【2019】二戰丨《凡爾賽條約》

題目拆解



參考答案(中文版)

(a) 你認為資料G中漫畫的主要信息是什麼?試參考資料G,解釋你的答案。(3分)

考生表現

表現良好。題目要求考生指出資料G中漫畫的主要信息。不少考生能夠按漫畫線索描述大戰戰勝國對德國的苛索。表現稍遜的考生誤以為漫畫指摘德國對英、法提出苛求,因而失竹。


評分參考

L1 答案含混,未能有效運用資料作答。 [最多1分]

L2 答案清晰,能參考資料作有效解釋。 [最多3分]

主要信息:

例:

- 大戰中的戰勝國對德國的要求十分苛刻。

解釋:

例:

- 鵝(德國)體型太小,不可能產下法國和英國所要求那麼大的金蛋。


參考答案

漫畫的主要信息是指德國未能滿足英法要求。

德國未能符合英法對金蛋的標準。參考資料G,漫畫裡代表德國的雞生下一棵「德國能給的」金蛋,但英法並不滿意,反拿出一個「要求金蛋的模樣」。對比下,德國給的金蛋比英法要求的細,故推斷漫畫主要信息是英法不滿德國未能滿足要求。


法國將採取行動對付德國。參考資料G,漫畫裡代表法國的男子拿出一把闊斧,義正詞嚴指責代表德國的雞。從圖像分析,推斷法國對「德國能給的金蛋」感到不滿,於是拿出武器威迫其不生下「要求金蛋的模樣」就採取行動。可見,漫畫主要信息是指德國不能達到英法要求。


最後,漫畫的標題是「無法令人滿意的金蛋」,指的是「德國能給」的金蛋未能令英法滿意,相信與漫畫主要信息有關。


(b) 克里孟梭對法國政府在凡爾賽條約的執行上抱持什麼態度?試參考資料H的用語及論據,解釋你的答案。(4分)

考生表現

表現平平。題目要求考生參考資料H的用語和論據,指出克里孟梭對法國政府在凡爾賽條約的執行上所抱持的態度。表現最佳的考生能運用資料解釋克里孟梭的態度。部分考生能夠援引線索作出解釋,必未能按題目要求運用資料的用語和論據。表現稍遜的考生誤以為資料描述克里孟梭對條約的執行抱持正面的態度,或僅僅引錄資料文字,未能清楚解釋克里孟梭的態度。


評分參考

L1 答案含混,未能有效運用資料作答。 [最多2分]

L2 答案清晰,能參考資料作有效解釋。 [最多4分]

態度:

例:

- 不滿


解釋:

例:

- 用語:「情況難以置信,但卻是實情!」「把凡爾賽條約置於毫無效用的狀態」

- 論據:「……每天所發生的……戰敗所要承擔的後果逐漸由德國轉到法國。」

參考答案

克里孟梭持不滿的負面態度。

先從用語方面分析。


克里孟梭向法國政府抱怨。參考資料H,對於政府減少德國賠款一事上,克氏形容為「難以置信」。一方面,該詞語具難以令人信服之意,表示他否定寬容對待德國。另一方面,從句構上此詞具諷刺意味,嘲罵當權者態度軟弱、漠視人民損失。可見,克里孟梭持反對的負面態度。

克里孟梭反對政府所為。參考資料H,克氏批評政府舉動是「前後不一致」,表示執政者自相矛盾,無法討好國際社會和人民。另一邊廂,他指善待德國是「毫無效用」,意思是絲毫作用也沒有。即是說,法國減少賠償是無利於維持和平。可見,克里孟梭持討厭的負面態度。

現從論據方面討論。

克里孟梭批評政府無能。參考資料H,克氏指第一次世界是德國過錯,例如稱她「犯下了歐洲歷史上最嚴重的、有預謀的、有準備的罰行」,理應對其懲處。但由於法國政府軟弱,或是「條約執行者的善意」,從寬對德國,使之「戰敗所要承擔的後果逐漸由德國轉到法國」,得不到應有賠償。因此,他持不滿的負面態度。

克里孟梭嘲諷政府軟弱。參考資料H,克氏批評政府態度「前後不一致」,原想嚴懲德國,後來卻對她從容,導致「凡爾賽條約於毫無效用的狀態」,未能締造穩定。於此情況下,法國政府「不惜任何代價謀求和平」是反智行為,因此舉有損自身利益。故此,他持憎恨的負面態度。

(c) 「1920年代,凡爾賽條約作為一個決定歐洲國際關係的因素,其重要性越來越小。」你是否同意此說?試參考資料G及H,並就你所知,解釋你的答案。(8分)

考生表現

表現欠佳。題目要求考生討論凡爾賽條約作為一個決定歐洲國際關係的因素,在1920年代的重要性是否越來越小。部分考生未能掌握題旨,討論了1930年代某些史事導致極權主義在德國興起和國際關係惡化,這些都無關題旨。一些考生誤以為凡爾賽條約等同巴黎和約,因而討論了意大利於第一次世界大戰後不滿等無關題旨的史事。部分考生採用了「其他因素」的答案,討論了影響1920年代國際關係的各個因素,惟此乃無關題旨。只有表現最佳的考生能夠集中討論1920年代的國際關係,以凡爾賽條約為討論核心,並能夠以資料及個人所知立論。


評分參考

L1 答案含混,未能有效使月資料及個人所知。 [最多2分]

L2 答案缺乏均衡,僅能有效運用資料個人所知。 [最多4分]

L3 答案有力且均衡,能有效運用資料個人所知。 [最多8分]

同意:

例:

- 德國多次未能繳清賠款,魯爾因而被佔領,這標誌著德國與歐洲諸國關係陷於最低谷。後來,對德太苛刻、太不切實際的凡爾賽條約,實際上已經被條款較寬的協議(如多茲計劃)所修正,致使如資料H所示德國的賠款獲大幅削減。(資料H及個人所知)

不同意:

例:

- 資料G顯示,英法兩國在執行凡爾賽條約時對德苛刻。後來,兩國意識到這種苛索已非德國所能承,遂予以同情,簽訂新的國際條約(如羅加諾公約),並同意德國加入國聯。換言之,凡爾賽條約的苛索,在促成新政策出現時往往有著重要的角色。(資料G及個人所知)


參考答案

題目所言成立。

1920年代早期《凡爾賽條約》對影響歐洲國際關係的重要性很大。

第一,《凡爾賽條約》影響德國、英國、法國關係。參考資料G,英、法因《凡》約與德國觸發衝突。例如漫畫裡「德國能給的」的金蛋遠不符合英法所「要求金蛋的模樣」,另漫畫標題為「無法令人滿意的金蛋」。這反映德國未能遵守《凡》約規定,令英、法著急準備干戈,故其對歐洲國際關係影響深遠。

第二,《凡爾賽條約》鞏固法國、英國關係。參考資料G,《凡》約拉近英、法距離。例如漫畫裡代表英國男子向德國展示「要求金蛋的模樣」,而法國男子則拿出斧頭威嚇。可見,追討賠款一事令英、法兩國關係靠攏,反映《凡》於1920年代早期存肩大重要性。

第三,《凡爾賽條約》影響德國、比利是、法國關係。就我所知,《凡》約規定賠款66億英鎊,但由於德國於1923年未能按時償還,法國聯同比利時合共10萬聯軍進佔魯爾區(擁有豐富煤礦資源)。可見,條約款項令歐洲國家觸發衝突,反映其於1920年代早期發揮很大重要性。

1920年代中期《凡爾賽條約》對影響歐洲國際關係的重要性減少。


第一,列強邀請德國參與和平條約。就我所知,威瑪共和國外首施特萊斯曼為求與西方國家改善關係,於1925年召開羅加諾會議,重新確立1919年《凡爾賽》定下的德國西部邊界。會議成功令德國與西方國家建立溝通橋樑,展望進一步合作。可見,《凡》約於1925年成為和平幌子,其重要性逐漸減弱。


第二,德國成功加入國際聯盟。就我所知,《羅加諾公約》(1925)取得成效,不但為西歐各國關係改善提供基礎,而且令列強減輕對德國敵視。於是乎,德國於1926年成為國際聯盟(1920)第六個常任會員國,與英、法、意攜手維持和平,彼此協作。這反映1920年代中期歐洲國家為維持傾盡全力,《凡》約影響力下降。


1920年代後期《凡爾賽條約》對影響歐洲國際關係的重要性大不如前。


第一,《凡爾賽條約》的賠償金額持續下降。參考資料G,法國政府接受德國減少賠款的請求。例如克里孟梭稱「德國在法國境內造成的人命及財產破壞為1360億金馬克」,但這個數額到「1921年5月縮減至680億」,又到「1929年時是220億金克馬」,為「協定金額的六分之一」。這表示《凡》條的賠款一直調減,其對歐洲國際關係影響亦隨之減少,故重要性愈來愈小。

第二,法國政府為和平與德國修補關係。參考資料G,克里孟梭批評「政府還在不惜任何代價謀求和平」,漠視國家於戰爭損失,接受「德國請求或要求減輕其負擔」,令人髮指。因此舉是「把凡爾賽條約於毫無效用的狀態」,不能保障法國利益,又未有締結和平。可見,1920年代末期《凡》已失去功效,對歐洲國際關係影響甚微,重要性亦愈來愈小。


第三,德國與歐洲國家締結非戰公約。就我所知,承繼1920年代中期帶來的和平氣氛,歐洲國家於1928締結另一條和平條約(《凱格-白里安公約》),宣布放棄以戰爭作為國家政策的手段,並盡一切辦法以和平方式解決國際爭端。國際氣氛大為改善,列強相處融合,顯示《凡》約至1920年代末重要性遞減。

總括而言,《凡爾賽條約》作為一戰和約對歐洲國際關係發揮很大重要性。但隨1920年代集體安全體系取得成效,列強對德國放下戒心。例如接受其減輕賠款、邀請她成為國聯一份子等。直到1930年盟軍更完全撤出德國西部的萊茵蘭,正好一例標示《凡》約重要性大不如前。因此,題目所言成立。

參考答案(英文版)

(a) What, in your opinion, was the main message of the cartoon in Source G? Explain your answer with reference to Source G. (3 marks)

Candidates’ Performance

Performance was good. This question required candidates to identify the main message of the cartoon in Source G. Many candidates described the harsh demands on Germany by the victors of the Great War, as symbolized in the cartoon. The weak candidates misunderstood the cartoon as one that blamed Germany for making greedy demands to Britain and France, and so lost marks.


Marking Scheme

L1 Vague explanation and ineffective use of the Source. [max. 1]

L2 Clear answer with effective explanation with reference to the Source. [max. 3]


Main message:

e.g.

- The victors of the Great War made exorbitant demands on Germany.


Explanation:

e.g.

-The goose (Germany) was too small to produce a golden egg the size required by France and Britain.



Suggested Answer

The main message of the cartoon in Source G was Germany could not fulfill the demands from Britain and France.


Germany could not meet the standard of golden egg set by Britain and France. From Source G, the chicken that represented Germany produced a golden egg of “German offer”, which failed to satisfy the demand of Britain and France that they took out a “model of golden egg desired”. In comparison, the golden egg produced by Germany was much smaller than the demand of Britain and France. This implied that Britain and France were dissatisfied against Germany as it could not meet their demands.

France would take action in confronting Germany. From Source G, the man represented France took an axe while criticizing the chicken who represented Germany harshly. This implied that France was discontented towards the golden egg of “German offer”. Thus, it took out arms to force Germany to produce “model of golden egg desired”. This showed the main message of the cartoon was Germany failed to meet the demands of Britain and France.

Lastly, the title of the cartoon was “The Unsatisfactory Golden Egg”, meaning Britain and France were dissatisfied towards the egg of “German offer”.


(b) What was the attitude of Clemenceau towards the French government regarding its execution of the Treaty of Versailles? Explain your answer with reference to the language and arguments used in Source H. (4 marks)



Candidates’ Performance

Performance was fair. This question required candidates to identify the attitude of Clemenceau towards the French government regarding its execution of the Treaty of Versailles, with reference to the language and arguments used in Source H. The best candidates made use of the Source to explain the attitude of Clemenceau. Some candidates cited clues to the explanation, but without focusing on the Source’s language and argument as required. The weak candidates misunderstood the Source as one that illustrated a positive attitude towards the implementation of the Treaty, or merely cited the Source without clearly explaining Clemenceau’s attitude.


Marking Scheme

L1 Vague answer, ineffective in using the Source. [max. 2]

L2 Clear answer with good reference of the Source in making explanation. [max. 4]


Attitude:

e.g.

- Discontented


Explanation:

e.g.

- Language: ‘Incredible, yet true!’ ‘… Treaty of Versailles to a state of nullity’

- Argument: ‘… every day something of the burden of defeat will be transferred from Germany to France…’


Suggested Answer

Clemenceau was discontented.

The following answer would be first explained in terms of the language in Source H.

Clemenceau complained to the French government. From Source H, Clemenceau thought the decline of the German reparations was “incredible”. The word “incredible” means something that is difficult to believe in, implying Clemenceau disagreed on loosening punishment on Germany. Besides, such a wording contains a sarcastic meaning, condemning that the ruler neglected the immense casualties bear by the people. Hence, Clemenceau was discontented.

Clemenceau disagreed on the act of government. From Source H, Clemenceau criticized the current policy of the government was “incoherency”, meaning the ruler could neither please the international society nor its people. Besides, Clemenceau thought treating Germany nicely was in a state of “nullity”, meaning it was useless. This reflected decreasing the reparations by France was useless in maintaining peace. Thus, Clemenceau was disliked.

The answer would then be explained in terms of the argument of Source H.


Clemenceau criticized the government of its inability. From Source H, Clemenceau stated that the WWI was a mistake caused by Germany. For example, he claimed that the “guilty of the greatest crime in the history of Europe, a crime premeditated, prepared” was caused by Germany. Thus, Germany had to be punished. However, due to the weakness of the French government, or the “good graces of the Treaty’s executors”, that Germany was treated nicely. As a result, “the burden of defeat” would be “transferred from Germany to France”, meaning France failed to get the reparations it deserved. Hence, Clemenceau was discontented.


Clemenceau ridiculed at the weakness of the government. From Source H, Clemenceau criticized the attitude of the government was “incoherency” that it failed to punish Germany harshly as it wished to. This reduced “the Treaty of Versailles to a state of nullity”, failing to keep peace. Under this circumstance, the French government carried on “its work of peace at any price” was unwise as it only harmed its self-interest. Hence, Clemenceau was discontented.

(c) ‘As a factor in determining Europe’s international relations in the 1920s, the Treaty of Versailles became less and less important.’ Do you agree? Explain your answer with reference to Sources G and H and using your own knowledge. (8 marks)

Candidates’ Performance

Performance was poor. This question required candidates to discuss whether the Treaty of Versailles became less and less important as a factor in determining Europe’s international relations in the 1920s. Quite a number of candidates failed to grasp the gist if the question and discussed major events in the 1930s that led to the rise of totalitarianism in Germany and deteriorating international relations, which were irrelevant to the question. Some candidates mistook the Treaty of Versailles for the Paris Peace Settlement, and unnecessarily discussed the discontent of Italy after the First World War. Some adopted the ‘other factor’ strategy and discussed irrelevant factors that affected international relations in the 1920s. Only the best candidates focused on international relations in the 1920s and made the Treaty of Versailles the subject of exploration, with valid reference to the Sources and using their own knowledge.


Marking Scheme

L1 Vague answer, ineffective in using both Sources and own knowledge. [max. 2]

L2 Lack in balance, effective in using either the Sources or own knowledge only. [max. 4]

L3 Sound and balanced answer, effective in using both Sources and own knowledge. [max. 8]


Agree:

e.g.

- The occupation of the Rhur, as a result of Germany’s repeated failures to pay the indemnity, marked the climax of Germany’s worsening relationship with the European countries. Later on, the Treaty of Versailles, which was too harsh and impractical to Germany, was actually revised by more lenient agreements and plans (such as Dawes Plan), which resulted in drastic cut in Germany’s indemnity as seen in Source H. (Source H and own knowledge)


Not agree:

e.g.

- Source G shows that Britain and France were harsh to Germany when implementing the Treaty of Versailles. Later on, considering that the Treaty was too harsh to Germany, more sympathy was given to it by signing new international treaties like the Locarno Treaty and admitting Germany to the League of Nations. In other words, the harshness of the Treaty of Versailles always played an essential role in shaping the new policies. (Source G and own knowledge)



Suggested Answer

The statement is valid.


In the early 1920s, the Treaty of Versailles was important in determining Europe’s international relations.

First, the Treaty of Versailles determined the relations among Germany, Britain and France. From Source G, Britain and France initiated crisis against Germany due to the Treaty of Versailles. For instance, the golden egg of “German offer” failed to meet the “model of golden egg desired” by Britain and France, and the caption of the cartoon was “The Unsatisfactory Golden Egg”. This implied that Germany could not obey the terms stated in the Treaty of Versailles, leading to discontent of Britain and France that they would nearly start a war. Thus, the treaty was important in influencing Europe’s international relations.


Second, the Treaty of Versailles consolidated the Franco-British relations. From Source G, the Treaty of Versailles brought Britain closer to France. For example, the British man in the cartoon requested Germany of the “model of golden egg desired” while the French man took an axe to threaten Germany. This reflected Britain and France developed closer relations when asking Germany for reparations. Hence, the treaty was important in influencing Europe’s international relations.

Third, the Treaty of Versailles influenced the relations among Germany, Belgium and France. In my own knowledge, the treaty demanded Germany for paying 6.6 billion pounds. However, as Germany was unable to pay the reparations in 1923, France and Belgium occupied the Ruhr (a place with rich coal and steel resources) with a joint force of 100 thousand people. This reflected the term in the treaty paved way for conflicts among European countries. Hence, the treaty was important in influencing Europe’s international relations.


In the mis-1920s, the importance of the Treaty of Versailles in determining Europe’s international relations declined.


First, the powers invited Germany to join the peace treaty. From what I knew, Stresemann, the Foreign Minister of the Weimar Republic, called the Locarno Conference in 1925 in order to improve Germany’s relations with the West. It re-established the west boundary of Germany which had stated in the Treaty of Versailles. The conference successfully increased communication between Germany and Western countries, paving way for further cooperation. This showed the Treaty of Versailles was only a shadow of peace, reflecting its decline in importance.


Second, Germany joined the League of Nations. From what I knew, the Locarno Pact (1925) was effective in improving the relations among Western European countries as well as reducing the hatred of powers against Germany. Thus, Germany could join the League of Nations in 1926, becoming the sixth permanent member that cooperated with Britain, France and Italy in maintaining world peace. Th reflected European countries greatly attempted to keep peace in the mid-1920s. Hence, the importance of the Treaty of Versailles declined.


In the late-1920s, the Treaty of Versailles was not important in determining Europe’s international relations.


First, the amount of reparations stated in the Treaty of Versailles decreased continuously. From Source G, the French government agreed to reduce the reparations bear by Germany. For instance, Clemenceau claimed that “the damages caused by Germany to persons and property in France at 136 billions of gold marks”, but it “had already dwindled to 68 billion” in “May 1921” while further declining to “22 billions of gold marks” in “1929”, which was “one-sixth of the agreed amount”. This reflected the reparations stated in the Treaty of Versailles reduced continuously. Hence, it became less and less important in influencing Europe’s international relations.


Second, the French government improved its relations with Germany so as to maintain peace. From Source G, Clemenceau criticized the French government carried on “its work of peace at any price”, neglecting the loss of the country and accepted the request when “Germany requesting, demanding, to have its burdens lightened”. It was unacceptable as it reduced “the Treaty of Versailles to a state of nullity”, failing to protect the interests of France as well as keeping peace. This showed the Treaty of Versailles had lost it influence. Hence, it was not important.


Third, Germany signed non-war convention with European countries. From what I knew, the European countries signed the Kellogg-Briand Pact in 1928, announcing they would no longer include war as national policy and resolve international conflicts through peaceful means. This greatly released the international tension that the powers established friendly relations. This showed the importance of the Treaty of Versailles declined in the late-1920s.


To conclude, the Treaty of Versailles largely determined Europe’s international relations as a post-war peace treaty after WWI. However, as the collective security system achieved success in the 1920s, the powers reduced their hostility towards Germany. For instance, Germany’s request of reducing reparations was accepted and it was allowed to join the League of Nations. In 1930, the allied powers even withdrew their troops in Rhineland, marking the declining of importance of the Treaty of Versailles . Therefore, the statement is valid.