漫畫內容關戰前戰後法國對列強的態度轉變 — 於「當年」，法國指加入戰爭是「『我們』的事」，要求「英、美、意」等國往「前線」出發，同心協力抵抗侵略。然而，於戰後當列強拿著「想法」、「建議」和「提示」等前往「和平」的大門時，卻遭法國拒諸門外，並指出戰後「和平」及國際秩序的安排乃「『我』的事」，阻止列強參與其中。
L1 答案含混，未能有效運用資料及個人所知。 [最多2分]
L2 欠缺均衡，僅能有效運用資料或個人所知。 [最多4分]
L3 答案合理且均衡，能有效運用資料及個人所知。 [最多7分]
同時，資料F 雖然指出婦女地位於第一次世界大戰後有所提升。然而，資料F 卻指出婦女地位提升只不過是局限地區，「女權運動在歐洲的天主教地區薄弱得多」，舉例「法國」、「意大利」和「比利時」等分別到「1944年」、「1946年」和「1948年」方「才將投票權擴展至婦女」，戰後婦女地位未有於歐洲得到全面提升，故未為歐洲帶來更好。
(a) What, in your opinion, was the main message of the cartoon in Source E? Explain your answer with reference to Source E. (3 marks)
Performance was good. This question required candidates to identify the main message of the cartoon in Source E. most candidates were able to focus on France and identify a valid message from the cartoon, with sound justification.
* One mark for valid answer and two marks for valid explanation
- France was a selfish country.
- During the war, France sought the help of other countries; after the war. It refused to discuss their proposals in the peace conference.
The main message of Source E was to satirize France for prioritizing own national interest while neglecting the development as a whole in Europe after WWI.
From Source E, there was a sharp contrast over the attitude of France towards the powers during-war and post-war. During “the war”, France pointed out that war was “our affair”, asking “England, Italy and the USA” to go into “front entrance of war” and fight together as one. That said, in post-war period, the powers brought “suggestions”, “ideas” and “hints”, wishing to enter the door of “the peace”. They were rejected by France as France said post-war international order and arrangement was “my affair”, hindering the powers to involve in that.
Thus, Source E criticized the change of attitude of France after WWI, prioritizing on own national interest while neglecting the development as a whole in Europe, which was the main message of the source.
(b) Identify one general misunderstanding of the impact of the First World War on women’s status, according to the author of Source F. Explain your answer with reference to Source F. (3 marks)
Performance was good. Most of the candidates were able to identify one general misunderstanding of the impact of the First World War on women’s status, with good reference to Source F. the weakest candidates copied indiscriminately from the Source and did not make use of data about ‘misunderstanding of the impact of the First World War on women’s status’.
* One mark for valid answer and two marks for valid explanation
- Women’s status was improved obviously after the First World War.
- Many countries did not give women voting rights until the end of the Second World War
- Women’s status did not change a lot at home and in the workplace.
There was a general misunderstanding towards the rise of women status after WWI, which was depicted in Source F.
From Source F, women had “vital contribution” and held important roles in the war. Therefore, after WWI “in most of Europe”, women’s socio-political rights were being emphasized. Women were given “the right to vote”, so as to enhance their political status. It showed that WWI led to the rising women status.
From Source F, “movements for women’s rights had been far weaker in Catholic parts of Europe”, hindering the prevalence of women suffrage across Europe. Took some catholic countries as examples, “France extended the franchise to women only in 1944, Italy in 1946, Romania and Yugoslavia the same year”. It reflected that the women status had not been significantly enhanced after WWI. There was a general misunderstanding towards the rise of women status after WWI.
(c) Did the First World War bring about a better Europe? Explain your answer with reference to Sources E and F, and using your own knowledge of the development of Europe up to 1929. (7 marks)
Performance was fair. The question required candidates to discuss whether the First World War brought about a better Europe, with reference to Sources E and F and using the candidates’ own knowledge of the development of Europe up to 1929. Only the best candidates were able to focus their discussion on the key phrase ‘better Europe’ and us both sources and their own knowledge effectively. Mediocre answers discussed how the War affected the development of Europe, with inadequate treatment of the key word ‘better’. Some weak candidates ignored key phrases in the question such as ‘better’ and ‘up to 1929’, and merely wrote prepared answers on the rise of totalitarianism and cause of the Second World War.
L1 Vague answer, ineffective in using both Sources and own knowledge. [max. 2]
L2 Lack in balance, effective in using Sources or own knowledge only. [max. 4]
L3 Sound and balanced answer, effective in using both Sources and own knowledge. [max. 7]
- Women’s contribution was recognized after the War. (Source F)
- Europe achieved peace that there were no big conflicts among the powers in the 1920s. (own knowledge)
- The powers suffered from improvement and ideological conflicts after the War. (Source E)
- Overdependence on the USA made Europe vulnerable to economic depression. (own knowledge)
To a small extent, the claim was valid.
From Source E, powers advocated the use of force in the face of clashes before WWI. For example, England, Italy and the USA were armed and ready for the war. But “Now”, cartoonist pointed out that powers brought “suggestions”, “ideas” and “hints” for “the peace”. It reflected powers’ willingness to prevent war through peaceful means after WWI. WWI did bring a better Europe.
From Source F, people recognized “the vital contribution by women in the war”, leading to a “change in the attitude towards women’s suffrage”. Women gained more rights like they “had been given the vote in most of Europe”. Gender equality was promoted after WWI, proving WWI did bring a better Europe.
From my own knowledge, there was absence of peacekeeping body before WWI. After WWI, powers established the League of Nations (1919) to maintain peace. The League had organs like Secretariat, Assembly and Permanent Council of International Justice. By condemnation, economic sanction and military action, international order was maintained. Through collective security, powers could build strong bonding with each other. WWI did bring a better Europe.
From my own knowledge, WWI broke out owing to the clashes among different races. Therefore, US president Wilson proposed “ the Fourteen Points” at the Paris Peace Conference (1919), one of which was “nation self-determination”. It led to the establishment of new nation states like Czechoslovakia, Poland and Lithuania. This reduced conflicts regarding nationalism. WWI did bring a better Europe.
That said, to a large extent, WWI could not bring a better Europe.
From Source E, during “the war”, conflicts were “our affair”. But “Now” (after WWI), they became “my affair” and France refused powers’ “suggestions”, “ideas” and “hints” for “the peace”. Relationships between powers were worsened and conflicts became edgy. WWI did not bring a better Europe.
From Source F, even though it agreed to the rise of women status after WWI, the result was restricted to some regions only. “Movements for women’s rights had been far weaker in Catholic parts of Europe”, like in “France”, “Italy” and “Belgium” had to wait until “1944”, “1946” and “1948” respectively to extend its voting right to women. After WWI, the women status had not been significantly enhanced. Thus, WWI did not bring a better Europe.
From my own knowledge, the League of Nations was meant to maintain the international order. However, it lacked the participation of the US, which was supposed to be a keystone. Moreover, it had ineffective mechanism. As a result, when France occupied Fiume (1924), announced Abyssinia as protectorate (1924), there was no immediate action to stem its aggression. WWI did not bring a better Europe.
From my own knowledge, Paris Peace Conference (1919) failed to solve the post-war problems. For example, France could not seize Fiume. Discontent aroused among people in France and this catalyzed the rise of Mussolini (1922). In 1924, France occupied Fiume and this harmed regional stability. WWI did not bring a better Europe.
From my own knowledge, under the principle of “national self-determination”, new nation states set up were weak in terms of economic and military power. They became the target of aggressors. In 1939, Germany invaded whole Czechoslovakia and Poland, sparking off WWII. It reflected that WWI failed to establish a new international order but paved the way to WWII. WWI did not bring a better Europe.
To conclude, although powers made every endeavor to improve the international situation like establishing the League of Nations and enhancing women status, the results were not significant. Worse still, it further led to the outbreak of WWII. Thus, to a small extent, the claim is valid.