L1 解釋含混，未能有效運用資料。 [最多1分] L2 解釋清晰，能有效運用資料。 [最多3分] 例︰ - 希特拉多次違背自己所作的承諾（會遵守羅加諾公約、不會覬覦歐洲領土、不會干擾捷克）。
希特拉多次違背承諾，所以他不是個有「良好誠信」的人。 資料C指希特拉「違背凡爾賽條約」，意即希特拉推翻凡爾賽條約中的規定，違背承諾，所以他不是個有「良好誠信」的人。 資料指希特拉「違背凡爾賽條約」的同時，他「承諾會遵守羅加諾公約」，將確保和平得以維持。然而，資料卻指希特拉「違背羅加諾公約」，沒有兌現遵守羅加諾公約的承諾，故他不是個有「良好誠信」的人。 違犯羅加諾公約的同時，希特拉「承諾不會再製造麻煩或覬覦歐洲任何領土」，不會再發動侵略，破壞歐洲的穩定。然而，資料卻指出希特拉「以武力進行入奧地利」，吞併奧地利以擴張其勢力，違背其許下的承諾，故非「良好誠信」的人。 最後，資料指希特拉「信誓旦旦說不會干擾捷克」，以確保捷克的國家安全，不會受到威脅。然而，資料卻指德國要求「取得蘇台德區」，反映希特拉違背他不會干擾捷克的承諾，因此他不是個「良好誠信」的人。
L1 能確切嘗試指出綏靖政策的目的，惟按資料解釋時內容含混。 [最多2分] L2 就綏靖政策的的目的作答合理，能按資料作出有效的解釋。 [最多4分] 例︰ - 綏靖政策皆在將納粹德國的侵略轉向蘇聯（代表英法兩國的兩名紳士以捷克為餌，誘使納粹德國「向東走」）。
綏靖政策目的旨在引誘納粹德國向東擴張，對抗蘇聯，以確保西方國家的安全。 資料出版於1939年的蘇聯，而此時期蘇聯與西方國家的關係惡劣，因而推斷其不滿於西方國家的行為，認為西方國家推行綏靖政策目的在於利誘納粹德國轉東擴張，從而打擊蘇聯的國力，以確保西方國家的安全。 其次，資料中代表西方國家的紳士分別奉上捷克的肉塊和舉起「向東走」的旗幟，引誘代表納粹德國的狼轉向東邊走，由此可推斷綏靖政策目的引誘納粹德國向東擴張，對抗東邊的蘇聯，以確保西方國家的安全。
L1 嘗試指出答案，並予以解釋，惟所作解釋並非建基於對三項資料的比較。[最多3分] L2 嘗試指出答案，所作解釋亦能建基於對三項資料的比較，惟內容欠缺均衡，論述亦欠完備。 [最多6分] L3 能指出答案，所作解釋有力且建基於對三項資料的比較，內容均衡，論述完備。 [最多8分]
例︰ - 綏靖政策令作者「無法再次抬起頭來」。（資料C） - 資料D中的男人在寫著「捷克危機」的破木板上走著，意味著綏靖政策導致種種危機。然而，漫畫顯示地球正從戰爭走向和平，意味著作者仍然認為該政策是有希望的。（資料D） - 該漫畫反映出蘇聯對綏靖政策的看法。西方紳士所象徵的西方民主國家，嘗試以捷克為餌，誘使納粹德國（即漫畫中的狼，其鬍子和納粹軍帽象徵它是納粹德國）「向東走」，即將侵略轉向到蘇聯。（資料E）
資料D對綏靖政策的負面程度最低。 首先從資料D分析，雖然資料D的漫畫家描繪男人和地球正處於「捷克危機」的破木橋上，意味當時（即1938）年綏靖政策仍面對各種危機挑戰，情況並不樂觀，實有一定的負面程度。 然而，從漫畫家繪畫的男人分析，男人樣子如同當時英國首相張伯倫（資料D），他相信綏靖政策能夠解決當時各項危機，終為國際社會帶來和平。所以，漫畫家非一面倒認為綏靖政策是絕望的。 與此同時，資料D的漫畫家亦描繪男子把地球從「戰爭」推向「和平」，此都反映漫畫家認為綏靖政策能夠阻止戰爭爆發，並為世界帶來和平的願景，對綏靖政策充滿希望，故其負面程度甚微。 現從資料C討論。 資料C作者認為希特拉是個貪得無厭之徒，他曾許下多次承諾，就如「遵守羅加諾公約」、「不會干擾捷克」等都未曾兌現，故面對希特拉的侵略行動仍採綏靖政策安撫，實為過度樂觀的看法，也令作者「無法相信」行之有效。 而且，當資料C作者被邀請參與「討論德國要求蘇台德區」事宜，作者認為加入「游說捷克政府」（即綏靖政策陣營），將令他「無法再次抬起頭來」，顯示作者並不看好綏靖政策，甚至認為其有失尊嚴，對綏靖政策持負面看法。 比較之下，資料D的漫畫仍對綏靖政策存有希望，認為其能解決紛爭，為國際社會帶來和平的願景。相反，資料C的作者卻認為綏靖政策乃過度樂觀的見解，運行下去將有損利益。所以，資料D的負面程度比資料C的低。 最後從資料E討論。 資料E的漫畫出版於1939年的蘇聯，此時期蘇聯與西方國家關係惡劣，故她其不會支持綏靖政策，反而對綏靖政策加以抨擊，實存相當的負面程度。 同時，資料E的漫畫家把西方民主國家描繪成卑躬屈膝的紳士，並向代表納粹德國的狼奉上象徵捷克利益的肉塊，從而誘使狼「向東走」。此可反映漫畫家認為綏靖政策讓德國往東侵略，把侵略轉向蘇聯，帶來災難。 比較之下，資料E的漫畫家認為綏靖政策使「西方國家」屈服於德國面前，更拱手奉獻利益予她。而同時反映綏靖政策未能有效解決國際危機，僅只能把威脅轉移至另一方向（向東走），不如資料D漫畫般認為能為國際社會解除威脅，實比資料D的負面程度更高。 可見，資料D對於綏靖政策的負面程度為最低。
(a) According to Source C, why was Hitler not a man of ‘good faith’? Explain your answer with reference to Source C. (3 marks)
Performance was good. The question required candidates to explain why Hitler was not a man of good faith according to Source C. most candidates made good use of the Source to point out that Hitler always broke the promises he made. However, some candidates merely quoted the Source without further elaboration, hence losing marks.
L1 Vague explanation and ineffective use of the Source. [max. 1] L2 Clear explanation, effective in using the Source. [max. 3]
- Hitler repeatedly broke the promises he himself made (keeping the Treaty of Locarno, no further territorial aim in Europe, non-interference with Czechoslovakia).
Hitler had broken his promises repeatedly so he was not a man of ‘good faith’. According to Source C, Hitler “broke the Treaty of Versailles”. It means that Hitler overthrew the terms of the Treaty of Versailles and broke his promise, showing that Hitler was not a man of ‘good faith’. Source C also indicates that “when Mr. Hitler broke the Treaty of Versailles, he promised to keep the Treaty of Locarno” in order to maintain world peace. However, Source C shows that Hitler “broke the Treaty of Lucama” later and he didn’t honor his promise of keeping the treaty. Thus, he was not a man of ‘good faith’. When Hitler broke the Treaty of Lucama, he “promised not to interfere further or to have any territorial aims in Europe”. It shows that Hitler promised not to initiate any aggression which undermined the stability in Europe. However, Source C indicates that Hitler “entered Austria by force”, annexing Austria to expand his power which broke his promise. Therefore, Hitler was not a man of ‘good faith’. Lastly, Source C shows that Hitler “assured that he would not interfere with Czechoslovakia” to ensure the national security of Czechoslovakia. However, Source C pointed out Germany “demanded for Sudetenland”, reflecting that Hitler broke his promise of not interfering with Czechoslovakia. Therefore, Hitler was not a man of “good faith”.
(b) According to the author of Source E, what was the purpose of the appeasement policy? Explain your answer with reference to Source E. (4 marks)
Performance was good. The question required candidates to infer the purpose of the appeasement policy according to the author of Source E. most candidates were able to make good use of clues in the Source to determine that the appeasement policy, in the eyes of the author of Source F, aimed at diverting German aggression eastward to the Soviet Union. However, some candidates misunderstood ‘Go east!’ in the Source as suggesting aggression towards Eastern Europe in general or even Asia, and/or mistook the wolf in the cartoon as a symbol for Italy, and so lost marks.
L1 Concrete attempt to identify the purpose of the appeasement policy, but vague in explanation with reference to the Source. [max. 2] L2 Valid answer about the purpose of the appeasement policy, with effective explanation with reference to the Source. [max. 4]
- The appeasement policy aimed at redirecting Nazi aggression towards the USSR (the two gentlemen – representing Britain and France – used Czechoslovakia as a bait to lure Nazi Germany to ‘go east’ )
The purpose of the appeasement policy was to lure Nazi Germany to expand to the East and confront against the USSR in order to ensure the national security of the western countries. Source E was published from the USSR in 1939. At the time, the USSR and the western countries were hostile to each other. Thus, it can be deduced that the USSR was dissatisfied with the western countries, thinking that the purpose of the western countries adopting the appeasement policy was to lure Nazi Germany’s expansion to the East so as to weaken the USSR and ensure their national security. Moreover, according to Source E, the gentlemen representing the western countries were presenting a piece of meat labelled “Czechoslovakia” and raising a banner labelled “Go East” to the wolf representing Nazi Germany, luring the wolf to go east. It reflects that the purpose of the appeasement policy was to lure Nazi Germany’s aggression to the East to confront against the USSR and ensure the security of the western countries.
(c) Which Source do you think has the least negative view towards the appeasement policy in the 1930s? Explain your answer with reference to Sources C, D and E. (8 marks)
Performance was far from satisfactory. This question required candidates to compare the three Sources and determine which had the least negative view towards the appeasement policy in the 1930s. come candidates merely described the three Sources without going one step further to compare them, therefore any conclusions reached were ungrounded. The weak candidates misread the Sources, for example, regarding the author of Source C as not against the appeasement policy, mistaking Chamberlain in Source D for Hitler, and mistaking Source E as appraising the peace-keeping efforts of the appeasement policy. Only the best candidates read the Sources correctly, did substantiated comparisons and determined the correct answer.
L1 Shows attempt to identify the answer with explanation, but the explanation is not based on comparing the three Sources. [max. 3] L2 Shows attempt to identify the answer with explanation based on comparing the three Sources, but marred by unbalanced and rough arguments. [max. 6] L3 Succeeds in identifying the answer with valid explanation based on comparing the three Sources, with balanced discussion and sound arguments. [max. 8]
- The appeasement policy made the author unable ‘to hold up [his] head again’. (Source C) - The man in Source D was walking along a breaking plank of ‘Czech Crisis’, meaning that the appeasement policy resulted in crises. However, the cartoon showed that the globe was going away from war to peace, meaning that the author still regarded the policy as hopeful. (Source D) - The cartoon reflected a USSR view of the appeasement policy. Western democracies, as symbolized by the several gentlemen, tried to lure Nazi Germany (the wolf, as symbolized by the moustache and the Nazi hat) to ‘go east’ – that is, redirect its aggression to the USSR – by offering it Czechoslovakia. (Source E)
Source D has the least negative view towards the appeasement policy. Firstly, according to Source D, the cartoon depicts that the man and the earth was crossing the broken bridge labelled “Czech Crisis”, which reflects the appeasement policy in 1938 was facing different challenges and the situation was not optimistic. The cartoon shows certain negative view towards the appeasement policy. However, the man in the cartoon was depicted as Chamberlain (Source D), who was the Prime Minister of Britain at that time. He believed that the appeasement policy could resolve all crises at that time and eventually bring world peace. Therefore, the cartoonist thought that the appeasement policy was not necessarily useless. Meanwhile, according to Source D, the cartoon depicts that the man would push the earth from “War” to “Peace”, reflecting that the cartoonist believed the appeasement policy was able to stop the outbreak of the war and bring peace to the world. The cartoonist felt hopeful towards the appeasement policy and thus Source D held minimal negative view towards the appeasement policy. Now, let’s discuss Source C. According to Source C, the author thought that Hitler was an insatiable person. Hitler had made many promises, such as “keeping the Treaty of Locarno” as well as “not interfering with Czechoslovakia”, but he was not able to keep all his promises. Thus, it was an over-optimistic view that the appeasement policy was useful to appease the aggression of Hitler. The author “cannot believe” that the appeasement policy would be effective. In addition, according to Source C, when the author was invited to discuss “the German demand for Sudetenland”, he thought that he should “never be able to hold up his head again” if he were “a party to persuading the Czechoslovak Government to accept the demand” (the appeasement policy camp). It implies that the author was pessimistic about the appeasement policy and even believed it had undermined his dignity. Therefore, the author held negative view towards the appeasement policy. In comparison, the cartoon in Source D was still hopeful about the outcome of the appeasement policy, believing that it could resolve the conflicts and bring peace to the world. On the contrary, the author of Source D thought that the introduction of the appeasement policy was an over-optimistic act and interests would be lost if the policy was still adopted. Therefore, Source C held a more negative view than Source D did. Now, let’s discuss Source E. The cartoon in Source E was published from the USSR in 1939. At that time, the USSR was hostile to the western countries and thus it would not support the appeasement policy. The USSR even criticized the appeasement policy. Therefore, Source E held certain negative view towards the policy. Furthermore, the cartoonist of Source E depicted the western democratic countries as gentlemen who were flattering the wolf representing Nazi Germany. They were presenting a piece of meat labelled “Czechoslovakia” to the wolf and luring the wolf to “go east”. It implies that the cartoonist believed the appeasement policy had directed German aggression to the East and brought disasters to the USSR. In comparison, the cartoonist of Source E thought that the appeasement policy had made the western countries succumb to Germany and even gave interests to Germany. Also, the cartoon implies that the appeasement policy failed to resolve international crises that it only directed the threat to another direction (East). On the other hand, the cartoon in Source D thought that the appeasement policy may be able to eliminate the threat for international society. Thus, Source E held a more negative view than Source D did. Therefore, Source D has the least negative view towards the appeasement policy.