumb to ‘people power.’ With this, Yeltsin
became the most powerful leader in the Soviet Union, and it was he
who finally brought about the conclusive breakup of the USSR by
calling for its dissolution, and replacement by the Commonwealth of
Independent State. (specific example and analysis)
L4
Award 6m for explanation of two factors, but without specific
examples
[6-7]
Award 7m max for explanation of two factors with specific examples.
L5
Award 9m max for explanations of the given factor AND 2 other
factors.
[8-10]
Award 10m for explanations of all 3 factors, all clearly linked to the
topic and takes a stand. Differentiation of marks dependent on
clarity and detail of explanation.
L6
L5 + Explain to what extent i.e. evaluate the relative importance of
the different factors leading to the breakup of the USSR.
i.e. answers that show how some factors are contingent /dependent
on others, or the different roles factors play (short-term, long term,
etc.)
In conclusion, although all the above three factors did contribute to
the break up of the USSR, the policy of glasnost was the most
important as it was the deciding factor that exposed the weakness
of the Kremlin, questioned their legitimacy to rule, and gave
nationalistic aspirations an avenue to express itself, where it
previously had been suppressed for decades. The Soviet Union had
hitherto been held together by force, and the new climate which
appeared to be more consultative had ironically emboldened the
nationalists to take advantage of the relaxation of control to assert
their desires for national independence. Perestroika on its own could
not have led to the breakup of the Soviet Union, as prior to glasnost,
the mass demonstrations in reaction to perestroika would have been
harshly quelled and come to naught. However, glasnost brought
about a change in mentality and reluctance to employ force, which
ultimately permitted the non-Russian soviet republics to break away,
thus leading to the break up of the USSR.
Comments: Underlying might not be the most appropriate word to
use as it has connotations of being present but not apparent. Hence,
nationalism would be the underlying factor, as it was present all the
time, but had been suppressed, but Glasnost was the (most recent)
DECIDING factor
[11-12]
4b
[13]
“Internal factors played a more significant role than external factors
in the failure of the communist experiment in the USSR in the
1980s.” Do you agree? Explain your answer.
L1
Writes about internal or external factors but without focus on the
question.
[1]
Award 1m max
L2
Agrees OR disagrees, and identifies reason (s)
[2]
Award 2m for identifying 1 point for agreeing or disagreeing
L3
Agrees AND disagrees, and identifies reasons.
[3]
Award 3m for identifying 1 point for agreeing AND disagreeing.
E.g.
Internal factors, such as the inherent flaws of communism as well
as the inefficient government, did play a more significant role than
external factors in the failure of the communist experiment in the
USSR in the 1980s. Although external factors were important, it did
not cause the downfall of communism, but had simply accelerated
the demise of a system that was already internally weak.
L4
Explains reasons for agreement OR disagreement
4-5 marks max for one point, with example and analysis
6-7 marks for two points, with examples and analysis
The presence of inherent flaws in communism suggests that the
failure of the communist experiment in the USSR was not
altogether unexpected, but was somewhat determined from the
start. (Point)
The principle of equality and remuneration according to need
(rather than effort) took away the incentive to work and the workers
were generally complacent, due to their guaranteed job security
and benefits, regardless of performance. (example)
[4-7]
This lack of a profit-making motivation meant that many industries
in the USSR was not operating productively and were often making
losses, thus weakening the economic system in the USSR.
(analysis)
Moreover, the principle of a centrally-planned command economy
led to inflexibility in response, leading to entrenched economic
inefficiency. Planning from the centre meant that very often the
decision makers at the top were unaware of all the intricate
problems in society, and thus came up with one-size fits all policies
that were unsuitable to be implemented and led to the creation of
entrenched problems in the system. The fact that every decision
was controlled from the centre also meant that decision making
took a long time to loop around (from individual factory up the
communist bureaucracy) before it finally got back to the individual
factory, resulting in a time-lag that ultimately crippled the system.
(example and analysis)
Another internal factor that led to the failure of the communist
experiment would be the inefficient and corrupt government which
had betrayed the communist experiment in the USSR by failing to
provide for the needs of the proletariat. (point)
It overemphasized on the production of military at the expense of
consumer goods, as seem from the fact that more than 50% of
government spending was on the military. Moreover, these
consumer goods were of low quality, which made the people lose
faith in Communism’s ability to improve their welfare. Even in the
area of heavy industries, the government failed to have the
foresight to build factories near to sources of raw materials, thereby
compromising on the speed of production and incurring additional
cost for the transportation of materials to the factories.
The government also took advantage of the system of democratic
centralism to foster cronyism, thus compromising on the quality of
leaders, and this clearly reveals that the Communist bureaucracy
was not one that was able to reform itself to ensure its continued
survival. The absence of a genuine feedback mechanism also
meant that there was no sense of accountability to the people, and
this betrayed the fundamental communist ideal of the dictatorship
of the proletariat, which aimed to empower the workers. (example
and analysis)
Internal reasons, such as the inherent flaws of communism and the
inefficient government, thus played a significant role in causing the
failure of the communist experiment in the USSR. (link)
Comments: Inefficient economy, alcoholism etc is more an
EXAMPLE rather than the cause of the failure of the Communist
experiment. Root causes would be inherent flaws of communism
(failure of the system) and inefficient government (failure of the
people within the system)
OR
However, external factors did contribute to the acceleration of the
demise of communism in the USSR, as it overstretched a USSR
that was already weak and worsened its economic woes. (point)
USSR was over-stretched in its overseas commitment as it had to
pay for the upkeep of Soviet troops that were stationed in other
Soviet Republics and satellite states to quell the anti-Soviet
sentiments there. Resources were further stretched when the
USSR invaded Afghanistan in 1979. USSR’s external ambitions
exacted a heavy toll on it, and it ended up spending more than it
collected in taxes. In fact, it gave about US$3 billion to its satellite
states through the COMECON, which led to the USSR being
further in debt. In addition, Reagan’s ‘Star Wars’ Programme
further highlighted the weakness of the USSR’s economy, and
exposed its inability to keep up with the cost of a new arms race.
(examples)
The inability of the USSR to keep up with America in the Star Wars
also dealt a severe blow to the prestige of Communism, as the
superiority and prosperity of the Capitalist economy (with its profit
making goal) was becoming increasingly apparent. That the
Communist experiment was only surviving due to the use of force
(and not by choice) also suggests that it was an unpopular system
that had to be propped up by military might, which in turn was a
burden to the faltering Soviet economy and was unsustainable in
the long run. (analysis)
Comments: Failure is relative: Success of Capitalism showed
Communism to be a failure in terms of quality of its economy,
internal stability and whether it was possible to have an
expansionist foreign policy. Remember that Cold war was
essentially a battle for ideologies which took the form of arms race,
expansion of spheres of influence etc. Ultimately all that USSR and
USA did sought to prove that their ideology was superior to the
other. That USA managed to sustain its foreign policy showed the
strength of its economy, and by extension, the strength of the
Capitalist ideology. Remember also that the competition to be THE
ultimate superpower is a zero-sum game – where the success of
one implies the failure of the other.
L5
Explains reasons for agreement AND disagreement
[8-10]
Award 8-9 marks for all three points, with examples and analysis.
Both sides of the argument must be present.
Award 10 marks for good and sustained argument with clear links
back to the question.
L6
Explains how far and reaches a balanced conclusion based on
explanation of factors in L5
How far – 11-12 m
Balanced conclusion – 13m
E.g. In conclusion, although both internal and external factors did
contribute to the failure of the Communist experiment, internal
factors were more influential as it weakened the USSR from within
and made it resistant to change, thus depriving it of a real
opportunity to avert its doom. External factors merely contributed
further to the economic woes of the USSR which had originated
from the absence of a profit-making motive, which had led to an
inefficient debt-ridden economy that was ultimately unsustainable
in the long run. Therefore, I do agree with the above statement that
internal factors played a more significant role than external factors
in leading to the failure of Communism. (Conclusion)
[11-13]