History 10 11

REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA
KAVANGO WEST REGIONAL COUNCIL

DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION, ARTS AND CULTURE
PERFORMANCE
ENHARNCING NOTES
HISTORY GRADE10 -11
PREPARED NOTES FOR GRADE 10-11 LEARNERS, BASED ON THE
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THE REVISEDSYLLABUS. 2020
Compiled By:
1. Edward Likuwa
2. Johannes Abraham
3. Dala Alfonso
4. Naibes Monnica
5. Hillary Simubali
6. Andreas Frans
7. Tjukulia Benatus
When Excellence Becomes A Tradition, Greatness Will Sky-Rocket.

1|Page
Kavango West Region
8.
Contents
THE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS SINCE 1919 .............................................................................................. 3
Background; The outbreak of WW1 ............................................................................................................. 3
Who was to be blamed for the out Break of The war?................................................................................. 4
5.1 The International relations since 1919 ................................................................................................... 5
5.1.1 The Treaty of Versailles and its impact 1919-1923 .............................................................................. 5
The Terms of the Treaty of Versailles ........................................................................................................... 6
5.1.2 THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS .................................................................................................................. 16
5.1.3 THE COLLAPSE OF INTERNATIONAL PEACE ........................................................................................ 30
5.1.4 THE COLD WAR ................................................................................................................................. 43
The Big Three during the War ................................................................................................................ 44
5.1.5 UNITED NATIONS ORGANISATION ..................................................................................................... 56
THEME: Namibia 1915-2000 and South Africa 1948-1994 ........................................................................ 62
Namibia under South African occupation 1915-1990 ................................................................................ 62
THE STRUGGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE AND ITS CONSEQUENCES1915-2000 ............................................... 74
The Role of churches in the resistance against South Africa ...................................................................... 77
The Windhoek Massacre 1959.................................................................................................................... 79
The Cassinga Massacre 4 May 1978 .......................................................................................................... 82
5.2.3 SOUTH AFRICA 1948-1994 ................................................................................................................. 90
EARLY RESISTANCE TO APARTHIED (1950 TO 1960) ................................................................................... 96
PAST EXAM QUESTIONS PAPER 1 ............................................................................................................. 111
DEPTH STUDY A: NAMIBIA- RESISTANCE TO FOREIGN RULE. ................................................................... 125
PAPER 2 ..................................................................................................................................................... 150
2|Page Kavango West Region

THE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS SINCE 1919
Background; The outbreak of WW1

Factors that Contributed to the outbreak of WW1
MILITARISMwas one of the four major causes of the war. It was an “arms race.” Because
Britain had a large navy, Germany wanted a large navy too. Germany and France competed to
build larger armies. Many nations introduced “universal conscription” (the draft), even in times of
peace. For reasons of prestige and self-defense, the more one nation built up its army and
navy, the more other nations felt they had to do the same. The expense of the “arms race” fell
on civilian populations in the form of high taxes. Between 1870 and 1914, all of the major
powers except Great Britain and the United States, doubled the size of their armies.
ALLIANCES For twenty years, the nations of Europe had been making alliances. It was thought
the alliances would promote peace. Each country is protected by others in case of war, making
it foolish for one country to wage war on another. The danger of these alliances was that an
argument between two countries could draw all the other nations allied with them into a fight.
This is just what happened when a conflict between Austria-Hungary and Serbia led to World
War I. In the summer of 1914 there were two alliances. The Triple Alliance (Central Power)
composed of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire and Italy, stood opposed to the Triple
Entente (Allied Power) composed of Britain, France, and Russia.
IMPERIALISM Another cause of World War I was that European nations ruled smaller
countries, called colonies, and competed with each other to have more colonies. Gathering
colonies is known as IMPERIALISM. The purpose of imperialism was to build up national
wealth and influence by owning colonies. Both France and Britain had many colonies in Africa
and Asia. In the 1880s and 1890s, Germany and Italy decided they wanted a colonial empire
too. This global competition for land caused confrontations and conflicts in many places.
NATIONALISM In addition to political conflicts, the causes of the war included such forces as
nationalism, or pride in one’s country. The belief that one’s own nation or culture is superior to
all others, nationalism led European nations to compete to build the largest army and navy. It
also gave groups of subject peoples the idea of forming independent nations of their own.
Serbians, Czechs, Slovaks, Bosnians and many other peoples living under the rule of the
Ottoman or Austro-Hungarian Empires wanted freedom from “foreign” rule.
How the war happened.
 Bosnia was under the rule of Austria-Hungary

 Bosnia wanted independence from Austria-Hungary.
 Serbia was in alliance with Bosnia.
 Austria- Hungary sends the Archduke Franz Ferdinand to convince Bosnian
government.
 The Archduke was Assassinated in Bosnia by the Serbs.

 Austria-Hungary wanted payment and send demands to Serbia, then threaten to declare
war on Serbia
 Russia sent threats Austria- Hungary and started to mobilize their troops.
 Germany attacked Russia. Because of the alliance with Austria-Hungary.
 Germany invaded Belgium to get to France, Germany attacks France.
 Britain attacks Germany because of the alliance with Belgium and France.
 Then WW1 broke out.
The war was fought between the two Powers, Namely Allied Powers and the Central
Powers.
Allied Powers Central Powers

Britain Germany
France Turkey (Ottoman-Empire)
Belgium Austria-Hungary
Russia (withdrew in 1917)
USA (joined 1917)
Who was to be blamed for the out Break of The war?
Germany should be blamed for the war because theassassination of Franz Ferdinand and all
the eventsthat followed had nothing to do with Germany. ThisCountry had no reason for
declaring war on Russia andFrance. Germany was not threatened in any way by any Country.
Besides that, Germany was the first to attack another country, although it had no reason to
attackFrance. France did not participate inthe conflict afterthe assassination and did not pose
any threat Germany. Therefore, was just locking for an excuse to attackFrance. It was an act of
aggression to invade Belgiumin its attempt to reach France. It was clearlyGermany who turned
Franz Ferdinand's assassination into a war.
Austria-Hungary could also be blamedfor the outbreakof war. Austria-Hungary could have
reacted differently tothe assassination. There was no good reason to declarewar on Serbia. It
could not be proved that Serbia causedthe assassination of the Archduke. Bosnia, like the other
Countries in the Balkans, had good reasons why theywanted to be independent and Austria-
Hungary would not listen to them. In addition to this, the Archduke wentto Bosnia even though
he was warned of an assassinationplot. If theArchduke had stayed in his own country,his
assassination and the war might not havehappened. It was not Proven that the Archduke was
killed by the Serbians or that they were involved in the assassination plot of Franz Ferdinand
and Serbia agreed to most of the demands made by Austria-Hungary, they would have just
understand and all would have been avoided
Russia could also be blamed for the outbreak of the war because had no grounds to
interfere in the problems in the Balkans, except that it was the ally of Serbia. Russia set motion
of series of events that led to war by threatening Austria-Hungary.Then Russia mobilized its
troops incase Austria-Hungary attacks Serbia.If it was not for this ultimatum, Germany might

nothave become involved in the war and it would haveremained a war in the Balkans (Eastern
European smaller countries).
Serbia could also be blamed as Franz Ferdinand went to Bosnia and not to Serbia. If Serbia
would have stayed out and let Bosnia fight themselves for their independence, war would not
have happened. Serbia did not have any right to go over to Bosnia and kill someone that does
not threaten their country in any way.
By the 1900’s the system of alliances inEuropemade a general war in Europe highlylikely, as all
the major powers had made promises to theirallies to assist one anotherif one was attacked.if
they all wanted to prevent a war, they should have reacted differently, but they all chose to go to
war to solve theproblem.Therefore, they should all share the blame for the outbreak of the
WW1.
5.1 The International relations since 1919
5.1.1 The Treaty of Versailles and its impact 1919-1923

Discuss the motives and aims of the Big Three at Versailles
David Lloyd George Prime Minister of Britain
He wanted Germany to be punished but not too harshly:he feared Germany would seek
revenge in the future.
He wanted Britain and Germany to continue trading because Germany was his major
trading partner before the war.
He wanted Germany to pay reparations to compassionate for all losses and to take care of all
widows and children.
He wanted Germany to lose its navyso Britain would remain the strongest naval power.
He wanted Germany to lose all its colonies, to protect the British Empire,
He wanted to satisfy the wish of his people, So that they will vote for him in the future.
He blamed Germany for starting WW1.
Woodrow Wilson President of USA
He wanted lasting peace because the only way to achieve world peace was to be lenient.

He wanted peace to be fair to everyone including the defeated nations to avoid future war.
He wanted peace to be based on his 14 points: Wilson published a list of 14 Points which he
believed should be included in the treaty if it was to create lasting peace.
He wanted all countries to disarm, more armaments was a threat to peace.
He believed in Self-determination: he wanted all countries to rule themselves and be

independent. He knew as long as countries are being rule by others they will be exploited and
this too will bring conflicts.
He wanted formation of League of Nations: as a peace governing body, which will be

responsible to keep and maintain peace in the world.
Georges Clemenceau the Prime Minister of France.
He wanted to take revenge on Germany: against the humiliation of the previous attacks.
He wanted Germany to pay reparations: for him to rebuild what was damaged during the war.
He wanted the German army to be weakened: so that it could not threaten France again. He
wanted Germany to be punished in such way that it will never Cause another war. He even
insisted that Germany should be totally disarmed. He totally wanted to cripple Germany.
He wanted to Punish Germany harshly: he wanted Germany to be punished in such a way

that it would not recover.
Germany to be broken down into smaller states:Alsace Loraine, which Germany had
captured from France in 1871, to be returned to France and entire Germany to be split in small
states, Saar to be given to France and Rhineland to be made an independent state.
He wanted a Buffer state between France and Germany: This will be the reassurance that
they will be safe from German attacks.
The Terms of the Treaty of Versailles

Terms of the Treaty of Versailles were the Punishment Germany was given by the allies
for starting the war.
Territorial terms: Punishment on Land (land that was taken away from Germany and
given to other countries.
Military terms: Punishment imposed on German Military (the Army, Navy and Air force)
Reparation: Punishment German was given to pay others for the damages caused.
War guilt clause: Punishment that Germany should accept the blame for starting the war.

With The territorial terms of the treaty caused Germany to lose13.4% of its land. With the lost
land, went the people thatlived on the land (about seven million people) as well asthe minerals
and industries on the land. Germany was severely affected by the territorial terms of the Treaty.
The map of central Europe wasredrawn at the expense of the defeated countries. The Territorial
terms cut the German map smaller.
Territorial terms
1. Austria became a small, independent country andAnchluss was forbidden.(Germany

was not allowed to Unite with Austria).
2. Alsace-Lorraine was returned to France after it had been taken over by Germany after
the Franco-Prussian War of 1871.
3. The coal-rich Saar Valley was given to France for 15 years. After 15 years the
population of the valley would vote in a plebiscite on whether toreturn to German control
or become part of France.
4. German territory along the Rhine known as the Rhineland would remain part of
Germany butwas to be demilitarized. No German soldiers or military presence of any
kind was allowed.This was meant to give France a buffer zone in case of future German
aggression. British andFrench soldiers would occupy the Rhineland for 15 years.
5. Belgium was to receive German land around Malmedy.
6. North Schleswig would be returned to Denmark.
7. Poland was made a free, independent country.
8. Poland was given access to the sea.
9. Poland givena large part of West Prussia.
10. Upper Silesia was given to Poland
11. Posen was given to Poland
12. Danzig was made a free city. Poland to use the port of Danzig for its external trade.
13. Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which Germanytook from Russia in 1918,
became independent states.
14. A piece ofGermanland calledHultschin was given to Czechoslovakia
15. German colonies were given to various countries as mandates. The general rule was
thatthese territories had to be prepared for independence.
Disarmament was one of Wilson's Fourteen Points. The idea was that all countries should
disarm. The Allies forced Germany to disarm and were supposed to follow Suit, but that never
happened.
Military restrictions or terms
1. The German army was reduced to 100 000 men.

2. Conscription was banned. (Germany was not allowed to employ/recruit new soldiers,
Soldiers has to be volunteers).
3. Germany was not allowed to have any submarines

4. Germany was not military aircraft
5. German navy was reduced to 6 battle ships, 12 destroyers and 12 torpedo boats (36
ships in total).
6. The Rhineland was demilitarized
War guilt clause
Germany has to accept the blame for starting the war and losing the war. This meant that it
would have to pay for the damagecaused by the war to Britain, France and Belgium. This was
very humiliating for the Germans. Although theydid not disagree on responsibility for starting the
war,they strongly felt that they alone could not be blamed for the war.
Reparations
Since Germany was blamed for causing the war, it wasforced to pay for all the damage done
during the war. TheAllied Powers could not agree on the initial amount until 1921, two years
after the Germans already signed the Treaty, when it was set at 152 billion gold marks. At
theexchange rate of the time, this was equivalent to 6.6 billion British pounds. This meant that
Germanywould have to pay reparations to the Allies in installments until 1984.
NB compare the terms of the treaty with what the Big three wanted before they entered
the hall of Versailles. The terms of the treaty and what they hoped to achieve will tell you
whether everyone’s aims were achieved or not.
Explain why the victors did not get everything that they wanted.
George Clemenceau
George Clemenceau left the Versailles angry and disappointed as he felt that the treaty was not
harsh enough. He was very much angered by the soft approach of Wilson and Lloyd.
Becausehe wanted Germany to be totally weakened both economically and politically, but this
was notthe case. He felt that strong Germany was more a threat to rest of the Europe than it
was toBritain. Although Germany lost its powerful military force but he was not satisfied
thatGermany was totally disarmed.
Clemenceau also wanted Germany to be split into smaller states and he was nothappy that the
country kept its most powerful industrial area the Ruhr Valley. Woodrow Wilson didnot allow the
allies to enrich themselves from the defeated countries and George Lloyd did notagree with this
point as he wanted Germany to remain as it is so that they will keep on tradingwith Germany.
Wilson also believed that the inhabitant's wishes should be taken intoconsideration and Wilson
wanted to avoid another war at all cause.
Clemenceau also wanted The Saar to be given to France permanently but Lloyd and Wilson
was against thisIdea and Saar was only given to France for 15 years. They both did not want
that severe punishment for Germany because both feared that itGermany was to be punished
harshly it will take revenge in the future and on top of that Britaindid not wanted to lose their

trading partner. He wanted Rhineland to be an independent statebut the other victors did not
agree instead Rhineland was just demilitarized and occupied with British and France Soldiers.
Woodrow Wilson
Woodrow Wilson wanted Peace to be based on his 14 points but not all 14 pointswere
considered. Both Lloyd and Clemenceau believed that Wilson was lenient (soft) onGermany
because USA was not so badly damaged by the war because they join the war verylate, he did
not feel the damage that the others felt.
He also did not want severe punishment for Germany but he failed but to convince
Clemenceau and Germany was punished harshly. German army was drastically reduced,
Germany s productiveland was taken away and on top of that they had to pay reparations.
He wanted all countries todisarm so that the punishment is fair but at the end this did not
happened and only Germanywas asked to disarm and the punishment was not as fair as he
wanted to.
The German Colonies did not get self-determination and the wishes of the inhabitants were
notconsidered. As this countries were put as mandates under other countries and the local
people were not asked to what they wanted. It was simply decided for them.
David Lloyd George
Lloyd George was convinced that another war would take place because of the
harshness of the treaty also did not want Severe (harsh) treatment for Germany, he did not
wantGermany to be economically crippled because Germany was trading with Britain but this
was hampered by the huge reparations that Germany had to pay and the fact that Saar coal
fields was given toFrance for 15 years. He was very angry with Clemenceau.Lloyd George soon
realized that the treaty of Versailles was a mistake as it punished Germany harshly. Just as
Wilson, he also felt Germany will seek revenge in the future. He knew that Germany was unable
to pay because of its weak financial situation. Shortly after the Treaty of Versailles was signed
Lloyd George said that the treaty was harsh and if he was Germany he would have not signed
it.
He also wanted German colonies in Asia that was an oil-rich area of Persia (Iraq and Iran),
hewanted Britain's empire to be the strongest but he was disappointed when Woodrow Wilson
refused this idea as he believed that the Allies wanted to enrich themselves using
thisopportunity. Instead the German colonies were placed under League of Nations and were to
beput as Mandates.
He was worried that France left Germany weak. He was worried that the communistwill
further weaken Germany or that Germany will fall in the hands of communist andbecome
communist as well.
What victors got from the Treaty of Versailles?
George Clemenceau

George Clemenceau got reassurance that he wanted. The German army was reducedso
that it will not be a threat to France anymore. The Rhineland was demilitarized and made
abuffer zone between Germany and France. The German Navy was cut; Conscription was
banned meaning Germany will not be able to increase their army. Germany was left without an
air force. All this made Germany weak and there was no way Germany would attack France
again.
He got revenge that he wanted because the land that was taken by Germany Alsace-
Lorainewas given back to them on top of that they got Saar for 15 years, He made sure that
Germanywas humiliated the same way France was. As their Army was drastically cut down
becausethere army was German pride and Germany had to accept the guilt of starting the war
and accept that theylost the war. At the end Germany regarded the treaty humiliating and unfair.
He got reparations that he wanted. Germany was asked to pay huge amounts of reparations
to France, Britain and Belgium. The amount was set at 6.6 Billion and had to be paid in
installments. This will help them to rebuild the economies that were destroyed by the First World
War.
He also wanted to weaken Germany and Germany was weakened both economically and
politically. Germany lost its productive land both in Germany and in Colonies; Germany lost their
overseas markets in Africa and Asia. Clemenceau was also happy with the fact that Germany
was weaken by so much by taking away their armaments as it made them feel protected against
their traditional enemy.
Woodrow Wilson
Woodrow Wilson was able to get some of his 14Points and the most noticeable was the
establishment of the League of Nations.He wanted a world peace governing organization and
League of Nations was formed that would maintain world peace.
He was also able to achieve self-determination in the formation of new states such as
Poland, Latvia and Lithuania were formed and they received independence and Austria also
became a country on its own and Poland was given access to the sea.
He also wantedBelgium and French territory to be restored and Alsace-Loraine to be given back
to France. Germany Was asked to pay reparations that would be use for restorations and
Alsace Loraine was given back to France.
Lloyd George
Lloyd George did not want Germany to be punished harshly. At the end he made sure to
moderate some of the harshdemands by Clemenceau for example the reparation payments was
brought down and Ruhr was not taken by France.
He managed to keep the promise that he made to his people. Germany was punished as he
promised and reparation payments for Britain so that will compassionate widows andorphans.
He received a hero’s welcome when he returned from Versailles.
10 | P a g e Kavango West Region

He wanted to make Britain most powerful Country that he achieved as Germany sunk their
fleet and they lost the rest of the navy when their battleship was cut and he was happy that
Germany was not allowed to unite with Austria as the two will have powerful armies if united and
this will threaten the British Supremacy. Germany also lost its Colonies this broke the German
empire as they also received these colonies as mandated territories. He also made sure that
France did not become too powerful he managed to resist some of Clemenceau’s demands.
Discuss the impact of the peace treaty on Germany up 1923
The treaty of Versailles had weaken Germany both political, economically and socially. The big
three did not think of the ordinary German citizens as they only thought of punishing the
German government, at the end people that lived inside Germany had to bear the
consequences and not the government.
Economic impacts
The treaty of Versailles caused massive unemployment in Germany. When the treaty
reduced the army, the people that were working in the army lost their jobs. The men that were
working in the army had to become volunteers in the army. This people had no means of
income. People that were working in the coal mines lost their jobs when France laid them off
and replaced them with France Nationals during the occupation of Ruhr in 1923. This led to
poverty and starvation as they could not afford daily necessities.
The loss of large parts of its most valuable land caused Germany’s economy to collapse.
The treaty took away the productive land Germany could not produce enough food because the
treaty punished Germany by taking away good farm land which produced enough food to feed
the German people.
They lost their Industries and Mines about 13% of their coalfields when Saar was given to
France and 48% of Iron and steel. Germany’s economy relied of this land. On top of that they
had to pay huge amounts of money on Reparations. Where was Germany supposed to get all
this money from? This was an impossible task as they have lost much of their industries and
minerals already. This made them to print extra Money which resulted into hyperinflation and
the German mark lost its value. This situation brought poverty and sufferings in Germany as the
government was struggling to maintain for its people, rebuild their economy and again help
French and Belgium to rebuild their economies as well.
German future trade was severely affected too, 36 ships would not be enough for trading and
German colonies had resources that Germany had to trade with and that too was taken away
giving Germany little chances of trading. This left the British as the strongest power at the sea.
Political impacts
Opposition wanted to overthrow the new Government: For the first time democracy was
introduced in Germany and many groups like communist, Sparta and right wing parties wanted
to over throw the government. The new Weimar Government faced many problems with these
groups. The examples of these uprisings were the Kapp Putsch in 1920 and Munich Putsch in

1923. People started to blame the problem they were facing on the new government and they
even labeled them as the “November Criminals”. Germany became politically unstable because
of the new government that was force upon them. This led to the rise of the dictator which will
later on start the WW2
The people inside Germany also felt unsafe The Germans were only left with the arm force of
100000 men to protect the country. This was not enough to protect the country against future
attacks and to maintain law and order. This made Germany to lose their national pride as their
country was unable to defend themselves against foreign invaders,besides that Germany had
only limited number of battle ships and its frontier with France was left open because of the
demilitarization of Rhineland.
Social Impacts
People lost their Savings, after the Invasion of Ruhr, German mark hit rock bottom. People that
had investment lost their money; these people became beggars on the streets. People could not
afford daily necessities and it become hard on the citizens of Germany. People that saved
enough in 1918 found out that their savings in 1923 could not even buy a house.
The living standard of the German people Dropped, as the unemployment rate increased in
Germany. German people lost income making difficult to feed their family and maintaining them.
Why the German people were unhappy with the treaty of Versailles.
The territorial terms were one of the reasons that German people was unhappy about,
because Germany lost large amount of land, the land needed for agricultural land was taken
away. After war there was shortage off, the land that was taken away would have made
difference in the Agricultural needs of Germany. Germany could not produce for its people and
there was starvation in Germany.Besides the Agricultural land, there were German citizen living
of these lands, Families of people living in the parts were taken away and suddenly these family
members became part of another the country with different culture, language and Leadership.
Germans that was in new countries found themselves minorities this means they could easily be
discriminated against.
The colonies also served as source of income to Germany, these colonies were taken away
and put under the control of German enemies. Making them wealthier then Germany, because
the colonies had resources that Germany would have benefited from. With the Colonies taken
away Germany could no longer trade, the same with the industrial areas like Saar. This put a
strain on German economy. Germans were also settled on these colonies some had to live all
that they have built and go back to Germany while others had to stay separating from Family.
The Germans also hated the military terms as well because the German army was their pride
and the reduction of the army made Germans unsafe. The disarmament caused German
resentment towards the treaty. The small army that they were left with could not maintain law
and order inside Germany. The treaty also caused unemployment, the men that were working in
the army lost their job as the army was cut down. These men had to work as volunteers without

salary and some had to go look for work elsewhere. With the industries that was taken away it
was not easy to get jobs this caused poverty and unrest inside Germany.
The other thing they hated the treat was that it was promised that all countries should disarm
and only Germany was told to disarm, the allies promise they will disarm with time which they
never did. This made the Germans angry that they also started to rearm.
Reparations payments was also too much for Germany to pay. On top of that Germany lost
its productive land which could have used to pay for the reparations. Germany was also from
the war and was damaged during the war now they must use the little money they had to pay for
the reparations to the enemies while they were also suffering. With all that was taken away the
Germans could not understand where the allies though the money would come from. To
Germans it felt that they were punished double this left anger and rage inside the Germans.
Germans also thought that the treaty was a Diktat (dictated peace). Germans were not
invited to the peace talks. They were told t0 Sit outside while the big three were negotiating on
the terms. Germans believed that they were not given that chance to give their side or to
negotiate on the terms. They were just given the terms and told to sign in three days. Germans
thought that the terms of the treaty will be based on the 14 points of Woodrow Wilson when they
sign the armistice but to their surprise it was totally something different. They felt that the allies
stepped them in the back. The Allies also threaten to attack Germany if they will not sign the
treaty. The new government was punished severely and the Kaiser that started the war already
left Germany and it was the new government that had to pay the price.
Why the Treaty of Versailles was Harsh/Severe on German
To satisfy public opinion: People lost loved ones in the war and people were very angry
towards Germany. They wanted to see something done with Germany, they wanted Germany to
be punished and the Big three was aware of that, LIoyd George even made a Promise to his
people. The big three had to make sure they please their people, especially France and Britain.
Germany had Punish Russia harshly in 1918, The terms of the treaty of Brest-Livosk had
been extremely harsh Russia. Germany took away 32% of Russian agricultural land, 34% its
population and 54 % of its industries, It shows that if Germany could have won the war they
would have been harsher than the treaty of Versailles was to them. Germany got of lightly
compared to what they did to Russia. They would have demanded territories and reparations
too.
To make an example out of Germany: Germany had attacked France twice, in 1870 and in
1914. Both times France suffered therefore it was right to weaken Germany so that they will not
have the strength to attack other countries again. It was a way of teaching other countries does
not start any war in the future. Germany and the rest of the world should learn from the
punishment Germany was given by the Treaty of Versailles.
Evaluate whether the treaty could be justified at the time? (Justified means it was right or
acceptable)

Justified, not harsh and fair all mean the same thing.
Not Justified, Harsh and not fair all mean the same thing.
The treaty could be justified/ the treaty was fair/ the treaty was not harsh.
The treaty could be justified because the treaty was less harsh on Germany compared to the
punishment Germany gave to Russia in 1918. The terms of the treaty of Brest-Livosk had been
extremely harsh on Russia. Germany took away 32% of Russian agricultural land, 34% its
population and 54 % of its industries. It shows that if Germany could have won the war they
would have been harsher than the Treaty of Versailles was to them. Germany got of lightly
compared to what they did to Russia.
Germany was responsible for starting the war that lasted 4 years. Germany had no reason
declaring war on France and Russia. Germany was not threatened in anyway by any country.
The conflict was between Austria-Hungary and Serbia and Russia mobilizing had nothing to do
with Germany. German was the first to fire (attack) on the other country, the Murder of Franz
Ferdinand did not pose any threat to them. Germany was just looking for an excuse to attack
France and to Invade Belgium was uncalled for. So the treaty was right to blame Germany for
the war.
Reparation payments were also fair As Germany attacked France that did nothing to them
and they Invaded Belgium again. The war caused huge damages to France and Belgium and
someone has to take responsibility to these losses, Thousands of villages and many towns had
been badly damaged. People lost their lives and women were left widows and children orphan
and they needed to be cared for. It was right for the treaty to ask Germany to compensate for
these losses. The amount of reparations that Germany had to pay did not even cover the cost of
war of Britain. How will it cover for all the cost of the other allies? The reparation was not that
high as the Germans claimed it was; besides they were told to pay installments which made it
affordable.
It was fair to make an example out of Germany. Germany had attacked France twice, in 1870
and in1914. Both times France suffered therefore it was right to weaken Germany so that they
will not havethe strength to attack other countries again. It was way of teaching other countries
not start anywar in the future. Germany and the rest of the world should learn from the
punishment Germany was given by the Treaty of Versailles.
It was right to give back the land to rightful owners and give self determination to some
states. It wasright for the treaty to give back Alsace Lorraine to France as it was taken by
Germany by force in 1870France was the right full owner of it. It was also right for the treaty to
give independence to the BalticStates. As these states neither belonged to Russia or Germany,
they were countries on their own and theyhad the right to rule themselves, and the colonies
were put as mandates under League of Nationsmeaning they will eventually get their
independence.
The treaty of Versailles could not be justified/ the treaty was not fair/ the treaty was
Harsh.

It was unfair for the treaty to put the entire blame on Germany. Germany alone was not
involved inthe war, they did not fight alone the blame should have been shared as the whole
issue of the war wascaused by the alliance. Germany was honoring the alliance it made to
Austria-Hungary. Germany action was also provoked by Russian mobilization, if Russia would
not have threatened Austria Hungary and Mobilized Germany would not have gotten involved.
Why did Britain interfere? Germany did not poseany threat to them either. Britain Too would
have been punished for attacking Germany that did nothing to them. Just like Britain was
Honouring their alliance, Germany too was doing the same.
Germany was not invited to the peace talks/the peace was dictated: Germany did not lose
the war surrendered; they signed as Armistice to stop fightingtherefore Germany should have
been invitedto the peace conference to overlook at the agreement. Yet they were treated like a
defeated nation. It was unfair for the treaty of Versailles to give Germany that chance to defend
them or even to negotiate on the terms.lt seemed as if Woodrow Wilson lied to Germans about
his 14 points so that they will just sign the armistice to later put the blame on Germany, because
the Germans believed that the peace will be based on Wilsons 14 points but they were shocked
when they saw the terms of the treaty. It was something totally different. Woodrow Wilson
stabbed them in the back. It seems like they were just looking for someone to pin the blame on.
It was not fair that the big three did not tell Germany the amount of reparation in 1919
when theysigned the treaty. Germany was aware that they had to pay reparations but the
amount was not set atthat time in 1919, the German people only learned about the amount in
1921 after they had acceptedthe terms of the treaty. By then they have already signed the treaty
and there was no way that they willget out of this.
The reparation payments were high. Reparation money was too high for a country that is from
the war;there was no way Germany would afford to pay this sum of money. Its economy was
affected by the warand all areas where they could make money and to pay for reparations were
taken away, Such as Saar and the colonies. Germany too had infrastructure Damaged and they
had orphans and widows too but they had to take care of others while their own was left
stranded.
The treaty Separated parts of Germany; when the treaty formed new states it separated the
people(families) inside Germany. This resulted into resentment towards the treaty and this
resentmentcontributed to the rise of a dictator that lead to WW2.These people on this land
found themselves as refugees they were required to live under foreign rule, self-determination
did not apply to Germans.They had to learn new languages like the ones that were on Alsace
Loraine, had to adopt new cultures.
The military terms were also harsh on Germany. German Army was their pride. Cutting the
army deeplyhurt and humiliated the Germans. This also cost unrest in Germany. Other parties
tried their best to overthrow the new government. German government was totally weakened
militarily. The country became unsafe and vulnerable. The reduction also caused
unemployment. People starved, German peoplestarted suffering. The big three did not care
about what will happened to German citizen they only wanted to satisfy their needs.At the end
of the day the big three Especially France and Britain greatly Benefited from Germany. Britain

extended its empire and retained supremacy and France got coal rich Areas like Saar. They
gained some colonies that were taken from Germany on top of that they had to receive
reparation. At the end it looked like the Big three punished Germany to their benefit rather than
other countries to learn a lesson from what happened to Germany.
5.1.2 THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

It was an organization which was formed after the First World War on the 1st of January 1920. It
was an idea suggested by Woodrow Wilson, which hoped to end all wars and ensure the just
peace.
Aims of the League of Nations
 Discourage aggression from any nation / to prevent war

 To solve disputes between member states
 To encourage nations to disarm
 To encourage nations to co-operate especially in business and trade
 To improve the living condition of people worldwide
 To uphold the terms of the peace treaties
Means of influence (How the League of Nations hoped toprevent future war from taking
place of happening)
 Through the Covenant of the League of Nations.

These were principles Leagues members agreed to follow.
 Through Collective Security.

League members could work together e.g. an attack on one member state is an attack to
all.
 By Arbitration
The League could offer to solve disputes between countries peacefully.
 By Moral Condemnation
They could decide which country was the aggressor and tell it to stop what it was doing.
 By imposing economic sanctions

Members of the League could refuse to trade with the aggressor.
 By use of military force

The armed forces of member countries could be used against an aggressor.
The structure of the League of Nations
 The Assembly

 The Council
 The Secretariat
 The International Labour Organization
 The Permanent Court of Justice
Functions of the structures of the League of Nations
The Assembly
 Every member state sent a representative to the Assembly.
 Each member state had one vote.
 The Assembly only met once a year in September, in Geneva.
 Decisions made by the Assembly had to be agreed by all members of the Assembly.
 The Assembly could recommend action to the Council
 Admitting new members to the League
 Appointing temporal members of the council
 It voted on the budget of the League of Nations
The Council
 The Council met more often, usually about five times a year and in case of emergency.
 The Council had permanent members (Britain, France, Italy, Japan and Germany).
 The Council also had temporal members elected by the Assembly for three-year periods.
 Each of the permanent members of the Council had a VETO rights. This meant that one
permanent member could stop the Council acting even if all other members agreed.
 The Council could condemn the aggressor.
 The Council could impose economic sanctions against the aggressor.
 The Council could use military force against the aggressor if all means fails.
The Secretariat
 The Secretariat was headed by a Secretary General based in Geneva.

 The Secretariat was a sort of civil service of the League of Nations.
 It kept records of League meetings.
 Prepared reports for the different agencies of the League of Nations.
 The Secretariat had specialist sections covering areas such as health, disarmament and
economic matters.
 Made sure that decisions of the League of Nations are obeyed and carried out.
 It drafted the budget of the League of Nations.
The International LabourOrganisation (ILO)
 The ILO brought together employers, governments and worker’s representatives once a
year.
 Its aim was to improve working conditions throughout the world.
 It collected statistics and information about working conditions.
 To persuade member countries to adopt its suggestions.
 To stop child labour.

The Permanent Court of International Justice
 The Court was based at The Hague in the Netherlands.

 It was made up of different judges from the member countries.
 The Court was to settle disputes between countries peacefully.
 If asked, the Court would give a decision on a border dispute between two countries.
 It also gave legal advice to the Assembly or Council.
AGENCIES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS
 The Mandates Commission

 The Health Committee
 The Refugees Committee
 The Slavery Commission
 The Disarmament Commission
FUNCTIONS OF THE AGENCIES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS
 The Mandates Commission

The Mandates commission made sure that Britain and France acted in the
interests of the people of the mandated territories, not in its own interests.
 The Health Committee

The Health Committee attempted to deal with the problem of dangerous diseases and
educate people about health and sanitation. To educate people on the danger of
addictive substances like drugs.
 The Refugees Committee

This helped to return refugees to their original homes after the end of the First World
War.
 The Slavery Commission

This worked to abolish slavery around the world including contract labour system.
 The Disarmament Commission

This encouraged nations to reduce the number of weapons and the soldiers.
Discuss the successes and failures of the League of Nations in the 1920s

Successes of the League of Nations
I. Political successes
Disputes over the Aaland Island between Sweden and Finland in 1921. Both countries
wanted to control the Aaland Island because it lies between the two countries. The League
decided that Finland should administer the Island and the interests of the Swedish inhabitants
on the island would be protected by the League. It was solved through arbitration and both
countries accepted the league’s decision. War was avoided.
Dispute over Upper Silesia between Germany and Poland in 1921. Upper Silesia had rich
natural resources and a mixed German and Polish population. The League ruled that Upper
Silesia should be divided between the two countries. The League would treat Upper Silesia as
an economic unit and supervise its interest for the next fifteen years. It was solved through
arbitration and both countries accepted the league’s decision. War was avoided.
Dispute over Memel between Germany and Lithuania in 1923. The terms of the Treaty of
Versailles put Memel under the administration of the League while it was still to be decided
whether Memel should become part of Lithuania. Many Germans also lived there. The League
of Nations resolved that Lithuania should receive Memel and the port of Memel to be an
international zone. It was solved through arbitration and both countries accepted the league’s
decision. War was avoided
War between Greece and Bulgaria in 1925. Greek soldiers took control of Bulgaria because a
Greek soldier was killed while protecting the border between the two countries. Bulgaria asked
the league for help and the League ordered the two countries to stop fighting, which both
countries obeyed. After investigating the matter the league decided that Greece was guilty and
made Greece to pay reparations to Bulgaria for damaged caused by its Soldier. Both Countries
accepted the decision. The dispute was solved through moral condemnation.
II. Socio-economic Successes
 The League through the health Committee improved the health conditions worldwide by
sending doctors and nurses and distribution of medicines to affected areas for example
when typhus and Cholera broke out in Poland and Russia, local Authority failed to bring
the deadly decease under control the League stepped in and the outbreak was brought
under control. They also educated people about the dangers of addictive substances like
drugs and alcohol. The League closed down four Swizz drug companies
 The League under the refugee committee helped refugees who were affected by the
First World War as well as with the resettlement of refugees back to their home
countries. Refugees were helped by providing homes for them and ways to help them
improve their living conditions. 400 000 prisoner of war were repatriated back to their
home countries.

 In 1922, the League helped Austria with a loan of 20 million dollars to recover its
economic position. A League commission supervised Austria’s economic and financial
affairs. In 1926, the League’s commission was withdrawn when Austria’s financial
position had improved. It did the same with Hungary in 1923.
 The League provided humanitarian aid for Greece in 1923 when they were driven out of
Smyrna by the Turks. Cholera and typhoid broke out, so the League sent doctors to
bring the deadly diseases under control. .
 In 1925, the League formed a slavery commission to stop slave trading and slavery of all
kinds including the contract labour system.
 Through the international labourorganisation (IOL) the league was successful in
reducing working hours for children. It also recommended a 48-hour week for adults and
insisted that employers improve the working conditions for their employees.
FAILURES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS IN THE 1920s
Vilna was the capital city of Lithuania way back before it became part of the German Empire.
When Lithuania was restored after WWI at the Treaty of Versailles, Vilna became the capital city
once again. But this time around, the majority of the people living in Vilna were Polish. In 1920,
a private Polish army took control of the city. Lithuania asked the League for help and clearly
Poland was the aggressor. The League told Poland to withdraw its troops, but the Poles refused
to leave the city. The French could not send their troops to force Polish army out of Vilna
because they did not want to upset Poland and they saw it as a useful ally against Germany in
the future. Britain was not prepared to act alone by sending troops to far off countries. In the
end, the League did nothing and Vilna remained in Polish hands until the outbreak of the
Second World War.
War between Poland and Russia, 1920-21. The Poles were not satisfied with the boundary
with Russia. They wanted more land in the east than they were allowed to have. During 1920,
the Poles attacked the Russians and forcefully occupied an area called White Russia. The
Russians fought back and the Poles fled back to Warsaw, Poland’s capital city. The Poles
counter-attacked the Russians and many Russian soldiers were either killed or captured. In
1921, the Russian government accepted and signed the Treaty of Riga. This treaty gave more
land to Poland. By refusing to obey the terms of the Treaty of Versailles and the League of
Nations, Poland was then able to increase its size.
War between Greece and Turkey, 1921-22. Post-war treaties led to the breaking up of
Empires. In 1920, King Constantine 1 of Greece continued to take control of more Turkish land.
The Turkish part of Smyrna was already controlled by the Greeks. Mustafa Kemal, Turkey’s new
revolutionary leader, blocked the Greeks at the Sakarya River. The Greeks were totally
defeated by the Turks at the battle of Sakarya, which continued for three weeks. A year later,
Turkish soldiers attacked Smyrna and drove out millions of Greek civilians. Allied leaders
decided to negotiate with Kemal. In 1923, the Treaty of Lausanne replaced the Treaty of
Sevres. This new treaty allowed Turkey to get back most of her land. The Paris peace
settlement and the League of Nations had been disregarded again.

The Ruhr occupation, 1923.When Germany was not able to pay reparations in 1923, French
and Belgian soldiers occupied the Ruhr, Germany’s richest industrial region. Coal was taken as
part of the reparations that Germany had to pay. German workers protested against what
happened in the Ruhr. The protest led Germany to have no goods to trade. The French and
Belgian reacted ruthlessly by killing over a 100 and expelling 100 000 demonstrators. The
German government reacted by printing millions of bank notes to pay workers their wages and
pay reparations.
This resulted in massive inflation and made the Mark (German currency) to lose its buying
powers. The German government faced serious financial problems and the strike was called off.
France and Belgium received some of the coal from Germany. The Dawes plan was introduced
in 1924 to help Germany pay her reparations. In 1925 French and Belgian soldiers withdrew
from the Ruhr. The two countries (France and Belgium) had shown once more that they had no
respect and trust in the League, by simply ignoring the rules of the League.
The Corfu incident, 1923.One of the boundaries which had to be sorted out after the First
World War was the border between Greece and Albania. The conference of ambassadors was
given this job and it appointed an Italian general called Tellini to supervise it. On 27 August,
while they were surveying the Greek side of the frontier area, Tellini and his team were
ambushed and killed. The Italian leader, Mussolini was furious and blamed the Greek
government for the murder. On 29 August, Mussolini demanded that the Greek government
must pay compensation to Italy and execute the murderers. The Greeks, however, had no idea
who the murderers were. On 31 August, Mussolini bombarded and then occupied the Greek
island of Corfu. Fifteen people were killed. Greece appealed to the League for help. The League
condemned Mussolini’s actions. It was also suggested that Greece pay compensation but that
the money be held by the League and would be paid to Italy if, and when Tellini’s killers were
found. Officially Mussolini accepted the League’s ruling. However, behind the scenes, Mussolini
went to the conference of ambassadors and persuaded them to change the League’s ruling.
The Greeks had to apologize and pay compensation directly to Italy. On 27 September,
Mussolini withdrew from Corfu boasting of his triumph.
DISCUSS THE SUCCESSES AND FAILURES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS IN THE 1930S
FAILURES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS IN THE 1930s
Manchurian crisis 1931-33 Japan was badly hit by the economic depression of 1929, by this
time USA had cancelled many of its imports from Japan. Without this trade japan could not feed
its people. They then decided to invade Manchuria (in north-east China).
To ensure food supply from Manchuria and build its growing empire by force and to acquire the
fertile soil and natural resources from the region such as coal and Iron. The Japanese were
covered on the high mountain they had little farm land to grow on crops. The Japanese army
claimed that the Chinese sabotaged the railway, in revenge the Japanese army invaded
Manchuria in 1931 and expelled Chinese forces. China appealed to the League of Nations for
help. To the league this was a serious test because Japan was a leading member of the League
of Nations. The league sent a commission to investigate in September 1932.After a long delay,

action was taken. The League of Nations Condemn the Japanese action and ordered them to
withdraw from Manchuria. Japan ignored the leagues order and then withdrew its membership
on 27 March 1933. The handling of the crisis made the League seem weak and ineffective.
Disarmament conference 1932-34.one of the aims of the League of Nations was international
disarmament, to prevent aggression between nations. Despite of several disarmament
conferences countries refused to disarm. In 1932 at the disarmament conference Germany
demanded to have equal armaments to those of France and France refused. Germany
complained that only it had been forced to disarm. League members could not agree to disarm
and refused to allow Germany to rearm. Germany left the League in 1933 and began to rearm
openly. League members such as Britain no longer tried to stop Germany. League members
also began to increase their armed forces.
Abyssinian crisis 1935-36.Italy was also badly hit by the economicdepression1929 and he
wanted to re-establish the Roman Empire and to avenge the defeat at Adowa in 1896.Abyssinia
had rich agricultural land and mineral that he could use to feed his people. In 1935Italy invaded
Abyssinia (Ethiopia today).the emperor of Abyssinia Haile Silasie appealed to the League of
Nations for help. The league condemn Italy’s action and imposed sanctions on Italy, the
sanction did not work (ineffective) because non-league members continued to trade with Italy
and the Sanctions did not include oil, coal, and Iron. League members could not agree on
effective sanctions against Italy. Britain and France tried to do a secret deal to give most of
Abyssinia to Italy. The League of Nations was seen as powerless and irrelevant. This resulted in
Italy resigning from the League of Nations.
SUCCESSES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATION IN THE 1930s
The continued good work of the League of Nations agencies, committees and commissions. For
example the league successfully managed to the plebiscite which led to the return of the Saar
region to Germany in January in 1935 after it was taken aware from Germany for 15 years.
The contribution also made towards the resolution of border disputes in South America between
Bolivia and Paraguay over the Chaco in 1932 and between Peru and Columbia over Leticia in
1934.
Explain to what extent weaknesses in the League organization has made failure
inevitable
WHY SUPERPOWERS DID NOT JOIN THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS?

USA
The USA returned to its Monroe doctrine

The doctrine stated that the USA should not interfere in the affairs of Europe and vice versa. It
was a policy of splendid isolation. The USA felt involving themselves in the disputes of Europe
was expensive and uncalled for. Main Americans felt that America was not part of Europe and

should not get involved on geo-political grounds. Wilson, the USA president was accused of not
being mandated to even propose the formation of the League of Nations.
The American Senate voted against joining the League

They felt that American’s involvement in the League would drag the USA into war and would
result in loss of lives to American citizens. They also feared that the USA would spend a lot of
money to make the League work and they would be forced to provide its armed forces to the
League whenever there will be conflict/war between member states.
Americans were against joining

Many Americans were also offended by Clemenceau’s insults towards Wilson at the Versailles
conference when he claimed that America did not understand European politics. Germany
immigrants were also not happy with how Germany was harshly punished at the peace
conference. They opposed the USA joining the League.
Why Russia was not invited join the League until 1934?
In 1917, there was a communist revolution in Russia, an economic and political system not
accepted by the West. Britain and France as leading members of the League feared that if they
allow Russia to join, she will influence other countries mostly smaller nations to turn into
communism. They only allowed her to join in 1934 in an attempt to join forces against Adolf
Hitler. However, Russia was expelled from the League after Stalin signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact.
Why Germany was not allowed join the League until 1926?
Germany was not allowed to join the League at first because France was not willing to
cooperate with its traditional enemy and was afraid Germany would make use of the opportunity
to try and change some of the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Many Germans were against
joining the League as it will be an indication that they have accepted the terms of the Treaty of
Versailles. Germany was only allowed to join the League in 1926 after signing the Locarno
treaty in 1926 were they promised not to change their western border with France. Germany
then left the League in 1933 when Hitler’s Nazis were in power.
The absence of the three superpowers in the League’s membership made the work of the
league more difficult and aggressive countries did not fear the leading members in the
League of Nations. If the three Superpowers could have been members the league could
have operated with only few problems. Because aggressive countries could have been
afraid to invade as there would be someone stronger to stop them. The league lost its
status and reputation because it was supported by smaller and weaker Nations.
HOW THE STRUCTURE OF THE LEAGUE CONTRIBUTED TO THE FAILURE OF THE

LEAGUE?
Absence of super powers

The USA was never a member. Germany was not a member until 1926 and left in 1933. The
USSR did not join until 1934, whilst Japan left in 1933 and Italy left in 1937. Without these major

powers, the League lacked authority and sanctions were not effective as the countries could not
support the League’ sanctions and could continue trading with aggressor countries. It made the
league weak and the aggressive countries could do whatever they want. USA had the most
powerful army in the world, if USA was a member of the League of Nations countries like Italy
and Japan could be scared invading other nations but rather USA continued to trade with them.
It was difficult for League members to agree to decisions.

Any decision that was to be taken by Assembly had to be agreed by all members of the League
of Nations. Often it was hard to get all members to agree to a decision or decisions were
delayed. Permanent members of the Council had veto rights which meant that if any of them
was not happy with a decision they had the power to disapprove such a decision. The Assembly
only met once in September making decisions very slow. By the time decisions were made
damage was already done.
Lack of authority to enforce decisions

The League of Nations did not have the power to force countries to follow its decision e.g. The
Permanent Court of Justice had no way of making sure that countries followed its rulings. The
League could impose sanctions but had no power to make sure that countries complied with
these sanctions the league was like a dog without teeth and they could not make non-members
to follow such sanctions. All this was attributed to lack of armed forces since the league had no
power to force members countries to give their arm forces.
The self-interest of the leading members

The League depended on Britain and France to give support when problems arise but Britain
and France were not prepared to leave its own interest to support the league. They had
economic problems at home and their military was still weak after the First World War and only
acted when it suits them. They also used the league to satisfy their own interest.
WHY THE LEAGUE SUCCEED IN ITS FIRST TEN YEARS(1920s)
Smaller nations were involved in disputes

Conflicts of the 1920s involved smaller nations who believed and depended on the League.
These countries had faith in the League that it will protect them against stronger bigger
countries. Therefore, they were willing to accept decisions that were taken by the League.
Countries were exhausted by WW1 and were not ready for another war
After the First World War, many nations were economically destroyed and did not have the
money to start a new war again. They also still remembered the horrors and destruction of WWI
and there was a general idealism were people wanted to make a new and a better world. In
Britain and France there was enthusiasm for the League for example there were days and
rallies celebrating the League of Nations.
People were happy with the work of the agencies of the League.

The many social successes of the League were the cause for enthusiasm amongst many
people. Small countries also supported the League because they hoped the League would
protect them against aggression of bigger strong countries. The League was also helped by
international agreements that were signed in the 1920s such as the Locarno Treaty of 1925
Germany agreed to work together with France. This platform allowed Germany to join the
League. The Kellogg-Briand pact of 1928 countries agreed not to use force but to solve disputes
by using an arbitrator (third party).
DISCUSS HOW FAR THE GREAT DEPRESSION MADE THE WORK OF THE LEAGUE
MORE DIFFICULT.
It led to an increase in aggressive nationalism.

The depression had hit Japan and Italy badly and their economies were in crisis. The situation
encourage the two countries to follow aggressive nationalism which resulted in Japan and Italy
invading Manchuria and Abyssinia respectively to solve their economic problems. The League
of Nations was unable to take actions against its permanent members because the member
countries. (Britain and France) that were supposed to make the league work were also badly hit
by the depression so they concentrated on their own problems.
In Germany, the depression caused high level of unemployment and poverty led people to elect
the Nazis into power, who promised to solve economic and social problems by reversing the
terms of the Treaty of Versailles. The depression destroyed the political stability of Germany
encouraging the rise of a dictator Adolf Hitler and the Nazi who acted against the League of
Nations.
The USA could not support sanctions of the League.

Almost every country traded with the USA and since they were not a member of the League,
they would not support the League’s sanction as their economy was in such a mess.
Britain and France looked at their own interest.

Britain and France were not willing to get involved in sorting out international disputes while their
own economies were suffering, they could not leave their own problems to solve the world’s
problems. They could not spend money on Purchase of arms and weapons while there was
high starvation in their countries. France became worried of the changing situation in Germany
and began building series of frontier defenses on its border with Germany.
EVALUATE HOW SUCCESSFUL THE LEAGUE OF NATION WAS IN THE 1930s
How the invasion of Manchuria showed the weakness of the league?
The League took too long to condemn Japan.

A League’s commission of enquiries was sent to investigate who was the aggressor between
Japan and China since the former claimed it was protecting its railway line in Manchuria which
was sabotaged and they blamed China. The Lord Lytton commission report was published

almost a year later and condemned Japan of her actions. By that time Japan had already
completed its invasion. The League of Nations ordered Japan to Withdraw from Manchuria, but
Japan ignored, withdraws from the League of Nation and continued its assault on China.
League members could not agree on sanctions to impose against Japan.

Britain and Japan were trading partners and their economy was also affected by the depression.
Britain was afraid that other countries like Germany will trade with Japan at her expense.
League members could not force the USA to support sanctions as they were not a member of
the League and they were Japan’s number one trading partner.
The League did not have an army.

The use of military force could not work as the League lacked its own army. Britain and France
were not willing to risk war against Japan, who was a super power by then. British people
claimed it was a far off affair which could not affect Europe. The League members concentrated
on rebuilding their economies which was affected by the First World War and the great
depression rather than spending money on armed forces.
Why the league did not act against mussolini when italy invaded abyssinia?
The League was reluctant to act.

This time around it was clear for the League of Nations, Italy was the aggressor. Britain and
France failed to take the situation seriously. They played for time since they were desperate to
keep good relations with Mussolini, who seemed to be their strongest ally against Hitler. They
condemned Mussolini’s action but failed to force him out of Abyssinia.
Sanctions were ineffective.

Britain and France were unwilling to take strong measures because they were frightened that if
they imposed full sanctions it would lead to war with Italy and they were not ready for war.
Britain and France did not want to upset Mussolini as this might drive him to ally with Hitler and
Germany. So, the economic sanctions the League imposed did not include oil, coal and iron
which could have ended the Abyssinian campaign very quickly. Despites sanctions that were
imposed on Italy, Non-League members, the USA and Germany continued to trade with Italy.
Later, League members voted to remove existing sanctions.
Britain and France looked at their own interest.

Behind the scenes, the foreign ministers of Britain and France, Hoare and Laval drew up an
agreement to allow Mussolini to annex large parts (about two-third) of Abyssinia in an attempt
for Mussolini to call off the invasion. Details of the Hoare-Laval Pact were leaked in the French
press and served to undermine the credibility of the League. Both Hoare and Laval were sacked
but the damage was already done. The League voted to remove existing sanctions against Italy.
Mussolini declared that Ethiopia was part of Italy. Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somaliland were now
united to form a new colony called Italian East Africa under the rule of Mussolini.
The League did not have an army.

The use of military force could not work as the League lacked its own army. Britain and France
were not willing to risk war against Italy. British people claimed it was a far off affair which could
not affect Europe. The League members concentrated on rebuilding their economies which was
affected by the First World War and the great depression rather than spending money on armed
forces.
EVALUATE THE WORK OF THE LEAGUE OF NATION’S AGENCIES
The League of Nations was Successful in its Agencies.
 The League through the Health Committee improved the health conditions worldwide
by sending doctors and nurses and distribution of medicines to affected areas for
example when typhus and Cholera broke out in Poland and Russia, local Authority failed
to bring the deadly decease under control the League stepped in and the outbreak was
brought under control. They also educated people about the dangers of addictive
substances like drugs and alcohol. The League closed down four Swizz drug companies
 The League under the Refugee Committee helped refugees who were affected by the
First World War as well as with the resettlement of refugees back to their home
countries. Refugees were helped by providing homes for them and ways to help them
improve their living conditions. 400 000 prisoner of war were repatriated back to their
home countries.
 In 1922, the League helped Austria with a loan of 20 million dollars to recover its
economic position. A League commission supervised Austria’s economic and financial
affairs. In 1926, the League’s commission was withdrawn when Austria’s financial
position had improved. It did the same with Hungary in 1923.
 The League provided humanitarian aid for Greece in 1923 when they were driven out of
Smyrna by the Turks. Cholera and typhoid broke out, so the League sent doctors to
bring the deadly diseases under control. .
 In 1925, the League formed a Slavery Commission to stop slave trading and slavery of
all kinds including the contract labour system.
 Through the International Labour Organization (IOL) the league was successful in
reducing working hours for children. It also recommended a 48-hour week for adults and
insisted that employers improve the working conditions for their employees.
However some agencies failed like the Disarmament Commission.
Disarmament conference 1932-34.One of the aims of the League of Nations was international
disarmament, to prevent aggression between nations. Despite of several disarmament
conferences countries refused to disarm. In 1932 at the disarmament conference Germany
demanded to have equal armaments to those of France and France refused. Germany
complained that only it had been forced to disarm. League members could not agree to disarm
and refused to allow Germany to rearm. Germany left the League in 1933 and began to rearm
openly. League members such as Britain no longer tried to stop Germany. League members
also began to increase their armed forces.

WAS THE LEAGUE A SUCCESS OR A FAILURE? / THE LEAGUE WAS A FAILURE FROM
THE START?
It was a failure / I agree, the League failed to deal with the dispute between Lithuania and
Poland over Vilna. A Polish army seized control of Vilna in 1920, and Lithuania appealed to the
League for help. The league asked Poland to withdraw its troops, but Poland ignored them. The
League took no further action and the poles, who were the aggressors, kept Vilna.
The League failed to stop the war between Poland and Russia. The Poles were not satisfied
with the boundary with Russia. They wanted more land in the east than they were allowed to
have. During 1920, the Poles attacked the Russians and forcefully occupied an area called
White Russia. Many Russian soldiers were either killed or captured. In 1921, the Russian
government accepted and signed the Treaty of Riga. This treaty gave more land to Poland. By
refusing to obey the terms of the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations, Poland was
then able to increase its size.
It was a success / I disagree; the League solved the dispute over Aaland Island between
Sweden and Finland. Both countries wanted control the Aaland Island because it lies between
the two countries. The League decided that Finland should administer the Island and the
interests of the Swedish inhabitants on the island would be protected by the League. Both
countries accepted. War was avoided.
The League stopped the war between Greece and Bulgaria. Greek soldiers took control of
Bulgaria because a Greek soldier was killed while protecting the border between the two
countries. The League ordered the two countries to stop fighting and found Greece guilty.
Greece paid reparation to Bulgaria.
WHY THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS FAILED?
The absence of the USA / superpowers was responsible, that the league was powerless to
oppose strong countries like Japan and Italy, when they invaded Manchuria and Abyssinia
respectively. It was expected of the USA / superpowers to be the leading member of the
League, but the. Without the USA / superpowers aggressor countries had nothing to fear in the
League. The League sanctions were ineffective as non-League members continued to trade
with aggressor countries. They were the one that had an army and resources that would stop
aggressor countries.
The league did not have any army to enforce its decisions to allow other countries like France
and Britain to pursue their own ideals, or to prevent Italy and Japan to be aggressive towards
each other. The most loyal members of the League were small European countries, mostly
because they needed international peace to ensure their survival, but in reality they were too
weak and economically dependent, to provide the league with the power that it needed to
ensure peace. The aggressive countries knew that the League would not be able to take military
action so they refused to adhere to the League’s requests. The League was seen as a

watchdog without teeth. The bigger countries like the USA and Russia were not part of the
League to enforce its decisions.
The Treaty of Versailles, countries like Germany, Italy, Japan and others were dissatisfied
about the peace agreements made at the end of the First World War because they felt that they
were unfairly treated, they believed that the League existed to support the arrangements made
in the peace settlements, which they wanted to change.
The League was weakened by the Great Depression at a time of economic crisis;
governments were focused on their own problems rather than what happened in faraway
countries, like when Japan invaded Manchuria and Italy, invaded Abyssinia. The League lacked
teeth because France and Britain were more interested in their domestic affairs, rather than the
League’s affairs concerning collective security that caused the League not to make powerful
countries obey its rulings.
The Depression made countries in the world struggle economically. Countries like Japan which
depended on import and export were mostly affected. Because they did not have a lot of
minerals, occupying territories like Manchuria seemed to be the only option to save their
country’s economy. If it was not for the Depression they could have continued in the way that
they did by buying minerals from China.
Britain and France could not always agree, because they didn’t trust each other and often
disagreed how the League should work. The two biggest members of the League were too busy
with their own internal affairs and they also stabbed the League in the back by signing the
Hoare Laval Pact with Italy in secret, while Italy was the aggressor during their invasion of
Abyssinia. The Covenant of the League gave it the right to impose sanctions on any aggressor,
but the main problem was that the league could only ask its members to impose sanctions on
an aggressor. They had no power to force them to do so. Britain and France as leading member
were not willing to provide their armed forces to fight aggressors.
The League’s inability to secure disarmament in the 1930s was one of its major failures.
Dictatorships to rearm and to challenge the League were formed and supported by the people.
First to challenge the League were the Japanese in 1931 when they attacked Manchuria. The
League failed to persuade one of its permanent members to end its aggression. The
condemnation by the League of Japan’s action led to Japan’s resignation from the League.
The Italian invasion followed as an act of aggression against Ethiopia. Again the League failed
to act for fear of rejection by another of its permanent members. The weakness of Britain and
France in dealing with the Abyssinian crisis mirrored the weakness of the League itself. The
failure of the League over Abyssinia destroyed the idea of Collective Security by demonstrating
that League members would not act together firmly to face aggression.
The failure of the League over Abyssinia left weak nations defenseless against aggression by
powerful neighbors. Abyssinia was occupied by foreign powers and abandoned by the League,
which resulted in other nations to realize that they could no longer look to the league for
security. The two leading members Britain and France rather signed the Hoare-Laval Pact with
Mussolini behind the Leagues back to please him. The sanctions impose during the Abyssinian

crisis on Italy was not sufficient because it didn’t include oil which could have stop the Italian
conquest in a week.
By the time Hitler started his aggressive land grabbing in 1936, the League was a vague reality.
It failed to live up to the expectations of being a force in world peace. It was reduced to a more
humanitarian organisation to solve socio-economic problems.
5.1.3 THE COLLAPSE OF INTERNATIONAL PEACE
Hitler’s actions which eventually led to the Second World War
1933: Took Germany out of the League of Nations and

Began rearming Germany secretly
1934: Tried to take over Austria but was prevented by Mussolini
1935: Held massive rearmament rally in Germany
1936: Reintroduced conscription in Germany
Sent German troops into the Rhineland and occupy it.
Made an anti-Communist alliance with Japan (Berlin-Tokyo Axis)
1937: Tried out Germany’s new weapons in the Spanish Civil War
Made an anti-Communist alliance with Italy and Japan (Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis)
1938: Took over Austria
Took over Sudetenland (Area of Czechoslovakia)
1939: Invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia
Full military alliance with Italy (the Pact of Steel – Japan joined in 1940)
signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact( Molotov-Von Ribbentrop pact, Non-Aggression pact)) with
Russia 23 August 1939
Invaded Poland – Britain and France declared war on Germany
HITLER’S FOREIGN POLICY/ HITLER’S AIMS
 Hitler wanted to abolish the treaty of Versailles.

 Hitler wanted to unite all the German speaking people.
 Hitler wanted to regain all German land lost by the Treaty of Versailles.
 Hitler wanted to gain extra living space (lebensraum) to expand his empire and
for the increasing German population.
 Hitler also wanted to defeat communism.
 To re-arm Germany, to make it a greater Nation.
HOW HITLER BROKE THE TERMS OF THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES
 Hitler started rearming Germany.

 Conscription was reintroduced in Germany.
 Remilitarization of the Rhineland.
 Hitler united Germany with Austria (The Anschluss with Austria).
 Took over Sudetenland (area of Czechoslovakia).

 Invaded the whole of Czechoslovakia.
 Invaded Poland.
HOW HITLER PREPARED FOR WAR
 Hitler had a massive rearmament rally.

 Reintroduced conscription in Germany.
 Sent Germany troops into the Rhineland.
 Tried out Germany’s new weapons in the Spanish Civil War.
 Made an anti-communist alliance with Italy and Japan (Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis).
 Full military alliance with Italy (The Pact of Steel, Japan joined in 1940.
 Signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact with Russia.
 He sent his Soldiers to be trained in Russia.
Discuss the impact of the Treaty of Versailles 1919-1923
1. POVERTY
Germany lost large areas of land. The loss of workers, minerals and industries put pressure on
the German economy and made it difficult for Germany to recover after the war. Germany faced
high war debts and lost foreign trade after the war. The situation was made worse when France
and Belgium occupied the Ruhr, a coal–rich industrial area, after Germany failed to pay
reparations in 1923. The Weimar government ran out of money and issued worthless paper
money, which caused hyperinflation.
2. THE WEIMAR REPUBLIC

The Germans blamed the government of the Weimar Republic for signing the humiliating Treaty
of Versailles. They believed Ebert was a puppet of the Allies since Germany was not allowed to
negotiate the terms. Germany became politically unstable. There were uprisings from the right-
and left-wing parties who wanted to overthrow the unpopular Weimar government.The German
people were used to an autocratic form of government and dislikeddemocracy.
3. DISARMAMENT
Germany was the only country that disarmed. Although other countries promised that they
would also disarm, this never happened. When Britain and France refused Germany’s demand
for equal armament, Germany’s representatives left the Geneva Disarmament Conference in
1933 and Hitler started to rearm the country.
4. HITLER’S RISE TO POWER
The most important long-term impact of the treaty was the fact that it opened the way for the
Nazi Party to gain support in Germany. Germans blamed their economic and political problems
on the Treaty of Versailles and looked for a strong leader who would solve these problems. This
led to the rise of Adolf Hitler, who promised to break the bonds of Versailles and restore
Germany to its former glory.
Evaluate whether Hitler’s foreign policy caused the outbreak of the war in 1939

Rearmament
One of Hitler’s first steps while in power was to increase Germany’s armed forces. This helped
Hitler to reduce unemployment in Germany which was one of the biggest problems the country
faced. It also helped Hitler to deliver on his promises to make Germany strong again and to
challenge the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Rearmament began in secret at first and he
made a great public display of his desire not to rearm Germany but claimed that he was only
doing it because other countries refused to disarm.
In 1935, Hitler held a massive military rally celebrating the German armed forces. He
reintroduced conscription which was banned by the Treaty of Versailles. Rearmament boosted
Nazi support. Hitler was away that Britain had sympathy with Germany as they believed that the
limits put on Germany’s armed forces by the Treaty of Versailles were too tight. The permitted
forces (100 000 men) were not enough to defend Germany from attack. Britain also felt that a
strong Germany would be a good buffer against Communism. Britain signed a naval agreement
with Hitler, allowing Germany to increase its navy to up to 35 percent of the size of the British
navy. The French were angry with Britain about this, but there was little they could do.
The Saar plebiscite (referendum) 1934

The Saar was an important Germany area (in terms of its rich coal fields) and was given to
France for a period of fifteen years under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919.
According to the Treaty, after the fifteen years period, the people of the Saar region were to
decide whether to become part of Germany again or to remain under France.
In 1935, the promised referendum was to be held. Hitler began his propaganda campaigns. He
informed the people of the Saar region of his plan and desire to restore former Germany
greatness by uniting all the Germany people, building the economy and rebuild German’s
military power. The French however, did not do much and were not willing to keep the Saar as
the two countries (Germany and France) had agreed in 1934 that Germany would have to pay
French industries and infrastructures if the people voted in favour of Germany. As a result, over
90 percent voted to retain to Germany.
Why Hitler was happy when the Saar region returned to German rule in 1935?
Hitler was happy because he would make use of the coal and iron in the Saar in his rearmament
programme. It would enable him to manufacture more weapons such as guns, cannons and
ammunition. The Saar was also highly industrialized which help Germany could recover
economically as Germany was affected by reparation payments and the depression of 1929 to
the 1930s. Hitler was also happy that he was achieving one of his aims by re-uniting German
speaking people separated by the much hated Treaty of Versailles. It also gave Hitler morale
boost as the result showed that he had the support of the German speaking people and this
gave him the confidence to achieve his aims.
The remilitarisation of the Rhineland 1936

In 1919, according to the Treaty of Versailles, the Rhineland became a demilitarised zone
meaning no Germany soldiers and weapons were allowed in that area (see terms of the Treaty
of Versailles). In 1936 Hitler took advantage of the crisis of Abyssinia and made his first move in
achieving one of his foreign policies i.e. abolishing the terms of the Treaty of Versailles by
sending troops into the Rhineland. Hitler however, ordered his army generals to retreat when
and if the Germany troops are attacked by the French because at the time, the Germany army
was still weak and was not ready for war but the French were unaware of the Germany

situation. Hitler justified his action claiming that the agreement signed by France and USSR to
protect each other against Germany attack put Germany under threat. He argued that he had to
put troops on his own frontiers.
Why no action was taken against Hitler when he remilitarised the Rhineland?
Firstly, the attention of the League of Nations was on the Abyssinian crisis which was happening
at exactly the same time. The League condemned Hitler’s action but had no power to do
anything else. Many British people had begun to believe that the Treaty of Versailles had been
unfair to Germany. They saw nothing wrong with Germany placing its soldiers on its frontiers.
They were also not ready to start another war so soon as they remembered the horrors of the
First World War and they were concentrating on rebuilding their economy which was not only
affected by the great war of 1914 – 1918 but also the great depression of the 1930s.
The French, who were mostly threatening by the remilitarization of the Rhineland were unable to
take any action against Germany without the help of Britain. The fact that elections were to be
held in France, so none of the politicians were willing to take a stance and talk about what
action to take against Hitler. They were afraid they would lose votes as any action to prevent the
remilitarization of the Rhineland would plunge France into war against Germany. The French
also relied much on the Maginot line. They believed it would be difficult for Germany to pass
through the French defense line and attack France. In the end, Hitler’s gamble paid off and gave
him more courage to risk more.
The Rome-Berlin Axis and the Anti-Comintern Pacts 1936
Hitler’s successes made it easier for him to develop closer relationships with possible allies
such as Italy and Japan. The Rome-Berlin Axis (1936) was not a formal alliance but an informal
agreement between Hitler and Mussolini to work more closely together. Thus both Italy and
Germany gave support to the nationalists in the Spanish Civil War. The Anti-Comintern Pact
(1936) committed Germany and Japan to hostility towards the Soviet Union, and Italy joined the
pact in 1937. Anti-Comintern means Anti-Communist Alliance. The aim of the pact was to limit
communist influence around the world. It was particularly aimed at the USSR. A full military
alliance between Germany and Italy (The Pact of Steel) was signed in 1939, and expanded in
1940 to include Japan.
The Anschluss with Austria 1938
Austria is a German country both by language and culture. Hitler had been born and raised in
Austria, and his desire to unite all Germans was well known. Although the Treaty of Versailles
forbade the union of Germany and Austria, it seemed obvious that he would try to bring it about.
A strong Nazi Party already existed in Austria. In 1934 Nazis murdered the Austrian chancellor,
Dollfuss, during an attempted takeover which failed only when Mussolini, the Italian dictator to
intervene. At this time, Mussolini was suspicious of Hitler, and regarded Austria as being in
Italy’s sphere of interest.
In 1938, the Nazis made a second attempt to get Austria. Hitler encouraged the Nazis to stir up
trouble for the government. They staged demonstrations calling for union with Germany. They
caused riots and Austrian government lost control. Hitler then told the Austrian Chancellor
Schuschnigg that only the union could sort out these problems. Schuschnigg asked for help
from France and Britain but was refused it. Hitler reminded Schuschnigg that he and Mussolini
were now friends through the Rome-Berlin Axis and that Britain and France did nothing when he

remilitarised the Rhineland. Schuschnigg called on a plebiscite to see what the Austrian people
wanted. Hitler was not willing to take any chances. If the Austrian voted “NO”, it would seem as
if he forcefully taken Austria. He simply sent his troops into Austria in March 1938, supposedly
to guarantee a trouble-free plebiscite. Under the watchful eye of the Nazi troops, 99.75 percent
voted for the Anschluss. The Anschluss was completed without any resistance and Austria
became part of Germany.
Why did Britain and France permit the Anschluss?
Many British felt that the Treaty of Versailles was too harsh on Germany and they believed that
Austrians and Germans had the right to be united since they were all German speaking people,
so the Treaty was wrong to separate them. Britain’s Lord Halifax had even suggested to Hitler
before the Anschluss that Britain would not resist Germany uniting with Austria. Britain at the
time had a large empire and was more interested in her colonies, which needed help to recover
financially from the effects of the First World War, and especially the Great Depression of 1929.
At the time, France was experiencing a political problem. There was a coalition government in
place, so there was almost no unity among the leaders. This made it difficult for the government
to act quickly and firmly. France was also putting its trust in the Maginot Line. It was believed
that Germans would never get through it, so they never rearmed. At the time France also
believed that without Britain it was too weak to act alone against Germany.
Both Britain and France adopted a pacifist stance and refused to take part in war. They were
still remembering the horrors of the First World War and did not want another war to break out.
These two countries also believed in the appeasement policy – giving Hitler what he wanted to
avoid war hoping that he would be satisfied.
Crisis over Czechoslovakia
After the Anschluss, it was clear that Czechoslovakia would be the next country to attract
Hitler’s attention. A free and hostile Czechoslovakia would make it impossible for Germany to
fight a war in the west. Czechoslovakia’s geographical position, with its land thrusting deep into
German territory, would be a direct threat to Germany. Although not a large country,
Czechoslovakia was well defended (had an alliance against Germany with France and USSR)
and had a modern and well equipped army. However, it had one crucial weakness, which Hitler
planned to exploit. Its population included several ethnic minorities, among them 3.5 million
Germans living in the Sudetenland. Hitler used the same tactics as he did with Austria,
encouraging the Sudeten Germans to stir up trouble against the Czech government.
The Czech government was prepared to go to war with Germany over the Sudetenland because
they knew that to surrender that area would make them defenceless against Germany, since all
Czechoslovakia’s frontier defences against Germany were in the Sudetenland. Handing this
over would mean that Hitler could easily take over the rest of Czechoslovakia whenever he
wanted. It began to look as though war between Germany and Czechoslovakia would break out.
If so, then France, USSR and probably Britain (had an alliance with France) would go to
Czechoslovakia’s aid. However, neither Britain nor France wanted to fight against Germany.
Neville Chamberlain was sure that a peaceful solution could be found to the Czech crisis. On 15
September 1938 he met Hitler at Berchtesgaden in Germany to discuss the crisis. Hitler made it
clear that the crisis could be solved only by the transfer of parts of the Sudetenland that

contained German speaking people to Germany. Chamberlain indicated that he had no
objection to this as long as the transfer was done peacefully.
A week later on 22 September, having in the meantime forced the Czechs to agree to the loss
of the parts of the Sudetenland, Chamberlain returned to Germany to meet Hitler at Bad
Godesberg. But Hitler now demanded the whole area of the Sudetenland to be handed over by
1 October, and that claims on Czech territory by Hungary and Poland be met. If his demands
were not met by 1 October 1938, Germany would invade Czechoslovakia. Chamberlain was
upset and Europe was on the brink of war.
The Munich Conference
Chamberlain was desperate for any solution that would avoid war. When Mussolini, the Italian
dictator, proposed a four-power conference, both Chamberlain and Hitler, who now saw the
prospect of achieving his aims without having to fight, agreed to attend. On 29 September 1938,
Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Chamberlain (Britain) and Daladier (France) met at Munich.
Neither Russia nor Czechoslovakia, to which the Sudetenland belonged, was invited to this
meeting. The Czech representatives were in Munich but were not allowed to attend the
discussions. The four European powers agreed to everything that Hitler demanded, namely:
 Germany was to annex the whole of the Sudetenland as he promised that this was the
last territory he wanted.
 Poland and Hungary would each receive a part of Czechoslovakia that contained
minority groups of their own.
 The four powers that signed the Munich agreement would guarantee the borders of the
new territories.
The day after the conference, Chamberlain and Hitler met alone and they agreed an Anglo-
German Declaration. The two countries promised never to go to war with each other again, and
that they would settle all disputes between the two countries by consultation. Chamberlain
received a hero’s welcome when he returned to Britain and he referred the events in Munich as
“peace for our time”.
Germany invasion of Czechoslovakia
After the Munich conference, what remained of Czechoslovakia was in chaos. Their leader
Benes resigned and riots broke out between Czechs and Slovakians. There was a struggle for
power, even Communists wanted to take over the government. Various street battles took place
in Czechoslovakia and many lost their lives. On 15 March 1939, with Czechoslovakia in turmoil,
Hitler ordered his troops to occupy the rest of Czechoslovakia. There was no resistance from
the Czechs nor did Britain and France do anything about the situation.
For Chamberlain it was a step too far because, unlike the Sudeten Germans, the Czechs were
not separated from their homeland by the Treaty of Versailles. This was clearly an invasion. On
23 March 1939 Hitler also seized the territory of Memel from Lithuania. It was finally clear to
everyone, including the British and French governments, that the policy of appeasement was
dead. In an effort to prevent any further German aggression, Britain and France promised
Poland that they would guarantee its independence and they told Hitler that if he invaded
Poland they would declare war on Germany. However, after years of Appeasement, Hitler did
not actually believe that Britain and France would risk war by resisting him.

Why did Britain and France OR people of Europe follow the Policy of Appeasement?
They felt the Treaty of Versailles was unfair
Many felt that the Treaty of Versailles was unfair to Germany. They assumed that once these
wrongs were put right then Germany would become a peaceful nation again. E.g. Austrian and
Germans were all German speaking people therefore the treaty was wrong to separate them
and they saw nothing wrong in Germany sending its troops to its frontier when Germany
remilitarised the Rhineland. There were about 3.5 million Germans in the Sudetenland and they
had every right to be part of Germany.
They were not ready for war
The British government believed that their armed forces were not ready for war against Hitler. It
was not all certain that the British Empire and Commonwealth states like Canada and Australia
would support a war against Germany. Britain and her allies could not face up to Germany
without the guarantee of American support as American leaders were determined not to be
dragged into another war. France could not fight Germany without Britain as they had been
defeated twice by Germany in 1870 and 1914. Both British and the French leaders vividly
remembered the horrific experiences of the First World War. They wanted to avoid another war
at almost any cost. Chamberlain needed to buy time in order to rearm Britain and prepare for
war which seemed inevitable by the day.
Their economic problems were a higher priority

Britain and France were still suffering from the effects of the depression. They had large debts
and huge unemployment. Many felt that money should not be spent on buying weapons rather
on rebuilding their countries which were not only destroyed by the First World War but the Great
Depression of the 1930s as well.
At least Hitler was standing up to Communism

Hitler was not the only concern of Britain and its allies. He was not even their main worry. They
were more concerned about the spread of communism and particularly about the dangers to
world peace posed by Stalin, the new leader in the USSR. Many saw Hitler as the buffer to the
threat of spreading communism.
Crisis over Poland
After the destruction of Czechoslovakia, it was clear that Poland would be Hitler’s next target.
Germany had obvious claims on some polish territory. The Polish Corridor, which split East
Prussia from the rest of Germany, had been taken from Germany by the Treaty of Versailles, as
had the city of Danzig, which was now a free city under the League of Nations control. Hitler
wanted these areas back and he also wanted polish territory as lebensraum (living space).
Despite this, the Poles enjoyed a friendly relationship with Hitler’s Germany until 1939. The
Polish government sympathised with the Nazis’ authoritarian and anti-Semitic (anti-Jewish)
policies. They had even taken part in the destruction of Czechoslovakia after the Munich
Conference by grabbing Teschen. At first, the Poles found it hard to take seriously Hitler’s
demands and increasing threats against them. They even thought their best hope of survival
was to try and avoid making commitments to either two powerful neighbours, Germany and the
Soviet Union.

Britain’s guarantee to preserve the independence of Poland made the Poles feel safer than they
really were. There was little that Britain and France could do to stop a German invasion of
Poland – it was too far away from them. So the attitude of Poland’s other powerful neighbour,
the Soviet Union, would be crucial. Hitler had feared the USSR would come to the rescue of
Poland than Britain and France.
Discussion between Britain, France and the Soviet Union took place through early August 1939,
but collapsed because of distrust between the two sides, and also because the Poles refused to
let Soviet troops enter their territory in advance of an attack by Germany. The Soviets thought
Britain and France would be happy to see the Soviet Union doing all the fighting if war broke out
with Germany.
Why did Britain go to war over Poland in 1939?
Chamberlain signed the Munich agreement with Hitler in 1938, giving the Sudetenland to
Germany. However, within months, Germany troops took over the rest of Czechoslovakia and
made it part of Germany. British leaders now realised that the policy of appeasement had
failed. Neither Britain nor France wanted to go to war with Germany in 1939. They would have
preferred a peaceful solution to the Polish crisis and did their best to persuade the Poles to
negotiate with Hitler over the disputed areas, Danzig and the Polish Corridor. The problem was
that the Poles did not want to negotiate as they knew from the example of Czechoslovakia that
negotiating with Hitler could be fatal. Anyway, once the Nazi-Soviet Pact was signed,
negotiations would be meaningless as Germany and the Soviet Union had secretly resolved to
split Poland between them.
They realized that Hitler would not stop using force to get his own way. They also realised
that Hitler would not stop until he had taken lebensraum in Eastern Europe as that was part of
his foreign policy. They also realised that once he had conquered Eastern Europe he would be
so powerful that Britain and France would be unable to stop him if he decided to conquer them
as well.
Britain and France went to war because they were forced to. Hitler had finally pushed them to
the point at which they had to resist. Once Poland was attacked by Germany, Britain was forced
to honour its guarantee. Of course, this could not save Poland because there was nothing that
Britain and France could do to stop the German invasion, but it would mean war. The alternative
was national humiliation and acceptance of German domination of Europe.
The Nazi-Soviet Pact
 The Nazi-Soviet Pact was a treaty signed on 23 August 1939 by Molotov (USSR) and
Von Ribbentrop (Germany), the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of their respective countries.
 It was a non-aggression pact – USSR and Germany agreed not to fight each other.
 The pact was to last for ten years with an option for another five years extension.
 All differences should be resolved through negotiation or arbitration.
 The two parties would not join any group of powers directly or indirectly threatening one
of the two parties.
 Secretly, they also decided to split up Poland between them.
Why was the Nazi-Soviet Pact important?

The Nazi-Soviet Pact was important to Stalin because the Soviet Union would not be drawn into
a war with Germany over Poland. The Soviets did not trust Britain and France enough to ally
with them to save Poland, and now would not have to. Poland was hostile to the Soviet Union
and the two countries had fought a war in the 1920s. Much of Poland’s territory had been taken
from Russia when Poland was created. Now the Soviet Union could get this land back. This
area would be a useful buffer zone against any future German attack. Stalin still believed that
war with Germany would come eventually, but the pact gave him time to build up the strength of
Soviet armed forces.
The Nazi-Soviet Pact was important to Hitler because he knew that he could now invade Poland
without having to fight the Soviet Union. In an event of war, Germany would not fight on both
frontiers. There would be no alliance between the Soviet Union, Britain and France to prevent
Hitler carrying out his plans. Hitler would be able to get back the land lost to Poland at
Versailles, and begin to acquire lebensraum.
The Nazi-Soviet Pact left Britain and France to fight Germany alone. Hitler did not really believe
they would go to war over Poland, but almost had second thoughts when Britain’s reaction to
the pact was the signing of a formal alliance with Poland on 25 August 1939. This time Britain
and France would not be able to back down in the face of Nazi aggression. If they did, it would
signal to the world that they could no longer be regarded as great powers, and unlike in 1938,
re-armament meant that they were now more ready for war. But the Anglo-Polish alliance did
not change anything. It took only a few days for Hitler to recover his nerve and order that Poland
be invaded on 1 September. When Hitler ignored Britain and France’s ultimatum to call off the
attack, they declared war on 3 September. Nevertheless, within three weeks Poland had been
defeated, its armies completely powerless against the Blitzkrieg (lightning war) launched by
Germany. Two weeks into the fighting, Soviet armies invaded Poland from the east, at the same
time occupying the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania).
EXPLAIN THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE FAILURES OF THE LEAGUE IN THE 1930s

1. JAPAN’S EXAMPLE GIVES HITLER ENCOURAGEMENT
Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931. Hitler saw how Japan was able to take large parts of
China before the Lytton Report was made available. Even after the League condemned
Japan’s aggression, Japan simply withdrew from the League and no further action was
taken against Japan.
2. GERMANY LEAVES THE DISAMARMENT CONFERENCE AND WITHDRAWS FROM

THE LEAGUE
Hitler tested the reaction of the League by leaving the Geneva Disarmament Conference
in October 1933, after France opposed his demand to have the same size army as
France. Soon after, he ended German’s membership of the League of Nations.
3. ITALY SETS ANOTHER EXAMPLE FOR HITLER
Early 1935, Mussolini invaded Abyssinia. Once again, Britain and France tried to
appease Italy, rather than taking strong action to end the occupation. When Hitler saw

that the League of Nations did not take stronger action he started to take chances
(gambling) too.
4. HITLER GAINS SUPPORT IN SAAR
The League (mainly Britain and France) had controlled the German coalfields in the
Saar since 1919. According to the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, a referendum (also
called a plebiscite) was to be held to determine the wishes of the inhabitants of this coal
district in 1935. Hitler organized an intensive propaganda campaign before the
referendum, with the result that90% of the population voted to be returned to Germany.
The outcome of the results motivated Hitler that his policies were working and he had
the support of all German people.
5. HITLER ANNOUNCES GERMANY’S REARMAMNET
On 16 March 1935, Hitler officially announced that Germany was going to rearm.
Although Britain, France and Italy condemned this announcement and formed Stresa
Front (agreed to resist any future attempt by Germany to change the Treaty of
Versailles). The League was not willing to act against him rather some members
sympathized with him.
6. HITLER REINTRODUCES CONSCRIPTION
Hitler reintroduced conscription on 16 March 1935, another violation of the Treaty of

Versailles. Under the Military Service Law, young men had to serve two years in the
army from the age of 18 years. The size of the German army was increased from 100
000 to 555 000 soldiers, which was five times the limit imposed by the treaty. Once
again, no country within the League was ready to challenge Hitler’s actions.
made it part of Germany. British leaders now realized that the policy of appeasement had
They realized that Hitler would not stop using force to get his own way. They also realized
his foreign policy. They also realized that once he had conquered Eastern Europe he would be
as well.

How far had Hitler achieved his aims in foreign policy?
Hitler achieved some of his foreign policy because he managed to break the terms of the Treaty
of Versailles by rearming Germany and the remilitarization of the Rhineland. Hitler was also
successful in uniting German speaking people that were separated by the Treaty of Versailles
when he completed the Anschluss with Austria and taking the Sudetenland in 1938 without any
form of resistance. These actions made Germany to be a greater nation once again.
However, Hitler did not achieve his aim of expanding Germany territory because when Germany
took non-German land through the invasion of the rest of Czechoslovakia, Britain and France
realized that Hitler could not be satisfied and that he would not stop. They warned Hitler if he
took one more step toward invading Poland they would declare war on him. Hitler did not take
them serious, he invaded Poland and two days later, Britain and France declared war on
Germany. Therefore, Hitler did not completely achieve his aims as he failed to take the land in
Poland as well as uniting the Germans in Poland into greater Germany. Hitler did not achieve
his aims of defeating communism since communists remained a powerful opposition in
Germany and he failed to defeat communist Russia during the Second World War.
Evaluate Whether the policy of Apeasement was successful.
Was the Policy of Appeasement a success or a failure?
The Appeasement Policy was a success to the extent that many believed Chamberlain had no
other choice at that time. It was widely believed that the British forces were not ready to face up
to Hitler who had rearmed Germany remarkably.
Public opinion was also against war as they felt that money should not be spend on buying
weapons but should be used to improve economic and social welfare. The British government
were also away of the fact that important countries in her empire such as Canada and Australia
were against war and there was no guarantee that the USA would support them in a war against
Germany. Chamberlain needed to buy time in order to rearm Britain and prepare for war which
seemed inevitable by the day.
However, the appeasement policy failed as it encouraged Hitler to be more aggressive. Each
gamble he got away with encouraged him to take a bigger risk. For example, when Hitler got
Austria without any resistance, he started his demands over the Sudetenland and when he got
Sudetenland, he invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia and then invaded Poland despite been
warned not to attack Poland. Appeasing Hitler, basically, made him feel Britain and France were
scared of him and would not stop him.
This policy also allowed Germany to grow too stronger than Britain and France. Hitler was able
to secure his western frontier when he remilitarised the land and made use of minerals in the
area in his rearmament programme. Austrian army joined the Germany army when the
Anschluss was completed and he also got the Skoda weapon factory when he acquired the

Sudetenland. It was also a mistake to put too much trust in Hitler. Hitler had always broken his
promises.
Appeasement policy was based on the mistaken idea that Hitler was trustworthy. The policy
also scared the USSR because Hitler made no secret of his desire to expand Germany
eastward. Appeasement sent the message to USSR that Britain and France would not stand in
Hitler’s way. This Resulted in Russia signing the Nazi-Soviet pact with Germany.
Explain the Importance of the Nazi- Soviet pact (Non-aggression pact,Molotov- Von
Ribbentrop pact).
Why was the Nazi-Soviet Pact important?

The Nazi-Soviet Pact was important to Stalin because the Soviet Union would not be drawn into
a war with Germany over Poland. The Soviets did not trust Britain and France enough to ally
with them to save Poland, and now would not have to. Poland was hostile to the Soviet Union
and the two countries had fought a war in the 1920s. Much of Poland’s territory had been taken
from Russia when Poland was created. Now the Soviet Union could get this land back. This
area would be a useful buffer zone against any future German attack. Stalin still believed that
war with Germany would come eventually, but the pact gave him time to build up the strength of
Soviet armed forces.
The Nazi-Soviet Pact was important to Hitler because he knew that he could now invade Poland
without having to fight the Soviet Union. In an event of war, Germany would not fight on both
frontiers. There would be no alliance between the Soviet Union, Britain and France to prevent
Hitler carrying out his plans. Hitler would be able to get back the land lost to Poland at
Versailles, and begin to acquire lebensraum.
The Nazi-Soviet Pact left Britain and France to fight Germany alone. Hitler did not really believe
they would go to war over Poland, but almost had second thoughts when Britain’s reaction to
the pact was the signing of a formal alliance with Poland on 25 August 1939. This time Britain
and France would not be able to back down in the face of Nazi aggression. If they did, it would
signal to the world that they could no longer be regarded as great powers, and unlike in 1938,
re-armament meant that they were now more ready for war. But the Anglo-Polish alliance did
not change anything. It took only a few days for Hitler to recover his nerve and order that Poland
be invaded on 1 September. When Hitler ignored Britain and France’s ultimatum to call off the
attack, they declared war on 3 September. Nevertheless, within three weeks Poland had been
defeated, its armies completely powerless against the Blitzkrieg (lightning war) launched by
Germany. Two weeks into the fighting, Soviet armies invaded Poland from the east, at the same
time occupying the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania).
Factors that contributed to the outbreak of the Second World War
Treaty of Versailles
Problems that Germany experienced after 1920 were blamed on the Treaty of Versailles. Hitler
used it to justify many of his acts of aggression against his neighbours. Hitler and many
Germans believed that the Treaty of Versailles was a constant reminder to Germans of their
defeat in the First World War and it was humiliating because of the war guilt clause. Therefore,
Germany had to seek revenge the moment that they had recovered. This revenge, that is
reversing tor abolishing the terms of the Treaty of Versailles eventually led to the Second World
War as Britain and France stopped Hitler to take more land in Eastern Europe.

The failure of the League of Nations
The League of Nations failed to act against countries that broke peace. Its failure to force Japan
out of Manchuria and China made Mussolini and Hitler think that they could also get away with
using force to get what they wanted. When the League failed to act against Italy, Hitler began to
break the terms of the Treaty of Versailles such as remilitarising the Rhineland, made the union
with Austria, took over Sudetenland, and invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia and lastly the
invasion of Poland caused WWII.
Hitler’s Foreign Policy

Hitler’s foreign policy included expanding Germany territory to create more living space for
increasing German population and reversing the Treaty of Versailles, taking back lost land by
force. He made the Anschluss with Austria which made Germany stronger as the army of
Austria joined that of Germany. Germany gained the Skoda weapon factory when Hitler took
over the Sudetenland, a part of Czechoslovakia in 1938 thus boosting Hitler’s rearmament
programme. Hitler then took over the rest of Czechoslovakia. When Germany invaded Poland in
1939, Britain and France declared war on Germany. This marked the beginning of the Second
World War
The Appeasement Policy

The appeasement policy gave Hitler the courage to demand more land from Europe. Every time
he got away with what he wanted he took the next step demanding more land. Hitler then
believed that Britain and France were afraid of him and he thought they would not stop him.
Appeasing Hitler made Germany to grow stronger and gave him the power to take even bigger
risks. Since appeasing made Hitler to invade even more territories, Hitler had to be stopped
when he invaded Poland and that’s what led to the Second World War.
The Nazi-Soviet Pact

Hitler was not worried about the warnings of Britain and France over Poland. He was worried of
the USSR that they would come to the rescue of Poland. The Nazi-Soviet Pact gave Hitler an
opportunity to attack Poland without fear as Germany and USSR agreed not to attack each
other and secretly agreed to divide Poland among them. After this pact Hitler invade Poland,
two days later, Britain and France declared war on Germany.
Explain why Britain and France declare war on Germany on September 1939
made it part of Germany. British leaders now realized that the policy of appeasement had
They realized that Hitler would not stop using force to get his own way. They also realized

his foreign policy. They also realized that once he had conquered Eastern Europe he would be
as well.
5.1.4 THE COLD WAR

The origins of the Cold War
What was the Cold War?
The term Cold War refers to the hostile relationship between the USA and the USSR. It was not
a military war, but instead a war of words, propaganda and threats. The two superpowers got
entangled in a Cold War that lasted nearly 50 years which involved threats and building more
and more nuclear weapons.There was a state of political tension and military rivalry between
nations. There was competition between two systems namely Communism and Capitalism.
Each power was building up its military strength and trying to gain influence in the world.
Causes of the Cold War
1 Beliefs
The Soviet Union was a Communist country, ruled by a dictator, who cared little about
human rights, while The USA was a capitalist democratic country which valued freedom.
2 Aims
Stalin wanted huge reparations from Germany, and a ‘buffer’ of friendly states to protect the
USSR from being invaded again.Britain and the USA wanted to protect democracy, and
help Germany to recover.They were worried that large areas of Eastern Europe were falling
under Soviet control. To avoid mistakes the Treaty of Versailles made.
3 Resentment about History

The Soviet Union could not forget that in 1918 Britain and the USA had tried to destroy the
Russian Revolution. They refused to sign an alliance with Russia against Hitler. Stalin also
thought that they had not given him enough help in the Second World War. They did not
share the secret of the atomic bomb.
Britain and the USA could not forget that Stalin had signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact with
Germany in 1939. USSR wanted to spread communism. An atomic bomb in USSR’s hands
was a threat to world peace.
4 Events
Neither side trusted each other. Every action they took made them hate each other more:
 Yalta Conference (February 1945)

 Potsdam Conference (July 1945)
 Russian expansion in Eastern Europe (1945-48)
 Fulton Speech (1946)
 Greece (February 1947
 Truman Doctrine (March 1947)
 Marshall plan (June 1947)
 Cominform (October 1947)
 Czechoslovakia (February 1948)
Discuss why the USA and USSR’s Alliance break down in 1945
The 1945 Summit Conferences
The Big Three during the War
During the War, Britain and the USA were allies of the Soviet Union, but the only thing that
united them was their hatred of Germany. In 1945, the Big Three held two conferences – at
Yalta (February) and Potsdam (July) – to try to sort out how they would organize the world
after the war. It was at these conferences that the tensions between the two sides became
obvious.
The Yalta conference 1945 (Russia)
The Big Three: Winston Churchill (Britain), Franklin Roosevelt (USA) and Josef Stalin (USSR)
Agreements:
1. United Nations to be formed.

2. Russia would join the United Nations.
3. Divide Germany into four ‘zones’, which Britain, France, the USA and the USSR would
occupy after the war.
4. Divide the Germany capital, Berlin into four zones
5. Hunt down and bring Nazi war-criminals to trial especially those responsible for the
genocides in concentration camps.
6. Stalin to enter the war with Japan once Germany surrenders.
7. Russia to gain land from Poland and Poland would gain from Germany.
8. Eastern Europe to be seen as Soviet sphere of influence.
9. Set up a Polish Provisional Government of National Unity 'pledged to the holding of free
and unfettered( free) elections as soon as possible'.
10. Help the freed peoples of Europe set up democratic and self-governing countries by
helping them to (a) maintain law and order; (b) carry out emergency relief measures; (c) set
up governments; and (d) hold elections (this was called the 'Declaration of Liberated
Europe').
11. Set up a commission to look into reparations.
But, behind the scenes, tension was growing. After the conference, Churchill wrote to
Roosevelt that ‘The Soviet union has become a danger to the free world.’

The Potsdam conference( Germany)
The Big Three: Winston Churchill replaced by Clement Atlee (Britain), Roosevelt replaced by
Harry Truman (USA) and Josef Stalin (USSR).
The Conference agreed the following Protocols:

1. To set up the four ‘zones of occupation’ in Germany as agreed at Yalta.
2. Ban Nazi party and to bring Nazi war-criminals to trial.
3. Poland’s border to be adjusted to Oder and Neisse River.
4. Repatriate Germans in Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia.
5. To recognize the Polish Provisional Government of National Unity and hold 'free and
unfettered (fair) elections as soon as possible'.
6. Russia was allowed to take reparations from the Soviet Zone, and also 10% of the
industrial equipment of the western zones as reparations. America and Britain could take
reparations from their zones if they wished.
But in fact the Allies had disagreed openly about:
1. The details of how to divide Germany.

2. The size of reparations Germany ought to pay.
3. Russian policy in Eastern Europe.
4. Stalin’s demands for a naval base in the Mediterranean
Explain how the USSR gained control of Eastern Europe by 1948
By 1945 it was clear that Germany was losing the war. The Allies had landed in France and
were pushing towards Germany, while the Soviet army was moving towards Germany from the
east. The route the Soviet army took allowed it to liberate various countries that had been
occupied by Germany after 1939: the Baltic States (Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, Finland,
Poland, Romani, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Hungary and Czechoslovakia).
As the Soviet army moved towards Berlin it left behind soviet troops in every country it passed
through and the USSR did not withdraw their troops from those countries after the war. In
Poland, a communist government was formed despite the wishes of the most Poles to be a
democratic state. In 1945, a communist was elected as a Prime Minister of Romania within a
left-wing coalition. A left-wing coalition also won the elections in Bulgaria in 1945. The
communist members of the coalition then executed leaders of the other parties and took over
the government.
In Yugoslavia, Marshal Tito (a communist) was elected president in 1945. However, Stalin did
not trust him and they quarreled about how he should run his country. In Czechoslovakia, a left-
wing coalition won elections in 1945. In 1946 communists formed the largest party, but still
within a coalition.
Throughout 1946, Stalin’s secret police operated in all the countries liberated from German
occupation to ensure that the communists in the coalition governments remained strong and in

power. Gradually the secret police arrested the non-communist members of the coalitions until
fully fledged communist governments were firmly in place in all the countries.
By doing this, Stalin backtracked (did not keep the promise) on the agreement reached at Yalta
where he promised to allow free elections in the countries of Eastern Europe so that the people
could choose the governments they wanted. Stalin did not trust the Allies as he was convinced
they would attack the Soviet Union at the first opportunity. This is why he insisted on creating
the so-called satellite states between the Soviet Union and the West.
Why the USSR wanted to control Eastern Europe?
Stalin wanted to create a buffer zone between the Soviet Union and the West to ensure that
no West European country would ever be able to invade the Soviet Union again as it had
happened in the past, first by France under Napoleon and by Germany in 1914 and in 1941.
Stalin also wanted to spread communism. At the time the USSR were the only communist
country in the world therefore, Stalin feared that the capitalists will dominate the world and they
would eventually take a stand against communist Russia. Stalin wanted to encircle the USSR
with friendly nations as a protection against the capitalists.
Stalin also wanted to strengthen the economy of the USSR. No other country suffered much
as Russia did during the war with Germany. Millions lost their lives, hundred thousands were
wounded, many were left homeless and its infrastructures were destroyed. Stalin would make
use of the resources in countries of Eastern Europe to rebuild his country and its economy. After
all it’s the USSR who liberated these countries from Germany occupation during the Second
World War, so this was a way of getting reparations from those countries.
DISCUSS HOW THE USA REACTED TO SOVIET EXPANSIONISM IN EASTERN EUROPE.
The Truman’s doctrine: When Eastern Europe was in the control of the Soviet Union, the
USA changed their attitude to world politics and they came up with the Truman’s
Doctrine.Truman believed that communism succeeded when people faced poverty and
hardship.The USA was therefore, prepared to send money, equipment and advice to any
country that was threatened by a communist take-over.Truman accepted that Eastern Europe
was now communist, his aim was to stop communism from spreading any further.This became
known as the policy of containment and involvement (stop communism at all cost by getting
involved).
The Marshall Plan:It was a plan of General George Marshall, the USA secretary of state. The
USAoffered to provide countries with money and goods they needed. The offer was open to all
the countries of Europe including the Communist ones. The basic aim of the USA was to
containCommunism; therefore, it contributed to the hostile relationship between USA and
USSR.The Soviet Union rejected the offer and they made sure that none of the other countries
on their side benefit from it.

WHY WAS THE TRUMAN DOCTRINE IMPORTANT?
The USA wanted to prevent the spread of Communism.
Truman believed that communism succeeded when people faced poverty and hardship. He sent
an American General George Marshall to assess the economic state of Europe of which he
discovered a ruined economy. Europe owed the USA $11.5 billion; therefore, Marshall
suggested that about $12 billion would be needed to rebuild Europe’s prosperity. This was to be
known as the Marshall Plan/Aid.
It showed that the USA was not going to be isolationist.

The USA changed their attitude to world politics and they came up with the Truman’s Doctrine.
The USA was prepared to send money, equipment and advice to any country that was
threatened by a communist take-over. Truman accepted that Eastern Europe was now
communist, his aim was to stop communism from spreading any further. This became known as
the policy of containment.
It meant money, equipment and advice being invested in receiving countries.

Though the primary aim of the Marshall plan was to put the policy of containment into practice
i.e. to stop the spread of communist, it would also create new markets for American goods. The
Americans remembered the effects of the Depression of the 1930s and Truman wanted to
prevent it at all costs.
WHY WAS THE MARSHALL PLAN INTRODUCED?
To help Europe recover from the war

The Marshall Plan was an American initiative to aid Western Europe in economic assistance to
help rebuild Western European economies after the end of World War II. The goals of the
United States were to rebuild war-torn regions, remove trade barriers, modernize industry,
improve European prosperity and prevent the spread of communism.
To prevent the spread of Communism

The Marshall Plan was introduced to try to prevent the spread of communism. Truman believed
that communism spread when people faced hardship and poverty. In the aftermath of the war,
European countries were still rationing, a recipe for communism. Truman wanted to rebuild
Europe’s prosperity to prevent communism taking hold in suffering countries.
To help USA’s trade with Europe

Though the primary aim of the Marshall plan was to put the policy of containment into practice
i.e. to stop the spread of communist, it would also create new markets for American goods. The
Americans remembered the effects of the Depression of the 1930s and Truman wanted to
prevent it at all costs.
Why Stalin / USSR refused the Marshall Plan?
At first Stalin showed some interest in the Marshal Plan program but later refused to accept it.
He saw the plan was against communism and it was used by the West to belittle the USSR in
Eastern Europe. Stalin forbade any of the Eastern European states to apply for the aid. He also
felt the USA used its economic power to dominate as many as possible states to be dependent
on dollars.
The Marshall Plan included economic assistance to Germany, and the Russians could not
tolerate such aid to the enemy that had so recently devastated the Soviet Union in the Second
World War.
He maintained that the Marshall Plan would destroy the political and economic independence of
Europe. Alternatively, Stalin came up with COMECON (Council for Mutual Economic
Assistance). COMECON’s stated objective was to devise strategies to develop and integrate the
economies of member states.
EXPLAIN THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE BERLIN BLOCKADE
THE BERLIN BLOCKADE
Berlin was deep in the Soviet zone and was linked to West Germany by vital roads, railways
and canals. West Berlin became developed because the west introduced the new currency
called the Deutschmark in West Germany which made the west to recover economically and
this was seen by Russia as an attempt by the west to undermine Russia’s influence in eastern
Germany and ruin it’s economy. This resulted in many professional people from East Berlin to
walk over to the west. Stalin did not want to lose the skills of these people. On 24 June 1948 he
therefore decided to block all roads, railways and canals to West Berlin so that the Allies could
not supply aid to West Berlin anymore. Stalin also believed he would force the Allies out of
Berlin and make Berlin entirely dependent on the USSR. He was to be surprised by the Allies
response to the blockade.
THE BERLIN AIRLIFT
In reaction to the Berlin Blockade which was introduced by the USSR, The Allies airlifted
essential supplies such as food, fuel and medicine to West Berlin. The USA did not want to
attack the blockades because they were not willing to start another war. The relationships
between the East and the West became hostile by the day. Picking a fight with Stalin about the
blockade will only worsen the situation and the Allies felt nothing good would come from that.
No one could predict how Stalin would react if the Allies ran down the blockade.
The Allies also did not want to give in to Stalin because they knew that he wanted to have the
whole of Berlin under him. If they had withdrawn, Stalin would take the whole Berlin and might
give him the confidence to try to push them by taking other parts of Germany or other countries.
Truman wanted to show Stalin that he was serious with the policy of containment.
In 11 months a total of 275 000 flights delivered an average of 4 000 tonnes of supplies per
day. As a warning to the USSR, the USA stationed a B-9 aircraft capable of carrying atomic

bombs in Britain. West Berliners supported the Western Allies and rejected Soviet pressure to
become part of one city under a communist council. On 12 May 1949, the USSR reopened the
land routes to West Berlin.
Results/Consequences of the Berlin Blockade
1. The Cold War got worse

This almost started an all-out war since it reached its pink. This meant that the Allies also did
not want to give in to Stalin because they knew that he wanted to have the whole of Berlin
under him. If they had withdrawn, Stalin would take the whole Berlin and might give him the
confidence to try to push them by taking other parts of Germany or other countries. Truman
wanted to show Stalin that he was serious with the policy of containment.
2. East and West Germany

Germany split up in May 1949 America, Britain and France united their zones into the Federal
Republic of Germany (West Germany). In October 1949, Stalin set up the German Democratic
Republic (East Germany).
3. NATO and the Warsaw Pact

In 1949 the Western Allies set up NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) as a defensive
alliance against Russia and the NATO countries surrounded Russia. In response to this in 1955
the Soviet Union set up the Warsaw pact which was an alliance of the communist states to act
in self-defensive against possible attack by the Westerners
4. Arms Race
After Berlin blockade the USA and the USSR realised that they were in a competition for the
world domination and they began to build up their armies and weapons in case war will start.
This divided the world in two, each headed by one of the superpowers.
WHY DID STALIN BLOCKADE BERLIN?
Britain, France and the USA combined their zones which became known as West Germany and
West Berlin. They also reformed the currency and within months there were signs that West
Germany was recovering. As West Germany developed, more skilled people left East Berlin to
West Berlin, which was to the disadvantage to the Soviet Union.
Berlin was deep in the Soviet zone and was linked to West Germany by vital roads, railways
and canals. On 24 June 1948, the Soviet Union cut off all roads, railways and freight traffic to
West Berlin.
Stalin blocked Berlin because West Berlin became developed and professional people from
East Berlin walked over to the West. Stalin did not want to lose the skills of these people. He
blocked at roads, railways and canals to West Berlin so that the Allies could not supply aid to

West Berlin anymore. Stalin also believed he would force the Allies out of Berlin and make
Berlin entirely dependent on the USSR.
WHY DID THE WEST AIRLIFT SUPPLIES INTO WEST BERLIN?
The USA did not want to attack the blockades because they were not willing to start another
war. The relationships between the East and the West became hostile by the day. Picking a
fight with Stalin about the blockade will only worsen the situation and the Allies felt nothing good
would come from that. No one could predict how Stalin would react if the Allies ran down the
blockade.
The Allies also did not want to give in to Stalin because they knew that he wanted to have the
whole of Berlin under him. If they had withdrawn, Stalin would take the whole Berlin and might
give him the confidence to try to push them by taking other parts of Germany or other countries.
Truman wanted to show Stalin that he was serious with the policy of containment.
DETERMINE WHO WAS TO BLAME FOR STARTING THE COLD WAR, THE USA OR THE
USSR
Who was to blame for the Cold War, the USA or USSR?
The USA was to be blamed because they did not send troops to help the USSR fight Germany
in the East and they kept the secret of the atomic bomb while the two, USA and USSR were
regarded as allies during the Second World War since they were fighting a common enemy. The
attitude of the USA during the war made the USSR to feel that the West were willing to let
Germany to destroy the USSR and Stalin feared the USA would make use of the atomic bomb
on the USSR after the war with Germany and her allies. Therefore, Stalin ordered his scientists
to develop their own atomic bomb to defend themselves.
The USA can also be blamed for stopping the spread of Communism. All what Stalin intended
to do was to create a buffer of friendly nations to protect the USSR from another attack from the
West. The USSR had previously been attacked three times by the West, firstly by France under
Napoleon, secondly by Germany in 1914 and thirdly by Germany again in 1941. The USSR felt
threatened by the capitalists as they were the only communist country in the world at that time,
so, Stalin wanted to encircle the USSR with friendly communist countries. Truman had not
understood how much Russia had suffered in the Second World War.
Besides this, the USSR was to blame for the Cold War because they wanted to spread
communism especially by forcing countries of Eastern Europe to be communists. The USSR
was supposed to let the people of those countries to decide their own form of government rather
than been forced. Stalin was trying to build up a Soviet empire. Communism violated human
rights and this was against the principles of the USA and their Western allies.

The USSR deliberately crippled the economy of countries in Eastern Europe including Eastern
Germany by taking reparations in the form of resources. Stalin wanted Russia to rule the world
and there was no way he was ever going to stop unless someone stopped him. It was not just
the USA, the whole free Western world was aware of the threat of communism.
THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS
BACKGROUND
• Cuba is a large island just 160km from Florida just in the Southern USA.
• It had long been an American ally.
• In 1898 the USA helped the Cuban to win independence from Spain.
• The USA built a huge naval base at Guantanamo. American companies invested heavily
in Cuban industries.
• American companies had large stakes in most of Cuban companies, particularly in
mining and agriculture.
• In 1934 the USA helped the military officer Fulgencio Batista to establish himself in
power.
THE CUBAN REVOLUTION
• In 1959, Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. The new leader proposed reforms to
improve the economy of Cuba and in particular to end corruption in government and the
exploitation of the peasants and sugar mill workers.
• Fidel Castro also nationalized American businesses and plantations but he allowed the
Americans to keep the naval base.
• In the summer of 1960, the USA stopped buying Cuban sugar and later banned all trade
with Cuba. Then in January 1961, the USA broke off diplomatic relations with Cuba.
• The USA hoped that these measures would starve Castro into submission but they
seemed to have pushed him closer to the Soviet Union.
• Castro began appointing communists to his government and signed a trade agreement
with the Soviet Union in which Cuban sugar would be swapped for machinery, oil and
economic aid.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USA AND CUBA FROM 1959 TO 1961
• In 1959 Fidel Castro overthrew American backed dictator Batista.

• Fidel Castro also nationalized American businesses and plantations but he allowed the
Americans to keep the naval base.
• In the summer of 1960, the USA stopped buying Cuban sugar and later banned all trade
with Cuba.
• Then in January 1961, the USA broke off diplomatic relations with Cuba.
• The USA hoped that these measures would starve Castro into submission but they
seemed to have pushed him closer to the Soviet Union.

THE BAY OF PIGS
• The Cuban exiles (Batista's followers) received military training, weapons and transport
from the USA’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and aimed to launch an attack on the
coast of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs.
• They intended to establish a base for guerrilla activities against Castro and were
confident the Cuban people would support them.
• The US President Kennedy gave a go-ahead to 1 400 anti-Castro Cubans to attack but it
was a disaster.
• When they landed at the Bay of Pigs, they found themselves facing over 20 000 Cuban
troops on 17 April 1961.
• There was no popular uprising to support the invasion.
• All the exiles were killed or captured.
• The USA especially president Kennedy was humiliated.
• After the Bay of Pigs incidence Fidel Castro requested for military assistance from the
USSR and he declared Cuba was now a communist state.
WHY USSR INSTALLED MISSILES IN CUBA?
Khrushchev wanted to test the USA. He wanted to see how strong the new, young American
president was. He seemed to think that Kennedy was weak and would give in to his scheme. He
wanted to see whether the Americans would back down and let the missiles stay, or whether
they would face up to the USSR and force them to remove the missiles.
Khrushchev wanted to gain the upper hand in the arms race. The USSR was very concerned
about the missile gap between the USSR and the USA. NATO had long range missiles in
Turkey aimed at a number of Soviet cities and industrial areas. The USSR had only medium
range nuclear missiles that could not reach the USA. He believed that with missiles on Cuba
threatening the USA, this would discourage the USA from launching a missile strike against the
Soviet Union.
Khrushchev also wanted to trap the USA and drag them to a nuclear war. The USSR made no
attempt to hide the missile sites, and even allowed the missiles to be transported on the open
decks of cargo ships.
This also gave Khrushchev an opportunity to spread communism to the West and especially
South America on the doorstep of the USA who always tried to stop communism.
Khrushchev wanted to bargain with the USA. He thought he could use the missiles as a
bargaining chip. With missiles in Cuba, he could agree to remove them in return for American
concessions such as the removal of American missiles in Turkey.

WHY THE USA WERE WORRIED ABOUT RUSSIAN MISSILES IN CUBA?
The Russian missiles were on the doorstep of the USA and threatened its supremacy as leader
of the West. The missiles were erected in Cuba which was very close to the USA, about 160
kilometers to Florida. The missiles could destroy every major city in the USA as far as 2 000
kilometers from Cuba.
Americans feared the missiles even more as they did not know how the young inexperienced
Kennedy would handle the crisis. Many Americans feared a nuclear war between the USA and
the USSR which could have resulted in ending humanity.
DETERMINE WHO BENEFITED FROM THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS
WHO WAS THE VICTOR IN THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, USA (KENNEDY) OR USSR
(KHRUSHCHEV)?
It was a victory for Kennedy (USA) because he managed to secure USA’s national security by
successfully negotiating with the USSR for the removal of missiles from Cuba. The Soviet
missiles in Cuba was less than 160km from US cities and could fire into US with a rage of 2 000
kilometers giving USSR the capacity to strike cities deep within the USA.
In order to protect USA from any potential nuclear threat from the USSR, Kennedy needed the
removal of these nuclear missiles in Cuba. Soviet missiles in Cuba were removed under UN
supervision whereas USA missiles in Turkey were removed secretly.
Kennedy was victorious because he gave Khrushchev an ultimatum to remove the missiles
within two days. He was able to stop Soviet ships before the quarantine line. He forced
Khrushchev to back down. This raised his prestige in the USA and the West.
However, it was a victory for Khrushchev because he managed to force Kennedy into making
concessions for the removal of the missiles from Turkey which were of a threat and the promise
not to invade Cuba.
Despite the removal of Soviet missiles from Cuba, Cuba remains communist, heavily armed and
a useful ally to Russia in the USA’s sphere of influence.
He had managed to avoid direct confrontation with the USA by claiming that the Cuban missiles
served as deterrence to US invasion, which was in fact a bluff, as the power balance between
USA and the USSR tilted towards the favor of the USSR.
Khrushchev was praised for his willingness to compromise and saved the world from a nuclear
war by agreeing to the removal of Soviet missiles from Cuba.

THE VIETNAM WAR 1954-1975
A protracted conflict pitted the communist government of North Vietnam and its allies in South
Vietnam, known as the Vietcong, against government of South Vietnam and its principal ally, the
United States. Called the “American war” in Vietnam (or, in full, the “War against the Americans
to save the nation”), the War was also part of a larger regional conflict (seeIndochina wars) and
a manifestation of the cold war between the United States and the Soviet Union and their
respective allies.
WHY DID THE USA GET INVOLVED IN THE VIETNAM WAR?
Containment policy introduced by Harry Truman, according to this policy the USA government
had to make sure that the spread of communism in the world is stopped, so they went to
Vietnam to support a group of people that opposed the North communist government.
Domino theory, this theory stated that if Vietnam completely became a communist country than
the neighbouring countries like Thailand, Cambodia, Indonesia, Burma would also fall under
communism, Americans had to go to Vietnam and break the chain of a domino effect like that of
a domino game.
WHO WERE THE VIETCONGS?
 People’s liberation armed force (PLAF) known as the Vietcong.

 Established at the end of 1960 by the communist North Vietnamese to fight the South
Vietnamese supported by the USA.
 They were supported with arms and ammunitions by Ho Chi Minh the communist leader
in North Vietnam.
 They used guerrilla tactics which involved ambushing USA soldiers, setting traps and
land mine and planting bombs in town.
 They also mixed with the peasants and they did not wear uniform so that Americans
could not identify them.
 They were supplied with rockets and weapons by China and Russia.
 They used hit and run tactic which was part of the guerrilla War fare.
 They also used “hanging onto the belts” of the American tactics- meaning they had to
stay closer to the Americans so that they could not use air attacks without killing their
own man, in this way Vietcong were somehow safe from the American air attacks.
 They also walked in smaller groups; even the whole group was killed the other soldiers
remained and continued the fight.
 Vietcong had confidence, did not give up and this frustrated the American soldiers, their
moral was won down as a result.
 Their bases were underground.
THE AMERICAN TACTICS
 They fought a high-tech war, using B52 bombers, artillery, helicopters, Napalm and
defoliants (Agent Orange). This killed many innocent civilians and failed to stop the
Vietcong guerrillas.

 They forced the peasants to leave Vietcong- controlled areas and made them leave
in defended strategic hamlets in loyal areas.
 This created immense opposition, and allowed Vietcong infiltrators into loyal areas.
 American troops were sent on patrols, and then supported by air and artillery when
attacked. This demoralised the soldiers, who realised they were being used just as
bait.
 Search and destroy patrols went out looking for “Charlie”, as they called the
Vietcong. But the patrols were very visible, easy to ambush. This led to atrocities
such as “zippo raids” to burn villages, and the unprovoked massacre of peaceful
villages at My Lai in 1968.
 The chances of a combat soldier being killed in Vietnam were one in five, and one in
six of the Vietnam veterans (vets) who survived have subsequently experience
depression, drug or alcohol addiction or divorce.
EXPLAIN WHY THE USA LOST THE VIETNAM WAR
WHY DID THE USA LOSE THE VIETNAM WAR?
The differences between the Americans and the Vietcong
Americans Vietcong
The American high-tech tactics continually killed The Vietcong’s guerrilla tactics were
wrong people and demoralised their own troops. appropriate to the nature of the
conflict.
The US was trying to supply a War 8000 miles from The Vietcong were supplied with
America. weapons by China and Russia.
The South Vietnamese regime was weak, brutal and The South Vietnamese supported
corrupt. and sheltered the Vietcong.
Their short (one-year) tour of service meant that The Vietcong had been continuously
American troops were always inexperienced. at War since they resisted the
The cost of the War was too high for the USA Japanese during the second world
government to continue supporting, the government War.
spend millions of dollars on the War, but the Vietcong
still remained strong.
The morale of American soldiers was rock bottom- The Vietcong were fanatically
they took drugs, shot their officers (fragging) and determined to drive out the
deserted. Americans, whatever the cost.
Back in the USA the War became very unpopular; The North Vietnamese were

Americans themselves did not support the War motivated, fighting at home at home
(public). About 85000 American lost their lives while to unite their country.
fighting the War, this increased opposition to the War.
The media e.g. TV, Newspapers show cruel American

tactics were, example like killing of innocent people at
My Lai, the use of chemicals like napalm and Agent
Orange destroyed the Vietnam environment and this
made people all over the world to be angry with the
American involvement in the Vietnam.
The American tactic of search and destroy also

resulted into the killing of many innocent people and
destruction of infrastructures. This also angered
people in South Vietnam and started to oppose them.
EVALUATE THE IMPACT OF THE VIETNAM WAR ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
THE IMPACT OF THE VIETNAM WAR ON ITS ENVIRONMENT
The use of chemicals like Napalm and Agent Orange destroyed the natural vegetation of
Vietnam. In 1969 alone, 1, 034 300 hectare of forest was destroyed by using “Agent
Orange”. Agent Blue was sprayed on crops in an effort to deprive the North of its food
supply. Between 1962 and 1969 about 688 000 acres of Agriculture land was sprayed-
primarily on paddy fields.
 Chemicals also intoxicated water bodies such as rivers, (Formation of algae bloom in
rivers)
 It reduced food production as the land became unfertile/fruitless as a result of
intoxication of chemicals used in the War. It made the Country dependent on foreign Aid
as Vietnam experienced drought for almost 40 years.
 Chemicals also destroyed living organisms in the forest e.g. wild animals, insects and
the forest as well as some parts of it did not return to its former state till this day.
 Chemicals used remained in the Vietnam soil for many years, it led to physical disability
among the inhabitants of Vietnam.
5.1.5 UNITED NATIONS ORGANISATION

DESCRIBE HOW THE ORGANISATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (UN) HAS HINDERED
ITS EFFECTIVENESS
FORMATION OF UNITED NATIONS
 The League of Nations was created after World War I to keep world peace, failed
in its main objective. Before the USA entered World War II, British Prime Minister

Winston Churchill and United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued a
joint declaration in August 1941 that became known as the Atlantic Charter. It
was a statement on how to maintain the rights of nations and international
relations after the war ended.
 On 1 January 1942, 26 Allied nations adopted the principles stated in the Atlantic
Charter, and promised that they would work together to preserve human rights
and justice. Their statement was called the Declaration by the United Nations. It
paved the way for a new international organization to replace the League of
Nations. On 24 October 1945, the United Nations Organization was created. We
will now look at the Charter of the UN to find out its aims and how it is organized.
THE AIMS OF THE UNITED NATIONS

1. To keep world peace.
 It refers incidents of conflict to the Security Council.
 It imposes sanction against aggressors.
 It sends UN armed forces to assist the victims in a conflict.
2. To grant countries their independence

 The International Court of Justice investigates the legality of all requests for
independence.
 It passes resolutions to guide independence processes.
3. To uphold human rights
 Any country or person has the right to bring cases of the violation of human rights
to the attention of the UN.
 After investigation, guilty parties can be ordered to appear in the UN’s Human
Rights Court.
4. To promote economic, social and scientific progress
 Governments can request experts to be sent to provide support for economic,
social and scientific development.
The organization (structure) of the United Nations (UN)

1. General Assembly (GA)
2. Security Council (SC)
3. Trusteeship Council (TC)
4. Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
5. International Court of ustice (ICJ)
6. Secretariat
THE AGENCIES OF THE ECOSOC

1. International Labour Organization (ILO)
2. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
3. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

4. World Health Organization (WHO)
5. The World Bank
THE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

1. GENERAL ASSEMBLY
 All member countries have a representative.
 Each nation has one vote.
 It meets every September in New York.
 It discusses a variety of international problems.
 It makes recommendations on how to deal with issues.
2. SECURITY COUNCIL
 It has 15 members:
o Five permanent (the USA, Britain, France, Russia and China)
o 10 non-permanent, elected from any nation for two years.
 All five permanent members of the SC must be in agreement before action can
be taken (they each have the right of veto that allows them to stop a proposed
decision that they do not like).
 The SC maintains peace and security in the world.
 It can order economic sanctions or military action against aggressors.
3. TRUSTEESHIP COUNCIL
 It replaced the League of Nations’ Mandates Commission.
 It governs and leads mandate countries (now called the Trust Territories) to
independence.
 By 1970 most mandates had gained their independence except for Namibia.
4. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL (ECOSOC)

 It has 54 members.
 Members are elected by the General Assembly.
 The ECOSOC works to improve economic and social conditions in the world.
 It protects human rights all over the world.
 It coordinates the work of specialized agencies.
5. INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE (ICJ)

 It is based at the Peace Palace in Hague (the Netherlands)
 It consists of 15 judges.
 Each judge is from a different country.
 Each judge serves for nine years.
 The ICJ makes decisions on legal disputes.
 Its decisions are based on a majority vote.
6. SECRETARIAT
 It is responsible for the administrative work of the UN.
 It opens the whole year.
 It has a Secretary-General as its head who is:

o Appointed for five years
o Usually comes from a country that is not one of the superpowers
o Is the spokesperson for the UN
o Represents the UN all over the world.
THE AGENCIES OF THE ECOSOC AND THEIR WORK

1. International Labour Organization (ILO)
 It aims to improve working conditions round the world.
 It sets maximum working hours and minimum wages.
 It provides resources to develop working abilities.
 It investigates unemployment.
2. United Nations High Commissioner For Refugees (UNHCR)

 The office of the UNHCR helped to resettle refugees after World War II.
 It helps provide long-term solutions to refugee problems.
 It provides humanitarian aid and protection for refugees.
3. Food And Agriculture Organization (FAO)

 Helps eliminate hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition.
 Makes agriculture, forestry and fisheries more productive and sustainable.
 Works to reduce rural poverty.
 Enables inclusive and efficient agricultural and food systems.
 Works to increase the resilience of livelihoods threats and crises.
4. World Health Organization (WHO)

 It aims to improve health standards throughout the world.
 It campaigns to wipe out diseases such as cholera, malaria, HIV and AIDS.
 It provides financial assistance and advice to countries to improve the health of
their populations.
 It puts pressure on governments to supply their citizens with clean drinking water,
safe sanitation facilities, immunization against diseases and so on as part of
basic human rights.
5. The World Bank

 It provided money to rebuild Europe after World War II.
 It lends money to help the economic development of member states.
 It provides expert advice on development projects to Member states.
6. More Specialized Agencies Of The UN

 UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
 UNICEF, the United Nations Children’s Fund
 UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees.
Issues that have hindered the effectiveness of the UN:

 The General Assembly’s resolutions are not legally binding. This means that it can only
recommend or advice member countries to adopt its resolutions. It does not have the
power force members to implement these resolutions.
 For the UN to take action regarding a conflict, all five permanent members of the
Security Council have to vote in favour of the proposal. Superpowers who do not want to
cooperate with each other often misuse their right of veto to defeat one another. (This
was particularly the case between the USA and the USSR during Cold War period, when
these two countries often supported opposition sides in a conflict).
REASONS WHY THE UN STRUGGLES TO IMPLEMENT ITS DECISIONS

1. Lack of a permanent army
 As in the case of the League of Nations, the UN does not have a permanent
army. It therefore has to rely on member countries to provide troops to enforce its
decisions. This makes it difficult to react against powerful states.
2. Shortage of funds
 The UN depends on member contributions to finance all the work it does.
Sometimes states refuse to give their share of contributions, especially when
they disagree on some of the activities on the UN. It also happens that member
states withhold their contributions in order to influence the UN to do something
they want.
3. No clear rules on when to get involved in conflicts
 There are no rules that states clearly when exactly the UN should get involved
during a conflict. Very often it intervenes too late so that the problem becomes
much more difficult to solve. This is usually the case when the superpowers
exercise their right to veto.
The implications of the growth of membership

When UN was formed in 1945 it only had 51 members, during 1960s former colonies that
gained their independence also joined the UN. In 2017 UN had 193 members’ states. In 1945
there were only 4 countries from Africa and 12 from Asia. Today the developing holds the
majority of the seats in the General Assembly (GA). This means that the UN has become a
voice for smaller and weaker countries. It is increasing difficult for the stronger countries like
USA and the USSR to get their resolutions passed by the General Assembly. This has led to
conflicts amongst the member states as western European Countries often feel that the General
Assembly is being used to carry out the political aims of the developing countries and has
therefore become ineffective.
Admission of developing Countries in UN (China)

Founding members of UN
Permanent member since 1945
UN’s Involvement in the Korean War (1950-1953)
The UN was effective to a certain extent The UN was ineffective to a certain extent
1. The UN was effective in the in the 1. General MacArthur, who commanded
sense that it did react to the crisis. the UN forces, did not report to the

UN, but to the USA.
2. The UN managed to convince 2. The UN allowed Truman to give
member states to provide soldiers to MacArthur permission to invade North
form a combined armed force for the Korea’s territory. This was an act of
UN, since the UN does not have its aggression.
own army.
3. The UN managed to drive the 3. The fact that the UN forces crossed
aggressor, North Korea, out of South the 38th parallel caused the outbreak
Korea. of a superpower war between the
USA and China, which prolonged the
Korean War for several years and
caused millions of casualties.
4. The actions of the UN in the Korea 4. The fact that Korea is still divided
War indicated to the world that the UN indicates that the UN was not able to
is willing to react against aggressors achieve its aim of uniting the two
to achieve its aim as a peacekeeping zones into one country.
body.
The UN’s Involvement in the Congo (1960-1964)
The UN was effective to a certain extent The UN was ineffective to a certain extent
1. The UN was willing to send an armed 1. The UN should have had plans in
force to restore peace in the Congo place to support the independent
when the civil war broke out after government when Belgium
independence. announced it would withdraw from
Congo within six months in 1960.
2. Katanga province was returned to the 2. Although the costs involved in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo crisis were enormous, the UN should
with the assistance of the UN. have left a small armed force in the
country to ensure stability after the
main UN forces withdrew.
3. The presence of the UN troops 3. The fact that the DRC is still
brought the civil war to an end. experiencing uprisings and civil war
indicates that the UN has failed to
assist the Congo in laying the
foundations for establishing a stable
democratic government.
United Nations’ effectiveness in human rights issues
The United Nations has a Human Rights Commission that works to ensure that all governments
obey the 30 Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).
The UN proclaims that these basic human rights are universally protected. The UN works
through several agencies, such as the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
(OHCHR) and the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), to provide support and
advice to governments. These agencies encourage governments to develop policies to apply

human rights standards in their countries. They also report on progress made and evaluate
human rights conditions in countries around the world.
Basic Human Rights
 We all have the right to be free from slavery, torture and racial discrimination.
 We all have the right to move freely in our country of residence.
 We all have the right to have access to a good standard of living in order to experience
good health.
 We all the right to express ourselves freely.
 We all have the right to own property and participate in elections.
Children’s Right
 All children have the right to free education.

 All children have the right to be protected from any type of discrimination.
 All children have the right to adequate food and medical care.
THEME: Namibia 1915-2000 and South Africa 1948-1994
Namibia under South African occupation 1915-1990
Background
The occupation of Namibia by South Africa in 1915

 In 1914 WWI started in Europe and all the European countries drew their colonies into
the war.
 South Africa being a colony of Britain entered the war on the side of the allied powers.
 Namibia was a German colony, which means that South Africa and Namibia became
enemies when the war broke out.
 In 1915 the South African force under the command of General Louis Botha, entered
Namibia to fight the Germans.
 In July 1915 the German troops in Namibia surrendered and German colonial rule in
Namibia came to an end.
 South Africa governed Namibia on behalf of Britain from 1915.
 When the war ended in 1918, German and her allies were defeated by the allied powers.
 At the treaty of Versailles they decided to take away German colonies including Namibia
were placed under control of the League of Nations.

 In 1920 the League of Nations gave Namibia to South Africa to be governed as a
mandatedterritory under Mandates Commission.
DESCRIBE THE MANDATE SYSTEM WITH REFERENCE TO NAMIBIA
Namibia and the mandate system

Mandate is the authority given to a country to administer on behalf of the League of Nations
Mandate Territories are countries that were taken away from Germany after WWI and where
placed under control of another country.
The mandates were classified according to their development. Mandates were put as A,
B and C depending on their readiness of independence. Mandate ‘A” Countries that
were ready for immediate Independence, mandate B not well developed but could reach
independence in the near future and the “C” mandate were countries classified that they
would not receive their independence in the near future, since they were believed not
ready to rule themselves. Namibia was classified as a “C” mandate and was given
officially to Britain in 1920 by the League of Nations. Britain then requested South Africa
to govern Namibia on her behalf.
Terms of the Mandate system

South Africa was required to do the following by the League of Nations
 To prepare Namibia for independence
 To promote material and moral well-being of the Namibian people (meaning
South Africa would govern Namibia to the advantage of the Namibian people
 South Africa was expected to develop Namibia
 South Africa was expected to abolish the slave trade in Namibia
 South Africa had full control in terms of Administration and law-making
 South Africa was expected to submit an annual progressive report to the League
of Nations , the report has to state how South Africa was carrying its mandate
DISCUSS THE CONFISCATION OF LAND AND CATTLE BY SOUTH AFRICANS
Many Boers (Whites) started to occupy Namibia as soon as German troops were defeated.
Many Germans left the country because they did not want to be under South African
Administration. South African government occupied the land that belonged to the Germans
instead of returning it to the rightful owners (Namibians).The South African continued with the
reserve system which was introduced by the Germans. Good farming land and land with
minerals wealth was taken by whites South Africans. Blacks (Namibians) were forced to go live
into reserves where they were overcrowded and their land covered only 13% of the total area
meaning Namibians could not farm in their traditional way. In addition the land reserved for
blacks was dry and barrenand this resulted in blacks not to have enough grazing land for the
cattle.South Africans continued to confiscate the cattle that belonged to the Namibian Blacks
and therefore Namibians suffered as a result of losing their cattle because they solely depended
on them for milk, meat and transport. The South Africans wanted full control over the area once

the land and cattle belongs to them they could subject the indigenous people to accept their rule
and to separate blacks from the whites.
DISCUSS THE NATURE OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS CONTROL OVER NAMIBIA
Although Namibia was supervised by the permanent mandate commission of the League of
Nations.This body had no real knowledge about the situation in Namibia or any of the other
mandates, because they relied on the reports which were sent to them by the South Africa. The
league did not have any powers to enforce its will on the ruling countries. At some point J C
Smuts, the South African prime minister wanted to incorporate (Annex) Namibia and make it
part of South Africa as its 5th province. In 1948 South Africa stopped to send the annual
progressive report to the League of Nations, when the National Party (NP) won the election
under Dr D.F Malan
EVALUATE THE EXTENT TO WHICH SOUTH AFRICA CARRIED OUT THE MANDATE
 It was the South Africa’s intention to incorporate Namibia into South Africa.
 So the South African government started to implement all their apartheid laws in
Namibia.
 Therefore South Africa did not fulfil its obligation of governing Namibia to the advantage
of the Namibian people, because only whites benefited from these laws and the wealth
of the country.
 The slave trade was replaced with the contract labour system which exploited the
Namibian people and resources to benefit whites.
 In years later South Africa stopped to submit the annual report to the League of Nations.
 Preparing Namibia for independence did not happen at all; actually South Africa
indicated that they wanted to make Namibia their 5th province.
 South Africa developed Namibia as stated by the League of Nations, they upgraded the
roads, built infrastructure, opened mines all this benefited the Namibian people in some
way.
DISCUSS THE NATURE OF UNITED NATIONS (UN) CONTROL OVER NAMIBIA AFTER
WWII
The UN replaced the League of Nations in 1945.The UN formed the trusteeship council for the
mandate territories which replaced the mandate commission of the League of Nations. South
Africa retains (kept) control of Namibia after WWII, because they were allowed to continue its
administration of Namibia. South Africa now had to submit the annual reports to the trusteeship
council of the UN. South Africa continued with its plan to make Namibia their 5th province and
they held a referendum in which the Namibian people did not take part.

EXPLAIN WHY SOUTH AFRICA REJECTED UNITED NATIONS (UN) CONTROL OVER
NAMIBIA
The conflict between South Africa (SA) and United Nations (UN) over Namibia
 South Africa refused to recognise the UN as a successor of the League of
Nations.Therefore South Africa refused to submit the annual report to the trusteeship
council of the UN, claiming that the mandate was given to them by the League of
Nations and not by the UN.
UN tried to stop South African rule over Namibia by passing resolutions, but all these
resolutions were unsuccessful in stopping South Africa from administering Namibia
 In 1966, the international court of justice (I.C.J) failed to decide that South African’s
administration over Namibia was illegal
 In 1967 the UN unsuccessfully tried to take over administration of Namibia, South Africa
refused in all these attempts to surrender Namibia
 This made South Africa to want to annex Namibia, but the UN refused to this proposal
 In 1971 the I.C.J ruled that South Africa was illegal in Namibia, South Africa did not
follow the court ruling, instead they ignored it and continued to administer Namibia
 In 1976 the UN passed resolution 385 which stated that there should be free and fair
election in Namibia, to be supervised by the UN, instead the election were held under
the supervision of South Africa and SWAPO did not participate in these election, also the
UN was not invited to supervise, therefore the election were nullified
 In 1978 the UN again passed another resolution called 435, which called for free and fair
election under the UN supervision
The resolutions 435 terms (Aims) were:
 Cease-fire agreement between SADF and SWAPO PLAN fighters
 South Africa to reduce their troops from Namibia
 Free and fair election
 Election to be supervised by the UN
 This resolution 435 was delayed for a period of 10 years, it was only implemented in
1989
 WHY?
South Africa demanded that:
 Withdrawal of the Cuban troops from Angola
 The inclusion of Walvis Bay in an independent Namibia
 The size of the UN task-force
 The date of the election which was too near
Reasons why South Africa refused UN control over Namibia

 South African wanted to continue exploiting the Namibian people and their resources for
their own benefits
 South African did not recognise the UN’s right over Namibia, because the mandate was
given to her by the league of nations which was no longer in existence

 South Africa was not willing to recognise SWAPO as a true representatives of the
Namibian people (they described SWAPO as terrorists)
 South Africa wanted to annex (make part off) Namibia as their fifth province
 South Africans claimed that local chiefs in Namibia supported the idea of Namibia
becoming part of South Africa.
 South Africa refused to leave Namibia because it was supported by the USA and Britain.
EXPLAIN HOW SOUTH AFRICA TRIED TO ANNEX NAMIBIA
South Africa gave white Namibians the right to vote for representatives in the South African
parliament, because it knew there was a great deal of support for the National party amongst
white Namibians.
The South African government also convinced some local chiefs to sign a document in which
they declared that they wanted Namibia to become part of South Africa.
When apartheid was introduced in 1948, South Africa introduced the same apartheid laws in
Namibia.
EXPLAIN WHY SOUTH AFRICA TRIED TO ANNEX NAMIBIA
SA saw Namibia as a fertile ground for white settlement to be divided to poor white farmers
(Boers), because Namibian offered valuable agricultural land for white commercial farmers.
These farmers supported the national Party.
They wanted the mineral resources, because Namibia became an important exporter of
Diamond copper, beef, fish and other commodities which South Africans wanted to benefit from.
SA claimed that all traditional leaders of Namibia were in support of the idea to become part of
South Africa
SA claimed that, Namibians had representatives in the SA parliament
South Africa wanted Namibia to become the 5th province of South Africa
EVALUATE THE UN EFFORTS TO GAIN CONTROL OVER NAMIBIA
 From 1945, the UN came up with different ways to force SA to give up control over
Namibia, but all these efforts failed.
 In 1949 the General Assembly of the UN asked the ICJ to determine if South Africa was
legally obliged to hand over Namibia to the trusteeship council of the UN, which was the
successor of the mandate commission of the league of Nation. The ICJ ruled that the UN
had legally taken the functions of the League of Nations and that South Africa should
continue to submit annual reports and had no right to change the status of Namibia. But
South Africa ignored the ruling.
 1966 the General Assembly decided to end the mandate and withdraw South Africa’s
right to administer Namibia, bringing the territory under the direct supervision of the UN
but South Africa refused to adhere to the UN’s demands to withdraw from Namibia or
accept UN control over Namibia.
 In 1967 the UN council was set up to take control of Namibia, but failed again

 UN council asked the UN members to give economic sanctions on SA until such time
that SA hand over control of Namibia
 UN asked the I.C.J whether SA still had the rights to control Namibia, but even this
couldn’t make SA to give up control of Namibia
 1971 UN reversed its decision of 1966
 In January 1976, the UN Passed resolution 385 calling for free and fair election to be
supervised by the UN, but SA refused to follow the resolution
 The WESTERN CONTACT GROUP were given the permission by the UN to convince
SA to leave Namibia, but SA still could not give up
 SA only allowed the implementation of the UN resolution 435 in 1989
 Namibia got her independence in 1990
Apartheid
 Apartheid is an Afrikaans word meaning separateness/segregation
 This was a political system introduced by the National party (NP) of South Africa from
1948 by Dr D.F Malan
 This was a policy which separated black and whites in all aspects of life. E.g. education,
residential areas, recreations, sports
 Different laws were introduced to ensure that whites enjoyed the privileges and to keep
blacks inferior
EXPLAIN WHY SOUTH AFRICA ENFORCED APARTHEID oN NAMIBIA?
They wanted to use the natural resources to their advantages; with the application of
Apartheid black Namibians would be pushed into reserves where as white would remain in the
urban areas and controlling the fertile land and the land which was rich in natural resources.
The natural resources can be used to develop their country.
They wanted to divide black people to make it easier to control them: Whites feared blacks
being the majority in Namibia would join forces in resisting the white minority government then
they will eventually take over the government. Apartheid would make blacks leave in separate
ethnic groups thus making it difficult for them to work together in resisting the white government.
The main idea behind apartheid was to promote Afrikaner racial purity. They wanted to
keep the white race pure and not mixed with other races.
They wanted white people to benefit because they believed they were superior to black
people.
To prevent competition between whites and black
They did not want blacks to participate in the government of the country
EXPLAIN HOW SA ENFORCED APARTHEID ON NAMIBIA
South Africa enforced apartheid inside South Africa in three ways namely:
1. Through apartheid laws

2. Through the extension of homeland policy
3. Through the continuation of the Contract labour System
1. Through Apartheid laws

They introduced laws that separated blacks and whites, all apartheid laws separated the
blacks from white in all spheres of life,From education to Work, social life and residence
to the economic status. These laws disadvantaged blacks and made whites to enjoy all
the privileges.
Laws that were introduced are as follow:
 Pass law/native abolition of passes act

Every black person had to carry a pass identity where ever they went every time. The
pass should be shown to any police officer, soldier or any white person upon request or
demand. Anyone without a pass could be jailed or fined. The purpose of pass law was to
control the movements of black people. The passbook has to contain the photograph,
address, the authority’s permission to be in a particular area, the monthly signature of
his/her employer and other details.
 Bantu Education Act 1953

This Act provided a separate education system for the Africans ran by the government’s
native affairs department rather than by the education department which ran white
educations.Pupils at black schools no longer studied the same syllabus as their white
peers. Blacks and Whites could not share the same school. Education offered to black
schools was of poor quality compared to the white schools. Resources for black were
not enough Classrooms were of poor quality. Less money was spent on black pupils. It
provided African children with the basic knowledge needed by unskilled manual workers,
andto brainwash African children into accepting an inferior position in the society.
 Separate Amenities Act 1953.

This law separated public facilities, whereby blacks could not share any area with
whites. There was a division of public services and spaces according to race. Black
people could not use the same shops, beaches, toilets, swimming pools and buses as
whites. Public places like banks and post offices had separate entries. The standard of
services were also not same for blacks and whites
 Group area act 1950

Made provision for separate residential areas for each race, black People were forced to
relocate to other places and people lost their properties in the process. This destroyed
the spirit of nationalism as people could no longer unite. Town and cities were divided
into area each reserved for one race only.
 Population Registration Act 1950

Classified every individual according to race, race was classified by a number. Defined
which race every person belonged to e.g. white or black. It made it easier for the
government to decide who had to stay where and to have control of all the people. It
could determine work they could do. This law had an impact on the people whose racial
identity was not clear. Families could suddenly find themselves divided. Parents who
were classified as Africans might be told that their children had been classified as
coloureds.
 Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act 1949

Made the marriage between people of different races illegal e.g. a black person could
not marry a white person. This was aimed at keeping the white race pure. It was a
punishable offence by the law.
 Immorality Act 1950

Made sexual relation between different races illegale.g. no sexual relation or sexual
contact between whites and black. Police could raid houses and broke into bedrooms
and to photograph couples breaking the law.
2. The extention of the Homeland Policy
This policy made it easier for the South African government to control the blacks. Whites feared
blacks being the majority in Namibia would join forces in resisting the white minority government
then they will eventually take over the government. Apartheid would make blacks leave in
separate ethnic groups thus making it difficult for them to work together in resisting the white
government.
OdendaalCommision/plan 1964
As Apartheid evolved into separate development in South Africa, the new approach was applied
in South West Africa too. In 1962, the South African government under H.F Verwoed (SA Prime
Minister) sent a commission to Namibia. The commission was led by H.F Odendaal
administrator of Transvaal at that time. The commission came to investigate the economic,
social, and political situation of Namibia. With the criticism of Apartheid mounting in the UN,
South Africa hoped to present the homeland system as the process of internal decolonization
this will enable South Africa to maintain full control of its mineral wealth and agriculture in the
long term. In 1964 the commission finalised their investigations and passed recommendations.
The recommendations became to be known as the Odendaal plan.
Political recommendations made by the Odendaal plan

 The country to be divided into 10 homelands for various ethnic groups;
 The homelands should cover only 40% of the total area of the country.
 Certain areas to be set aside as government properties e.g. Etosha National
park.
 Whites were to be allowed to own properties in the economic heartland of the
country.
 Provision was to be made for creation of self-governing authority in each ethnic
homeland.

Economic recommendations
 The Kunene hydro-electric scheme was to be established to provide electricity in

the Northern part of Namibia.
 A canal to be built from Ruacana to supply water in Ovamboland.
 Gravel roads were to be upgraded and other main roads connecting towns to be
tarred.
 Mines to be opened in Tsumeb and Orangemund.

 The Bantu-Investment Corporation (BIC) to be established which would provide
financial assistance to small businesses and small farmers.
 Schools and black teachers training centres should be built e.g. Augustinium in
Windhoek and Ongwendiva Teachers Training College
 Nurses Training Centres and Windhoek State Hospital should be built.
Criticism of the Odendaal plan
 Coloured people were not allocated their own area.

 White people receive the best farmland in Namibia.
 The homelands were too small for all the people and animals that were forced
into the areas.
 The homelands were often barren and not suitable for farming.
 30% of black people were moved off their land and resettled, which had the
major impacts on their lives.
 Mining areas were controlled by white people and they were the only ones who
benefited from mining.
3. Contract Labour System

This was introduced so that blacks will remain inferior, and not to be able to compete
with the whites in the job market and remain cheap labourers.
Why was the contract labour system introduced in Namibia?
 To build the country’s infrastructure e.g. Roads and railway line

 The indigenous people to provide unskilled and manual labour
 They wanted to obtain cheap labour to develop the country.
 To exploit Namibia and their resources
Effects of the contract labour system on the Namibians
 Men were recruited through their health and physical strength.

 Their contract lasted from 9-18 months, meaning there was no physical contact
with their families.
 Wages were very low.
 Working conditions were very poor and dangerous.
 They were kept in compounds/hostel where there was no privacy and
overcrowded.
 Men did not send money home as workers were paid low wages.
 Workers were not allowed to bring their families along with them to their work
places.
 This caused estrangement and family breakdown.
 Marriages broke down.
 Children grew without their fathers.
 Men were lonely and homesick therefore turned for comfort to local women.

 Women were left with the burden to take care of the children and take care of
things that were supposed to be done by men.
DISCUSS THE SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL IMPACT OF THE APARTHEID ON

THE NAMIBIAN SOCIETY
Economic impacts
 Whites benefited most from the resources while blacks got little, this made the whites
rich than the blacks.
 Namibian’s economy became dependent on SA, because her natural resources were
used to develop SA industries.
 Namibians remained poor because good farming land was in the hands of the whites
they were resettled on land that was too small for all their cattle they had to sell their
animals and some died of hunger which caused poverty. Without land and animals,
black people were forced to work for white people for low wages.
 Poor education ensured that black people could not occupy high paying jobs this
resulted in them being inferior position and the living standard remained poor.
Social impact
 The division of Namibia into homelands encouraged hatred of another ethnic groups
and this became difficult to remove even after independence.
 New townships (locations) such as Katutura were established for blacks to keep
them away from whites townships and blacks were moved into these townships by
force.
 Blacks in Katutura were further divided into ethnic location e.g. Damara location,
Herero location, ovambo location, Nama location etc
 The land given to blacks covered only 40% and was dry and infertile and they could
not farm in their traditional ways.
 Blacks suffered racial discrimination which at times ended into deaths of innocent
people as young men were taking away from their families during contract labour
system this resulted into families being broken down.
 Blacks were been beaten and sometimes shot by the police for protesting or for no
reason.
 Blacks could not be given equal education as for whites and their education was very
poor which kept them unskilled and semi-skilled.
 Blacks were not allowed to use the same public facilities with the whites.
Political Impacts
 Black people were not allowed to vote in their own country. Without the right to vote the
blacks had no say in the government matters or how wealth of the country was
distributed.
 Black people did not have any platform to raise concerns on decisions that impacted on
their lives.

EVALUATE THE SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL IMPACT OF THE APARTHEID ON
THE NAMIBIAN SOCIETY AND WITH REFERENCE TO THE VIOLATION OF INDIVIDUALS
RIGHTS
The impact of apartheid on Namibians with regards to human rights
 During the apartheid, human rights of black people were violated because they were not
allowed to vote in the elections.
 Apartheid violated people’s right of movement with the pass law. People had to carry
passbooks and if they do not have passbooks they could not move. The pass book also
restricted them to certain areas only.
 Through the Group Area Act and Homeland Policy, apartheid violated people’s right to
settle in any part of Namibia of their choice. They were forcibly removed time and again.
 The right to quality education was violated by the Bandu Education act. The act made
sure that the Education for blacks was inferior to that of the whites, teachers’ were under
qualified, schools were underfunded and resources were not enough.
 The shooting, beating, torturing of people during the apartheid violated people’s right of
dignity and right to life.
 Apartheid violated people’s freedom of expression, freedom of association etc.
EVALUATE THE EFFECT OF DIVISION OF THE NAMIBIAN SOCIETY INTO DIFFERENT

GROUPS.
Housing
The Housing for Migrant (contract) workers in towns and cities often consisted of non-
permanent structures let to the development of slum conditions.
Workers were housed in the permanent structures called the compounds which were
overcrowded and uncomfortable and encourage the spread of diseases. Even though the
structures were permanent they could not bring their families.
Employment
Namibians were forced to become contract workers since they had lost their land and cattle.
Local chiefs also received money for each contract worker and therefore they put pressure on
young men to become contract labourers.
Education
Black education was poor aimed at keeping Namibians unskilled and semi-skilled to ensure
contract labourers for the future.
The schools and resources provided in black education system were not th same as those
provided to the white.
Political Impacts

The South African government followed the policy of divide and rule in Namibia this means that
it deliberately kept Namibians apart from one another to make it difficult to unite in resisting
South African rule. It made the people aware of belonging in separate groups rather than being
a single nation. The homeland policy ensured that people from different ethnic groups did not
meet in order to organised national resistance against foreign rule.
THE STRUGGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE AND ITS CONSEQUENCES1915-2000
Describe the formation of Nationalist movements
Nationalist Movements: These were political organisations formed to fight for freedom and
independence of Namibia.
1. The Herero Chief’s Council (HCC)

 It was the earliest Nationalist Movement in Namibia formed in 1945 by the Herero chiefs.
 Chief Hosea Kutako became its leader
Aims of the Herero Chiefs Council
 To protect the interest of the Herero people.

 To fight for the rights of the Herero
 To win back the land of the Herero people which was taken by the whites
2. Ovambo People’s Congress (OPC)

 It was formed in 1957 by the contract labourers who went to work in South Africa
 AndimbaToivoyaToivo became its leader
Aims of OPC
 To improve the living and working conditions of the contract workers
 To abolish the contract labour system
3. Ovamboland people’s organisation (OPO)

 It was a name change from OPC to OPO in 1958
 Sam Nujoma became its leader in 1959
Aims of OPO

 To improve the living and working conditions of contract workers
 To bring Namibia under the direct control of the UN
 To win the independence of Namibia
4. South West Africa National Union (SWANU)

 It was formed in 1959, by SWAPA and the Herero Chiefs Council members
Aims of SWANU
 To unite all south west African people in the struggle for independence
5. South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO)
 It was a name change from OPO to SWAPO in 19 April 1960

 Sam Nujoma became the leader of SWAPO
Why did they change the name from OPO to SWAPO?

 OPO was too exclusive, because of its name which was perceived to be representing
the Ovambo people only
 For the movement to have credibility in the eyes of the international organisation like the
UN and OAU
Aims of SWAPO
 To fight for the rights of all black Namibians

 To fight for the independence of Namibia
6. Caprivi African National Union (CANU)
 it was formed in 1964, by Brendan Simbwaye and MishakeMuyongo
Aims of CANU
 to end SA rule in Caprivi

 it want the UN to force SA out of Caprivi
7. Damara Tribal Council (DTC)
 Was formed in 1971, by a group of Damara speaking people, later it changed its
name to UDF (United Democratic Front of Namibia)
 First president was Justus //Garoeb.
Aims of DTC
 To fight for the independence of Damara people
8. National Unity Democratic organisation (NUDO)

 It was formed in 1964, by Hosea Kutako and Clemens Kapuuo
Aims of NUDO
 Wanted the equality for all South west African people

 To fight for independence for Namibia
 To end apartheid
Discussthe various forms ofresistance e.g labour Unions, independent

churches,preasure groups, (external and internal),armed struggle etc.
1. Chief Hosea Kutako

 He founded the Herero chiefs council and he became the leader
 He was the first Namibian leader to express the idea of an independent Namibia (he is
the father of Namibian nationalism)
 Through the Herero chief council , Kutako wrote a petition to the UN calling for South
West Africa to be placed under the direct control of the UN instead of South Africa
 The petition was sent to the UN through the help of reverend Michael Scott
 In 1959, Hosea Kutako supported the formation of SWANU
 After the Windhoek massacre of 1959, Kutako helped Sam Nujoma to leave the country
via Botswana
 Kutako encouraged many young Namibians to go into exile
 He rejected the South African referendum that was organised by South Africa to try to
annex Namibia and make it their 5th province
 He helped young Namibians to go study abroad e.g.in SA
 He rejected the odendaal plan of 1964 that divided the country into homelands
2. Labour Unions
The contract labour system was the motivation behind the formation of the earliest
resistance movements. In 1948 the first resistance against the contract labour system
appeared when 2000 Ovambo workers went on strike in Tsumeb after the killing of a
black worker by a white foreman. After that the resistance by Labour Union increased
steadily until independence.
The trade Unions organised large strikes to demand the improvement of the working
conditions and wages for the workers. South African government banned all labour
unions and no labour unions were allowed to be formed during the contract labour
system. Although there was a ban smaller localised strikes till occurred from time to
time. After the general strike of 1971 which was supported by the churches, trade Union
emerged again.
Why were independent churches formed?
 Mission churches were dominated by whites

 Mission churches did not take African value and needs into account
 Mission churches taught obedience to colonial authorities
 Mission churches did not allowed blacks pastors and priests to occupy the position of
responsibility
 Namibian people learnt how to read and write, therefore they learnt Christian massages
of justice and equality

Independent churches
 African Methodist episcopal church (AMEC) led by HendrickWitbooi
 Oruuano (Unity) led by chief Hosea Kutako
 Evangelical Lutheran ovambo-kavango church (ELOC) led by Bishop Leonard Auala
 Evangelical Lutheran church (ELC) led by Paulus //Gowaseb
The Role of churches in the resistance against South Africa
What was the role of churches towards the liberation struggle?
 Churches worked hard to make blacks aware of their rights

 Churches called for better education
 Church leaders confronted the SA authorities on issues of apartheid
 Churches questioned the SA government’s right to rule Namibia
 Churches helped the blacks to develop the sense of worthiness
 Churches became more responsible to the needs of blacks
The ELOC referendum

What is meant by ELOC referendum?
 it was a questionnaire that was sent to the ELOC churches in Namibia to find out if
people of SWA were supporting SA rule or Not
Aims of the ELOC referendum

 to give Namibian people an opportunity to say whether they were for or against
SA rule
 Auala saw this as an opportunity to let the whole world know about the feelings of
the Namibian against SA
Why did SA prime minister John Voster agree to the referendum
 He thought that churches would influence its members to vote for SA

 He felt that the referendum would give SA a chance to continue administering Namibia
 He thought the referendum will influence the UN to consider SA government the right to
administer Namibia
The outcome of the ELOC referendum

 The outcome was overwhelming, it showed that Namibians were against the SA rule
The open letter

 It was a letter written by Bishop Leonard Auala and Paulus Gowaseb to the SA prime
minister John Voster
 The letter contained the outcome of the ELOC referendum

 It also criticised SA rule that:
 non-whites were being intimidated
 non-whites were denied the right of movement
 the abolishment of the contract labour system
 SA government made it impossible for the political parties to work together
The Pastoral letter
 This was a letter that was written by Bishop Leonard Auala to all the ELOC
congregations
 In the letter he called for all congregations to strongly oppose SA rule and their policies
and indicate their interest to stay behind its citizens
 The letter received the strong support from the Anglican churches and Catholic churches
 With the Anglican Bishop Colin Winter openly criticising the apartheid laws as
unacceptable before God
The General strike 1971-1972
 The open latter inspired contract workers, so they organised a major strike
 During the strike workers demanded:
 The abolishment of the contract labour system
 Freedom to choose the place and type of employment
 Better wages
 Permission to bring their families along to their work places
 Almost 10 000 workers went on strike
 The strike covered 21 towns and 11 mines
 Companies closed down and the economy was affected
 In rural areas (farms) there was a wave of unrest
The state of emergency
 this was the response of SA government to the general strike of 1971-1972
 to keep the situation under control measures were put in place
 measures of the state of emergency were:
 gathering of more than 5 people was not allowed
 detention without trials was allowed
 freedom of political organisation and expression were limited
Results of the state of general strike
Positive results
 the SA government started to negotiate with contract workers and they agreed to:
 improve the working condition
 wages increased
 workers gained more rights
SA attempts to repress the churches

 in response to complaints by churches over SA administration
 SA government took the following measures:
 SA government expelled the Anglican Bishop Colin Winter for supporting the
strike
 Movement of church leaders were restricted
 Church leaders were refused visa and permits to travel abroad
 Clergy from other countries were prevented from visiting their fellow Christians in
Namibia
 The printing press of the ELOC at Oniipa in ovamboland was destroyed by
bombs in 1973, whereby the building, equipment’s (machines) as well as school
book and bibles were destroyed.
The Windhoek Massacre 1959
 As part of the apartheid policy, Group Area Actof 1950 ordered the creation of separate
residential areas for different ethnic groups. When the policy was applied to Windhoek
people were forced to move from the old location to Katutura.
 In 1959 OPO and SWANU organised a resistance against the forced removal of
Namibians from the old location to Katutura in Windhoek
 the resistance failed, but it was clear indication of how Namibian people were committed
and determined to fight for their independence
Causes of the Windhoek Massacre

 The massacre was caused by the segregation policy of the SA’s Group Area Act of 1950
which was to separate the residential areas of blacks and whites, therefore the white SA
government wanted to make the old location to be for white residential area.
 In 1959, the municipality of Windhoek decided to remove all blacks out of the old
location to Katuturabut black residents of old location refused to move to Katutura
Why did people refuse to move from the Old location to Katutura?
 They had lived in the old location for many years

 Their homes and gardens were built there in Old location
 Katutura was far from the city centre and this means they had to travel long
distances to and from work
 In katutura they had to pay rent for houses which were owned by the municipality
while in the old location they stayed there for freein their own houses.
 Their forefathers were buried in the old location cemetery
 Stress of ethnic division in katutura e.g. Damara location, Nama location,
Ovambo location, Herero location etc

Course (Development) / What happened?
 On 9 December 1959, women of old location marched to see the mayor of the city of
Windhoek Mr JaapSnyman, but he refused to see them.
 On 10 December 1959, the people of the old location decided to boycott public transport
and municipality beer hall
 Police arrested the demonstrators
 A large and angry crowd marched and gathered outside the municipal building to protest
the arrest.
 People began to throw stones at the building and overturned the municipal and set fire
on them.
 The police opened fire on the demonstrators
 11 demonstrators were killed among them was a woman Anna
RosaKakurukazeMungunda
 54 people were wounded
 The other 2 died later
The consequences of the Windhoek Massarce
 Nationalist leader like Sam Nujoma left the country into exile
 People were forced to move to Katutura because the municipality destroyed their houses
in the Old location
 Member of OPO and SWANU were arrested and put in prison
 Many people were killed and others were wounded
 The desire for independence increased in Namibian people,
 Anti-SA feeling started to grow even much stronger.
 Led to the outside world to start knowing what was happening inside Namibia and
started to give more pressure on South Africa
 The Namibian nationalism become stronger than ever
 Today 10 December is a public holiday called international human rights day
SWAPO and the armed struggle

 The armed struggle involves the use of arms and violence against the oppressors to
achieve independence.
 In 1962 SWAPO at its special congress in Lusaka, Zambia decided to launch the war of
liberation struggle
Why SWAPO started the armed struggle

 Because they failed to achieve independence through peaceful means e.g. through
discussions, through petitions, through demonstrations, failed to persuade the SA to
leave the country
 The UN failed to force SA out of the country

 The failure of the I.C.J 1966 in declaring the presence of SA illegal, was a bitter blow in
the eyes of the Namibian people
 The armed struggle was the only remaining option to end SA occupation of Namibia
 Majority of the people were in support of the idea of the Armed struggle
 The events of the Windhoek Massacre encouraged many to resort into the armed
struggle
Ongulumbashe 26 august 1966
 SWAPO established a military base at Ongulumbashe in Ovamboland, which housed

the PLAN fighters who received military training and help from countries all over the
world
 Unfortunately its presence was betrayed and on 26 August 1966, The first major clash
between the SWAPO PLAN fighters and SADF took place at Ongulumbashe in
Ovamboland
 The SADF helicopters located a SWAPO military base and SA police unit attacked the
camp, killing 2 PLAN fighters and capturing 27 and the rest of the PLAN soldiers
managed to escape to Angola and SADF destroyed the base
 This battle marked the beginning of a fierce armed struggle that continued for more than
20 years
 Today 26 August is a public holiday in Namibia called Heroes day
How SWAPO gained support during the liberation struggle

 SWAPO leader Sam Nujoma left the country after the Windhoek Massacre, looking for
support from the international organisation such as the UN and OAU
 SWAPO informed people(all over the world) about its role in the struggle for
independence for Namibia, thus they raised funds and opened SWAPO offices in many
countries and succeeded in getting SWAPO recognised as the representatives of the
people of SWA
 SWAPO leaders mobilised men and women to join them
 SWAPO seek help from neighbouring countries such as Angola, Zambia, etc.
How important was Angola independence to Namibian armed struggle

 Angola got it independence from the Portuguese in 1975
 The newly independent Angola opened its borders to Namibian freedom fighter
 It allowed the PLAN fighters to set up camps both for refugees and for fighters in the
Southern Angola e.g. Cassinga, Ndjamba, Kwanza Sul
 This made it possible for PLAN to launch guerrilla attack on the northern Namibia more
easily
 It also become easy for black Namibians to leave the country by simply walking across
the Northern borders into Angola
 MPLA provided military boots to the PLAN fighters

 Angola provided education, tents and food to the Namibians in the struggle for
independence
The Cassinga Massacre 4 May 1978

 Cassinga was a home of nearly 3000-4000 Namibian refugees including women and
children.
 On 4 May 1978, SADF decided to attack the Cassinga camp in Angola
 During the attack 700 people were killed of whom 300 were children
 600 people were wounded and 200 Namibians were taken as prisoners of war
 118 prisoners, including women were taken to prison camp near Mariental
 Survivors were offered asylum in Cuba, DRC, Czechoslovakia, Kwanza Sul and east
Germany
Why did SADF attack Cassinga Camp?

 SADF believed that there were PLAN fighters in Cassinga camp, believed to
have been used to enter Namibia to plant landmines and ambush the SADF.
 They wanted to kill the PLAN fighters because they believed that if they get rid of
the PLAN fighters in Angola, the war in Namibia could come to an end and their
occupation of SWA could continue.
 They wanted to destroy the camp so that they destroy the spirit of Namibian
Nationalism.
 SA perceived the camp as a threat to their political stability in the territory.
 Attacking the camp they saw it as a way to weaken the SWAPO movement in
exile.
Consequences of the Cassinga massacre
 It strengthened the spirit of Namibian nationalism and many Namibians joined the
liberation struggle.
 SA authorities were heavily criticized by the international communities. That they
violated the international agreement that was protecting refugees.
 SWAPO movement began to receive international support in terms of military
equipment’s and training, education, food, and health services.
 Survivors of the massacre were offered education in European nations e.g. West
Germany, Czechoslovakia
DESCRIBE EFFORTS TO GRANT NAMIBIA SELF-GOVERNMENT
South Africa changes direction
Why did SA change direction?
 SWAPO was becoming more popular inside and outside Namibia.

 UN recognised SWAPO as a sole and Authentic representative of the Namibian people .

 UN and OAU were increasing pressure on SA on its policy towards Namibia and its
People.
 SWAPO freedom fighters were becoming more effective with the success of
independence in Angola.
 Economic sanctions of the UN were threatening the SA’s economy.
 The UN Security Council passed in 1974 calling for South Africa to withdraw from the
territory.
 Increased pressure from the black people inside South Africa amongst the ANC
members with its military wing Umkhonto we Sizwe.
The Turnhalle Conference 1975
SA government asked the national party (NP) in Namibia to organise for a constitutional
conference for all ethnic groups in Namibia.
Aims of the Turnhalle Conference
 To draw up a constitution.
 To give some forms of independence to the Namibians.
 The representatives from the different ethnic groups met on 1 September 1975 in
Windhoek in the old gymnastic hall called Turnhalle
 Representatives of the Turnhalle conference were hand-picked by the SA authority
 SWAPO, SWANU and other political parties did not take part in the conference, because
the conference was based on:
 Ethnic grouping not political parties.
 It was dominated and chaired by whites.
 It was organised by SA instead of the UN.
Why did SWAPO, UN and OAU not recognise the turnhalle constitution?
 The conference was not a truly representatives of the Namibian people as delegates
were not elected but hand -picked by SA authorities.
 The conference was dominated and chaired by white South Africans.
 The conference was organised by NP not by the UN.
 It did not represent all Namibians as political parties were not invited.
 The conference did not meet the criteria set out in the UN resolution of free and fair
election.
 The ethnic appointment supported the policy of divide and rule.
The Western Contact Group/ (Western 5)

Member’s Countries of the Western Contact Group
 USA
 Canada
 Britain
 France

 West Germany
 They asked the UN to allow them to come and negotiate directly with SA
WHY?
 They had economic interest in SA that they wanted to protect
 They were scared, they would also be affected by the UN’s Sanctions on the SA since
South Africa had most of the commodities that they needed.
 They held discussions with SA, Namibia, Botswana, Zambia and Angola
 In their discussion the Western Contact Group persuaded the South African to:
 Suspend the Turnhalle constitution
 Allow free and fair election to be held under the supervision of the UN
 SA to appoint the administrator general (AG) to work together with the UN in
preparation for the election
Successes of the western contact group Failures of the western contact group
 It led to the agreed proposal to  SA continued to control the territory,

suspend the Turnhalle Constitution they held election under its own
and appointed the AG. supervision without the involvement
 The agreement was reached with of the UN and the AG controlled the
various players which laid the territory under SA rule.
foundation of the UN-supervised  Members of the western contact
election. group could not resolve their
differences as Britain had much
interests in the territory
 South Africa went on with the
implementation of the Turnhalle
Conference which was formalised in
1977.
Resolution 385 of 1976
 It was the UN’s response to the Turnhalle conference

 The resolution called for free and fair election to be held under the UN supervision
 However SA ignored resolution 385
 Then the UN imposed the economic sanctions on SA
The Multi-Party Conference (MPC)1983-1984
 After the Turnhalle conference and resolution 385 failed,

 This conference involved the members from different political parties no more members
from ethnic groups.
Members of MPC
 SWANU, DTA, DTC, SWAPO-D led by Andreas Shipanga and the NP which joined the
conference in 1984

Aims of MPC
 To draw the constitution of Namibia which will be recognised internationally and to led
Namibia towards independence
Failures of MPC
The conference was supported by the SA white authorities

SWAPO did not participate, therefore SWAPO accused the MPC as being SA tools
delaying the independence of Namibia
Why SWAPO refused to join the MPC?
 It indicated that it was used as a tool by SA authorities to delay Namibian independence

 MPC served the whites interest and not the people they claimed to represent
 SWAPO refused to participate in anything that was organised out of the UN resolutions
435
 It was organised by the whites SA and it was dominated by whites.
The Transitional Government Of National Unity (TGNU)
 It was formed by P.W Botha in 1985

 Most of the members who were serving in the TGNU were leaders of the MPC
 It consisted of 62 cabinet members, were mainly responsible for controlling Namibia until
independence
What problems were encountered by the TGNU?
 The TGNU was not a representative body, it was not truly multi-racial and its ministers
were not elected and SWAPO did not participate in it.
 The UN and OAU did not recognise the legitimacy of the TGNU.
UN Resolution 435
Terms of the resolution 435
 A cease-fire binding agreement to both SWAPO plan fighters and the SADF in their
bases
 The release of all Namibian political prisoners
 Return of all refugees and exiles
 Reduce the number of SA troops
 Arrange for free and fair election that would be accepted by the UN
 Election to held under UN supervision
Why resolution 435 took 10 years to be implemented?
 SA feared that SWAPO fighters in Namibia would be armed during the election
 SA demanded the withdrawal of the Cuban troops from Angola, because SA feared
Cuban troops in Angola would invade Namibia during the election, which was known as
linkage policy.

 The inclusion of Walvis Bay to an independent Namibia, SA wanted to keep Walvis Bay
as part of SA because of its economic benefits
 The size of the UN task force, SA expressed their unhappiness and opposition to the UN
sponsored election
 The date of the election, SA claimed that the date for election was too near, the asked
for more time to prepare themselves and this took time to reach on the agreement
The United Nations Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG)
 UNTAG was the UN peace-keeping force sent into Namibia in early 1989, to come and
monitor the independence process and ensuring that free and fair election in Namibia is
taking place.
The purpose of the UNTAG
 To help in managing the independence process

 To supervise the election and registration of voters
 To train election officials
 To ensure that people decide their future freely without fear or intimidation
 To implement resolution 435
 Repatriation of refugees and in exile
 The release of all Political prison
Registration and education of voters
 Registration points were set up all over Namibia.

 UNTAG undertook a multi-media campaign to inform voters about the aspects of the
election process in different local languages.
 Voters were informed about their rights and duties to vote.
 Everyone that was 18 years and above were registered as voters.
Repatriation of exile, refugees and the release of political prisoners
 The resolution stipulated that all exiles and refugees should be allowed to come back
home and participate in the election
 And all political prisoners to be leased and participate in the election
EVALUATE UNITED NATIONS (UN) INVOLVEMENT IN ACHIEVING INDEPENDENCE
 UN could only act as far as its structure allowed it to.

 The constitution of the UN does not allow it to interfere in the internal affairs of countries.
 It also cannot just take up arms to enforce its decision.
 Sanctions and resolutions are the many tool available to the UN with which to enforce its
decisions and unfortunately this tool involved a lengthy process.
 UN played a tremendous role and spent millions of dollars in promoting the
independence process in Namibia.

UN helped Namibia to gain independence in various ways:
 They passed various resolutions e.g. Resolution 385, Resolution 431 and resolution
435.
 They set up a special committee led by Sean MacBride.
 They Sent the UNTAG to organise Supervise elections.
 They also imposed sanctions on South Africa.
Assess post-independence developments and challenges.
Namibia has remained a democratic state since independence. Elections are conducted
every 5 years. When Namibia become independent in 1990, it immediately became a
member of SADC and also the 50th member of the commonwealth, on 23 April of the same
year, Namibia was accepted as a member of the UNO
As with young democracies, Namibia has achieved some excellent milestone, but has also
faced some challenges
Achievements(Developments)
1. Namibia is one of the most open and investor friendly : it attracts high levels of
foreign investment because Namibia is politically stable and Namibia ‘s foreign
investment law provides full protection to foreign investment
2. Namibia’s favourable economic environment: attracts donors and investors
3. The government invest heavily in education and training:the government pump in
more Money in the budget for education to ensure that they have all skilled members in
all sectors of Economy.
4. The government focuses on small and medium enterprises: in order to create jobs,
improve income distribution and contribute to private sector growth
5. Namibia is well known for the protection of human rights
6. Being politically stable: the country attracts thousands of tourists every year who
brings in foreign income
Challenges
1. Billions of dollars of Namibian funds has been invested outside the country:
mainly in SA as all finances were controlled by the South African government from
Pretoria.
2. Health problem:high rate of maternal and infant deaths as well as malaria and HIV and
AIDS
3. High unemployment: it remains a burden for the rapid economic growth
4. Corruption:contributes to the slow – down of economic development
5. In spite of government expenditure on education: there is still an acute shortage of
skilled manpower

EXPLAIN WHY NAMIBIA BECAME A MEMBER OF SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY (SADC ).
In 1980 the countries in Southern Africa formed an organisation to help their socio-economic
development in Lusaka, Zambia; this organisation was called SADCC, on 17 July 1992 SADCC
members met in Windhoek, Namibia. At this stage they changed the organisation from SADCC
to SADC. Namibia joined SADC in 1992, to benefit:
 Economically and to contribute to the development of the region;

 It also created the opportunity for Namibia to link its currency to South African rand
because they saw that South Africa is a much bigger economic unit than Namibia.
 Namibia was given the responsibility for coordinating fisheries and marine resources for
the entire region.
The SADC free trade area was achieved in August 2008, according to this agreement, 85% of
intra-regional trade amongst member states duty free.
The aims of the duty free trade were:
 Increase domestic production

 Create greater business opportunities
 Created greater employment opportunities
 Increase foreign investments
 Increase regional imports and exports
the creation of the free trade area ensured that intra-SADC trades has more than doubled since
its beginning and it is expected that their Gross Domestic Production (GDP) will grow between
2010 and 2040.
Discuss Namibia as a member of the UN and commonwealth
Namibia as a member of the UN
Since its independence, Namibia has been involved in many activities of the UN, the
relationship of Namibia and the UN focuses on the three pillars:
i. Peace and security

The UN does not have its own military force and therefore relies on the contributions
of its member states, Namibia has positively responded to various calls by the UN for
assistance during international conflicts. For example, in 1992-1993 Namibia
participated in the UN peace keeping mission to Cambodia; Namibia contributed a
contingent of 43 soldiers as well as equipment. In 1996 Namibia participated in the
UN Angola verification mission to assist the Angolan government and UNITA to
restore peace in Angola, in 2003 Namibia took part in the UN mission to Liberia,
Namibia contributed 3835 personnel to help stabilise Liberia and it also supported
the implementation of ceasefire agreement.
ii. Development

Theo Ben Gurirab was the first Namibian to become the president of the UN General
Assembly and emphasised the issues of poverty. At the end of his term in
September 2000 he submitted a draft resolution containing a proposal for the UN
Millennium declaration which became a key document on which the Millennium
Development Goals (MDG) are based. Namibia has actively participated in achieving
the goals set by the MDG. E.g. fight against HIV and AIDS. Namibia is collaborating
closely with relevant UN bodies by sharing lessons and experiences in areas such as
preventing mother-to-child transmission of HIV.
iii. Human Rights Conventions And Treaties
Human rights issues are a top priority on the UN’s activity. Namibia has agreed on
seven human rights treaty of the UN
Namibia agreed on:
 The international covenant on civil political rights
 The international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights
 The convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against
women
 The international convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment
 The international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial
discrimination
 The convention on the rights of persons with disabilities
Namibia as a member of Commonwealth
The Commonwealth of Nations is a voluntary association of 53 independent states, most of

which were former British colonies. The commonwealth aims to create a link between rich and
poor countries; it offers opportunity to smaller nations to sit down with larger nations during the
bi-annual (meet twice in a year) commonwealth heads of government meeting to share and
discuss issues affecting the commonwealth and projects. All members have an equal say.
Namibia is an active member of the commonwealth
What the Commonwealth does?
1. Capacity development: changes in the socio-political and organisational factors are

proposed to enhance local ownership in order to achieve development goal.
2. Building a culture of learning and performance: this ensures sustainability and
meaningful practices by: promoting knowledge by sharing and learning. Supporting
replication of good practices. Maximising technology to enable learning and
performance.
3. Mainstreaming cross-cutting outcome areas: this plan highlights three areas namely,
gender equality. Environmental sustainability. Cultural respect and understanding.

5.2.3 SOUTH AFRICA 1948-1994
How South Africa was charged by WW2:
• More than 2 million South Africans including 120 000 blacks fought in WW2
• Their experiences caused many whites to conclude racism was not justified
• Black servicemen met blacks from other countries who had political rights
• This strengthened their resolve to fight for political equality in South Africa
• During the war the economy boomed but when troops returned home factories no longer
had to produce for war efforts
• An economic depression set in
• There was high unemployment and dissatisfaction among both whites and blacks
• This made it possible for the National Party under Malan to win the support of Afrikaners
by making promises to enforce racial segregation to protect whites from competing with
blacks.
WHY WHITES WERE THREATENED BY CHANGES BROUGHT BY THE SECOND WORLD

WAR?
Black people now outnumbered white people in towns

During the Second World War the number of black males working in industries increased. More
black people moved to the towns where their jobs were and black people began to outnumber
whites in towns. White South Africans thought the segregation policy and their whole way of life
could be under threat.
Some of the segregation laws had been relaxed

The Fagan Commission of 1947 reported that the trend to urbanization is irreversible and the
Pass Laws should be eased. The Commission said it would be unlikely that black people could
be prevented from coming to the cities where there were more jobs. They depended on this to
survive as the reserves in the rural areas where they were supposed to live held few options for
a livelihood. In other words, total segregation would be impossible.
Black people had participated in boycotts and strikes

South Africa was characterized by political and social resistance campaigns. These were
spearheaded by Blacks, Indians and Coloureds. Liberation movements such as the African
National Congress, Communist Party of South Africa and labor organizations emerged in
opposition to the white government.
The United Party said that complete segregation was not practical
Many white South Africans believed the United Party was incapable of dealing with the post-war
problems. Many white people felt that Smuts lacked a clear policy on how to deal with black
people and segregation.
EXPLAIN WHY THE NATIONAL PARTY WON THE ELECTIONS OF 1948

THE ELECTION OF 1948
National Party (NP) under Dr DF Malan
• Offered apartheid to be enforced by the central government

• Each group to develop and practice its own culture and manage its own affairs
• The government would control all finances and decide where and how much land each
ethnic group would receive
• They promised to preserve white supremacy.
• They wanted to protect the purity of their race.
United Party (UP) under Jan Smuts
• Segregation but not through laws

• Believed that black urbanization was inevitable and that assimilation was bound to take
place
• Wanted to manage urbanization by providing separate living space and amenities for
each group
WHY THE NATIONAL PARTY (NP) WON THE ELECTION OF 1948?
They promised apartheid

The supposed policy of apartheid proposed by the NP served the economic interests of certain
groups of white South Africans. Farmers from the northern portions of the country relied on
cheap labor to maximize profits while working class whites living in urban areas feared the
employment completion that would follow an urban influx of black South Africans. Many
commercial and financial Afrikaner interests based on agriculture saw the value of apartheid in
promoting growth in this sector.
They promised to preserve white purity

Malan made preservation of white supremacy through apartheid laws as the main theme of the
election campaign. The NP played up the fear of black danger and ensures the white population
of their security, as well as a position of superiority through the apartheid policy. Through this he
succeeded in convincing enough white voters to win with a small majority.
They were helped by the clause in the Constitution of 1910

Demarcation of electoral district boundaries favored the NP. Most of the 70 seats won by the
National Party during the 1948 election were in rural areas, whereas most of the 65 seats won
by the United Party were in the urban areas. According to the Constitution that South Africa had
at the time, the constituencies in the rural areas were smaller than those in urban areas. This
meant that there were more rural constituencies than urban ones. It has been calculated that if
rural and urban votes had been of equal value, the UP would have won 80 seats and the NP/AP
coalition 60 seats thus giving the UP a majority.
DISCUSS HOW THE APARTHEID SYSTEM WAS ESTABLISHED IN SOUTH AFRICA

THE APARTHEID SYSTEM
• Political system of the National Party of South Africa from 1948 to 1994
• The policy separated blacks from whites
• The best living areas were given to whites
• Blacks only had 13% of the land
• Different laws were mad to ensure that white privileges were protected and to keep
blacks inferior
• All spheres of life were separated: religion, recreation, sports, culture, education, the
economy, suburbs, etc.
WHY DID THE NATIONAL PARTY INTRODUCED APARTHEID?
To make it easier to control blacks

The National Party invented apartheid as a means to cement their control over the economic
and social system. Initially, the main aim of apartheid was to maintain white domination while
extending racial separation.
To prevent blacks from uniting

Whites feared blacks being the majority in South Africa would join forces in resisting the minority
white government and they would eventual takeover the government. Apartheid would make
blacks live in separate ethnic groups thus making it difficult for them to work together in resisting
the white government.
To prevent competition from blacks

The white minority government had introduced apartheid laws so that they put blacks into
inferior position e.g. they introduced the Bantu Education Act to make sure that blacks can
receive poor education for them to remain cheap labourers and for the whites to receive quality
education to control blacks and also to avoid competition.
To enrich themselves
With the application of apartheid black South African would be pushed into reserves where as
whites would remain in urban areas occupying high paying jobs, in control of the fertile land as
well as controlling the land which was rich in mineral resources.
APARTHEID LAWS:
Prohibition of Mixed Marriage Act of 1949

• Made marriages between people of different races illegal
Immorality Act of 1950

• Made sexual relations between different races illegal
Population Registration Act of 1950

• Classified every individual according to race
• Defined which race every person belonged to e.g. white, black, colored
• Made it easier for the government to decide who had to stay where and to have total
control of all the people
Group Areas Act of 1950

• Made provision for separate residential areas for each race
• People were forced to relocate to other places
• People lost their properties in the process
• People had to adapt to the new environment
• Destroyed the spirit of nationalism as people could no longer unite
Separate Amenities Act of 1953

• The division of public services and spaces according to race
• Black people could not use the same shops, beaches and buses as whites
• Public places like banks and post offices had separate entries
• The standard of services were also not same for blacks and whites
Bantu Education Act of 1953

• Pupils at black schools no longer studied the same syllabus as their white peers.
• Less money was spent on black pupils
• Resources for black were not enough
• Resources for blacks were of poor quality
• Blacks had to share benches
• Classrooms were of poor standard
WHY THE NATIONALIST GOVERNMENT RESTRICTED EDUCATION FOR BLACK

PEOPLE?
They wanted to provide them with only the skills needed for work in the homelands or in
labouring.
They wanted to prevent them from receiving an education that would lead them to want higher
positions. Bantu education aimed at training children for the manual labor and menial jobs that
the government deemed suitable for those of their race and it was explicitly intended to
indoctrinate the idea that black people were to accept being subservient to white South Africans.
Education for black children would be cheaper

Funding for schools was to come from taxes paid by the communities that they served, so black
schools received only a small fraction of the amount of money that was available to their white
counterparts. The government was spending about 15 times more on each white child
compared with black students.
It was to maintain white supremacy.

Black people provided a vast pool of cheap labour for the whites. By restricting their education
their aspirations and opportunities would be limited; they would be prepared only for work in the
homelands or work as labourers for the whites.
Native Abolition of Passes Act / Pass Law

• Every black outside the native reserves had to carry a passbook (reference document)
wherever they went all the time
• Restricted the movement of blacks
• Police could demand to see the passbook at any time
• Anyone without it could be jailed
• Separated families as women stayed in rural areas / reserves
• It was more difficult for women to acquire passes.
WHY WAS THE PASS SYSTEM HATED?
It seemed unfair because it only had to be carried by non-Whites. They had to carry
documentation which had to be produced on demand. Failure to do so resulted in punishment.
Citizens were classified according to race and this was supported by the pass system.
Blacks had to carry a Pass Book wherever they went.It was a book that had to be shown on
demand and without a Pass Book, blacks were arrested. This led to raids in the black townships
to check passes and often resulted in law-abiding citizens serving time in jail for ‘pass offences’.
It helped the government to control where black South Africans lived and worked. It contained
personal information as well as their finger prints.’
The Pass Law separated families as it was mostly men who could acquire pass books and this
forced wives to remain in rural areas. It was very difficult for women to get pass books.
Furthermore, pass books restricted the movements of blacks from homelands into town and
cities as it was a requirement to have a pass books if blacks were to live in white men’s area.
Pass laws not only restricted the movement of blacks into these areas but also prohibited their
movement from one district to another without a signed pass. Blacks were not allowed onto
streets of towns in Cape Town and Natal after dark and they had to carry a pass at all times.
SEPARATION OF THE RACES
• No mixed marriages.
• No sexual relations between Whites and non-whites.
• White people, Black people and Coloured people had to live in separate areas.
• Black people could not remain in urban areas without a permit.
• There were separate schools for Black people and White people.
• There were separate public amenities.
• There were separate toilets, parks, beaches, cemeteries.
• Bantustans were created as the homelands of Black people.

CREATION OF BANTUSTANS
• With criticism of apartheid mounting in the UN, South Africa invented the new policy
called the Homeland / Bantustans policy
• They abandoned using the word apartheid
• Blacks could develop into self-government
• Hendrik Verwoerd worked a plan of Bantustans
• Verwoerd argued that Bantustans were the original homes of the black people of South
Africa
• Shortly it was known as Separate development and Self-determination
EFFECTS OF THE BANTUSTANS
• Communities were split into ethnic groups

• Bantustans were too small for people to farm in tradition way
• The land given to blacks was dry and barren
• Bantustans were too small which led to overcrowdings
• Thousands of people were moved out of their existing homes and resettled in unfamiliar
places
• The best farming land, the towns and areas with mineral remained under the control of
whites
EXPLAIN HOW THE CREATION OF BANTUSTANS AFFECTED THE LIVES OF BLACK

SOUTH AFRICANS?
According to the policy of Bantustans, black people were taken from their original land and
grouped together into Bantustans. This meant that they lost the land which was familiar to them
and they had to stay in places where the climatic conditions were not conducive which resulted
in the struggle for adaptation and survival.
The Bantustans were a major administrative mechanism for the removal of blacks from the
South African political system under the many laws and policies created by apartheid. The idea
was to separate blacks from the whites and give blacks the responsibility of running their own
independent governments, thus denying them protection and any remaining rights a black could
have in South Africa. Bantustans were established for the permanent removal of the black
population in white South Africa.
The local homeland economies were not developed. Bantustans relied almost entirely on white
South Africa's economy. Farming was not very viable largely because of the poor agricultural
land in the homelands. Blacks owned only 13% of South Africa’s land. These farm lands were in
a poor condition because of soil erosion and overgrazing. As a result, millions of blacks had to
leave the Bantustans daily and work in the mines, for white farmers and other industries in the

cities. The homelands served as labor reservoirs, housing the unemployed and releasing them
when their labor was needed in white South Africa.
People were separated from their families especially those who were fairer coloured people who
looked more white than coloured, the Indians that looked more coloureds than Indians and the
blacks who looked more coloured than black. People were moved to places of their own race
and some even moved to families that they were not even part of.
EVALUATE THE IMPACT OF APARTHIED ON THE PEOPLES OF SOUTH AFRICA ALSO

WITH REFERENCE TO THE VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
 People were forcefully removed from their areas and moved to the so called homelands
e.g. blacks were forced to move from Sophia Town to Soweto (south West Townships)
 People were continuously harassed by the police
 Workers families broke up because their wives and children were not allowed to join
them in towns and cities.
 Blacks were denied the education and training they needed to compete successfully with
whites.
 Many people were beaten and killed because of their resistance to apartheid and this
was a violation of people’ right to (dignity) and right to life.
 NO right to live in area of own choice this violated the right in any area of choice.
 People were denied freedom for movement and association
 People were discriminated against on the ground of their race and ethnicity
 Freedom of speech was limited
 Apartheid violated people’s right to own property
 Apartheid violated people’s right to privacy in the homes and in communicating with
others.
 Apartheid violated people’s right to marry partner of their choice and family
 Apartheid violated people’s right to equality.
DESCRIBE THE VARIOUS FORMS OF RESISTANCE TO APARTHEID
EARLY RESISTANCE TO APARTHIED (1950 TO 1960)
1. THE DEFIANCE CAMPAIGN LAUNCHED IN 1952
 Organized by the National volunteer board led by Nelson Mandela

 This campaign was aimed at encouraging people to break segregation by disobeying or
not following apartheid laws.
 Steps to break segregation involved breaking separate amenities act. Curfew Act and
pass laws

 Mandela himself led a group of 52 people who broke curfew regulations by walking on
the streets of Johannesburg after 11pm.
 Curfew is a law that does not allow people to go outside at night after a particular time.
• People deliberately broke the laws e.g.
– Using whites only entrances
– Refusing to carry passes
• The campaigns lasted for three months
• Over 8 000 people were arrested
The Defiance campaign did not succeed but had the following positive results
 It showed the willingness of the ANC to fight against apartheid and ANC attracted many
supporters in fighting apartheid, its members increased from 7000-100 000.
 It drew world attention to the National party oppression of Blacks, UN voted to set up a
commission that looked at the racial situation in South Africa.
 It brought more women into the freedom movement in 1954 the FEDSAW was formed
(federation of South African Women)
 It made different races in South Africa to work together in the fight against apartheid e.g.
Coloureds, blacks and Indians
2. THE FREEDOM CHARTER OF 26 JUNE 1955
 Charter a document that stipulated rights or goals of an organization or people

 Drawn by the Kliptown freedom congress
• Principles of South African Congress Alliances
• Attended by African National Congress, South African Indian Congress, South African
Congress of Democrats and the Colored People’s Congress
• Called for non-racial South Africa with political rights for all
• Demands:
– Land to be given to all landless people
– Living wages and shorter hours of work
– Free and compulsory education irrespective of color, race or nationality
– Rights in the charter included rights for all equality equal distribution of wealth,
right to education
– The Charter also stated that South Africa belongs to all blacks and whites (all
people who live in it).
– Every man shall have the right to vote
– Equal status for all races
– Discrimination shall be regarded as a crime
• The meeting was attended by roughly 3 000 delegates
• The meeting was broken up by the police on the second day
3. THE WOMEN’S MARCH AUGUST 1956

 The March was organized by FEDSAW (federal of South African Women)
 The march was aimed to oppose the pass law
 About 20 000 women from all over South Africa arrived in Pretoria
 Each women carried a written petition against the pass law
 On 9th August women marched up to the Union building to hand the petition to
Strydom, Strydom was not there to receive the petition.
 A petition is an official complain given to people in authority
 Women leaders that led the women’s march included LilianNgoyi, Helen Joseph and
Sophie Williams
 They made sacrifices like selling their furniture to fund their transport.
4. THE TREASON TRIAL OF 1957-61
 Early December 1956 the police swoop on homes all over South Africa.
 People that played a leading role in the freedom charter congress were arrested.
 They were accused of trying to use violence to overthrow the government
(treason)
 About 156 people were arrested, 105 blacks, 23 whites, 21 indians and 7
coloureds
 At the trial the arrested were found not guilty of treason and acquitted
Why was the treason trial important?
 The trial was widely reported worldwide;the accused received international support and
they condemned apartheid.
 The trial showed how people were committed in the fight against apartheid; many people
in South Africa were motivated to resist apartheid as a result.
PAC (Pan African Congress),1959
 This was a new political party that broke away from the ANC, it was formed by Robert
Sobukwe in 1959
Why was PAC formed?

 To promote black interests and rights
 PAC did not like the freedom charter especially its opening statement that South Africa
belonged to all people who live in it black and white PAC felt that South Africa belongs
only to blacks and whites must be excluded.
 PAC also disliked how communism the foreign ideology influenced the ANC
5. THE SHARPEVILLE MASSACRE (CRISIS) 1960

• In 1960 the PAC and ANC announced a new campaign against the pass law this
involved telling people not to walk with passbooks when going to a white man’s area and
this was thought to break the pass law, On 21st of March 1960 a crowd of people
gathered around a police station at Sharpeville and they organized the demonstration
against the Pass Law.
• People left their pass books and marched to the police station
• They demanded to be arrested
• Some started to burn their pass books publicly
• The police opened fire killing 69 people and 180 were wounded
• The government banned both the ANC and PAC
• They arrested and detained thousands of members
• The Sharpeville marked the major turnaround in the History of Resistance in South
Africa.
Sharpeville’s International consequences
 The killing caused worldwide anger

 Demonstration against the Sharpeville killing took place in many countries
 South Africa’s economy suffered after foreign investors pulled out of South Africa to
protest the killings
 South Africa was forced out of the Commonwealth; the commonwealth club is a group of
countries formerly colonized by Britain.
 South Africa was sanctioned economically
 Albert Luthuli was awarded the Nobel peace prize for the fight against apartheid.
Sharpeville’s Internal consequences
 Numerous protests after the killings forced the government to declare a state of
emergency; the ANC and PAC were banned. About more than 2000 people were
imprisoned.
 In 1961 the ANC formed a Guerilla wing Umkhonto we Sizwe was formed (Spear of the
Nation) Nelson Mandela became its leader.
 Umkhonto we Sizwe destroyed (sabotaged) government electrical power lines railways
and telephone lines.
 In 1962 the PAC also formed a guerrilla organization called poqo which means pure,
which was ready to use violance
 ANC sent Mandela and others to gain an international support in Tanzania, Algeria. In
1962 Mandela returned to South Africa and was imprisoned for 5 years for leaving the
country illegally and organizing people to go on strike.
WHY WAS THE SHARPEVILLE MASSACRE IMPORTANT?
The Sharpeville killings marked a major turning point in the history of resistance in South Africa
and caused worldwide anger. Demonstrations against the killings took place in many countries

and for the first time calls for international action against apartheid began to be taken seriously.
The South African economy suffered a set back; international sporting and cultural boycotts
began to have an effect.
Many anti-apartheid leaders became convinced that peaceful protest was no longer enough.
According to Mandela, however, strict instructions were given to its member’s right from the
start that on no account were they to injure or kill people. ANC and PAC formed guerrilla wings
to stage sabotage attacks on government buildings.
The South African government responded by applying the apartheid laws more ruthlessly.
Thousands of people, men and women were tried under the Security Laws and thrown into jail
or isolated on Robben Island. The government tried to speed up the independence of the
various ethnic homelands, despite the resistance of most blacks to this policy.
WAS SHARPEVILLE INCIDENT A SUCCESS OR FAILURE FOR THE BLACK SOUTH

AFRICANS?
It was a success because incident encouraged more demonstrations to take place throughout
South Africa. It was also the reason why the ANC and PAC decided to start guerrilla wings.
They organised more protests and also destroyed economic targets. These strikes made the
country ungovernable and did put pressure on the government.
The outside world became aware of what was going on in South Africa. Sanctions were
imposed on South Africa by the UN. Investment money started to leave the country. This
crippled the economy of South Africa and put the government under pressure. This was one of
the reasons why the government had to change direction in the years that followed.
It was a failure because after the incident the government became even more violet against
demonstrations and protests. The government responded by arresting political leaders and
banned ANC and PAC. The origin of Sharpeville incident was that the black people did not want
to carry passes anymore but this did not change.
APARTHEID IN SOUTH AFRICA WAS SUCCESSFUL?
Successful
The system was based on “divide and rule” and therefore affected blacks negatively, while
whites were advantaged. The SA government succeeded in its aim to sustain white supremacy
for over 40 years by securing the best farmland and control over the economy for whites.
Political rights were given to blacks in homelands only, but the real political power was kept by
the whites.
Not successful
The policy could not last forever, as the blacks resisted. They were unhappy because they felt
their human dignity was disregarded. They were also unhappy to be brutalized in their own
country, and because their land and cattle were confiscated. Though their resisted was met with

brutal repression by the army, police and the justices system, it helped to bring world’s attention
to what was happening in SA. As a result SA Government was condemned and economic
sanctions were imposed. The disinvestment campaign in the 1980s as well as the isolation of
South Africa led to the failures of the policy.
AIMS AND ACTIVITIES OF UMKHONTO WE SIZWE
• To start a sabotage campaign

• To prepare for guerrilla warfare
• MK targeted government installations such as power lines, railway lines, oil refinery and
other government buildings
• The aim was to bring the government to its knees
• To force the government to negotiate with the ANC
WHY WAS UMKHONTO WE SIZWE SET UP?
To intensify strikes / demonstrations against apartheid

In the 1950s it became clear to some members of the ANC that passive resistance and non-
violence were not working. A factor that undoubtedly had an influence on the thinking of the
ANC which probably had a bearing on their shift towards political violence in 1961, was the
general failure of the ANC directed campaigns of the 1950s to bring about meaningful political
changes based on the policy of non-violence and moderation following the moderate success of
the Defiance Campaign of 1952.
To cripple / sabotage the economy

The Umkhonto we Sizwe was established with the intention that was expressed by most South
Africans who felt that strikes and demonstrations were not enough. Therefore, they established
the ANC’s guerrilla wing to organise sabotage attacks on police stations, power lines and oil
refineries with bombs and rockets. The aim was to weaken the apartheid government
economically and politically and force the government into negotiations.
To fight for independence

The most means that led to the taking up of arms was the Sharpeville Massacre of 21 March
1960. The states heavy-handed response to the peaceful demonstrations and the subsequent
banning of the ANC, PAC and SACP the following month, dealt a serious blow to the ANC and
its allies. Many members were convinced that the time had come to rethink the approach
towards the struggle for their freedom and move from passive resistance to the armed struggle.
6. THE BLACK CONSCIOUSNESS MOVEMENT (BCM)
• It was formed and led by Steve Biko

• Aims:
– To raise African self-respect and confidence

– To unite black South Africans of all ethnic groups in the struggle against
apartheid
– Knowing about black African heroes of the past
• To take pride in black culture, history and achievements
• Inspired a spirit of fearlessness and resistance
• Instrumental in organizing strikes such as the Soweto uprising of 1976-7
• Steve Biko was expelled from university for his political activities
WHY WAS STEVE BIKO IMPORTANT IN THE STRUGGLE AGAINST APARTHEID?
Steve Biko was a black student leader in the Black Consciousness Movement. Its main aims
were to raise African self-respect and confidence. The government saw the message Biko was
preaching to the young people as a threat to apartheid. He was becoming very popular and in
1969 he formed South Africa Students Organisation (SASO) that had members across racial
lines. Especially white universities like Wits, UCT, Natal and Rhodes started supporting him and
his ideas.
The government felt that Biko could not be allowed to continue his campaign. He was arrested
on a minor charge and then beaten so badly that he died of his injuries while in police custody in
Port Elizabeth in 1977. This death was important because it encouraged blacks, especially the
youth, to continue the struggle which became increasingly violet, until the government finally
realised that it could not maintain apartheid and suppression against the majority of the
population by force. This brought about the end of apartheid. The more violence there was the
more the deaths and funerals where there that create new reasons for uprising.
The death of Biko as well as the uprising received a lot of international attention and the outside
world put pressure for sanctions against South African government. The UN sanctions were
biting as they started to have an effect on the South African economy. Some countries stopped
trading with South Africa at all level and some of the investors started to withdrew their money
from South Africa.
THE RIVONIA TRIAL OF 1964
 It was named after Rivonia the suburb of Johannesburg where 19 ANC leaders were
arrested and it was used as a hide out for ANC
 People arrested were Walter Sisulu, Govan Mbeki, Raymond Mhlaba and many others
 The arrested were accused of sabotage and attempt to overthrow the apartheid system.
 Mandela was already in prison serving his five years sentence, the sentence was
increased to life imprisonment at Rivonia Trial, Mandela was found guilty on leaving the
country illegal and organizing the strikes
 Most of the prisoners remained in prison for the next 25 years, it was only Mandela who
was later released in February 1990 by President F.W de Klerk.
 The sentences were served on Robben Island Mandela’s prison cell 46664 (prisoner
number 466 in 1964).

7. THE SOWETO UPRISING 1976-7
• The government ordered the use of Afrikaans as the medium of instruction in all schools
• Most of the black learners could not speak Afrikaans or understand it
• Even the teachers did not know Afrikaans
• A large crowd of students gathered for a protest march
• They carried cardboard placards with slogans
• They preferred and wanted English instead of Afrikaans
• They also protested against the whole Bantu Education System
• They were stopped by armed police
• The police opened fire killing four including Hector Petersen and 200 were wounded
• The news of the killings spread
• Demonstrations and riots broke out throughout South Africa
• Thousands of protesters were killed by police and others were jailedincluding Steve Biko
who was later beaten and tortured to death by the Police
• Many people left the country to join the MK and other exiled organizations
WHY DID THE SOWETO UPRISING TAKE PLACE IN 1976?
They did not like Afrikaans

The government ordered that Afrikaans to be used as the medium of instruction in South
Africa’s black secondary school. This was a big problem because most of the learners could not
speak or understand Afrikaans. Even the teachers did not know Afrikaans. Besides that,
Afrikaans was seen as the language of the oppressor therefore, they did not want to learn
Afrikaans.
They wanted the same education as whites

Black South African students protested because they believed that they deserved to be treated
and taught equally to white South Africans. Students formed an Action Committee later known
as the Soweto Students’ Representative Council which organised a mass rally for 16 June to
make themselves heard. This was also an opportunity to protest about the whole Bantu
education system with its inferior syllabus.
EXPLAIN WHO BENEFITED FROM APARTHIED
APARTHEID BENEFITED SOUTH AFRICANS?
Benefited
The white population had many benefits and privileges. They owned and lived on 87% of the
land. They were the big farmers and owners of big industrial enterprises. Apartheid gave white
people a good standard of living. Most of the physical labour was done by black, coloured or
Indian people.

Did not benefit
Apartheid forced the majority of black people to live on Bantustans, which was 13% of the total
area of South Africa. Some males went into towns and cities to get work, but they were forced to
leave their wives and children on the Bantustan. Many whites complained that they could not
play international sport during the ‘60s, ‘70s and ‘80s because other countries refused to play
them in cricket, rugby and soccer because of apartheid.
EXPLAIN WHY OPPOSITION TO APARTHIED INCREASED
WHY WAS APARTHEID OPPOSED?
The apartheid system divided the country along racial lines and there was segregation all over
the country. The white race was promoted and was seen as superior to the other races of the
country. Public facilities such as shops, toilets, beaches, parks and restaurants were divided
according to race. White people utilized the best facilities and then were the Indians, Coloureds
with black people below the social chain.
Black people could not study in white schools and universities which made them have a smaller
circle of career options. High school education was the highest qualification that most black
people had so they could not became doctors and nurses or even lawyers. All they could
become was teachers in black schools, garden workers for white suburbs and domestic workers
if they were women.
Apartheid restricted the movement of blacks. They could not just flow in and out of the white
suburbs as they pleased, they had to carry what resembled an ID document that had all their
details that was to be assessed by the white police to grant them access into white, Indian and
Coloureds suburbs. They also could not flow in and out of the city as they pleased too because
they had a certain time allocated for them to go in the city in the morning and evacuate later in
sunset. If you were black and did not have a pass with all your details with you, you were
refused admission into the white suburbs.
School learners also opposed apartheid due to the apartheid law that stated that black learners
should be taught in Afrikaans. For many, Afrikaans was a language not even spoken and
foreign. English was already a foreign language to them and most of them already struggled
with it but when this law was passed, the learners initiated a mass protest against the use of
Afrikaans in their schoolwork. Black students could no longer cope with failing at school
because of Afrikaans so they decided to march to Orlando Stadium in Soweto. They did this in
protest of studying in Afrikaans.
WHY OPPOSITION TO APARTHIED INCREASED
 The black population increased: by 1948, black people made up 69% of the population
of South Africa. By 1980’s the percentage had increased to 76%.

 Urabnisation: rapid urbanization made it easier to organized resistance and
demonstrations because everyone was in within one area and formed the basis of unity.
 The Neighbouring countries: more countries in the Southern Africa have received their
independence, Angola and Zimbabwe which allowed the ANC and the PAC members to
carry out cross border guerilla attacks into South Africa.
 International pressure grew: by 1980’s international pressure on South Africa increased
to an extent that it cripple the economy.
 Ruthless application of Apartheid : during the 25th anniversary police opened fire on the
black mourners killing more than 40 people.
DISCUSS THE IMPORTANCE OF EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL FACTORS IN ENDING

APARTHEID
INTERNAL FACTORS THAT LED TO THE END OF APARTHEID
The ANC
In 1952, the ANC led by Mandela led a Defiance Campaign against apartheid countrywide,
defying apartheid regulations. There were arrested in their thousands. Their actions gained
publicity in newspapers abroad and in the UN. Membership increased and the ANC became the
voice of the black resistance. The ANC organized demonstration throughout South African
which made the country ungovernable. They also formed the military wing Umkhonto we Sizwe
(better known as the MK) which started the armed struggle and aimed at sabotaging
government facilities. The action of the MK crippled the economy of South Africa.
Umkhonto we Sizwe
The Umkhonto we Sizwe was established with the intention that was expressed by most South
Africans who felt that strikes and demonstrations were not enough. Therefore, they established
the ANC’s guerrilla wing to organise sabotage attacks on police stations, power lines and oil
refineries with bombs and rockets. The aim was to weaken the apartheid government
economically and politically and force the government into negotiations.
Nelson Mandela
Mandela moved around the country in disguise mobilizing people to join the struggle against
apartheid. He travelled abroad seeking help in the struggle against apartheid. He was the first
leader of Umkhonto we Sizwe.He encouraged more people to join the struggle against
apartheid. The Revonia trials saw the imprisonment of Mandela and other leading figures. While
in prison he refused to renounce the use of violence against the white South Africa. Once free,
Mandela proved to be a very skillful negotiator; his behavior and moderation impressed many
South Africans. In a spirit of forgiveness and reconciliation, he appointed F.W. de Klerk as one
of the two vice-presidents.
Sharpeville Massacre
After the massacre ANC and PAC abandoned non-violence campaigns and formed military
wings to start an armed struggle against apartheid. The massacre encouraged many people to

join the struggle against apartheid. The international community became aware of the South
African situations. Some white South African started to question whether apartheid was the right
policy and they began opposing it.
Soweto uprising
When the news of the killings broke, demonstrations spread throughout South Africa and the
country became ungovernable. The UN condemned the action of the South African government.
Anti-apartheid movements organised demonstrations and protests in cities and towns around
the world. Sport and other boycotts were introduced against South Africa and alienated the
country from old friends like Britain and USA.
The role of women

Female activists were strongly present in trade union movements which also served as a
vehicle for future organizations such as the ANC Women’s League (ANCWL) and the
Federation of South African Women (FSAW). Their objective was to fight against racism and
oppression of women as well as to make African women understand that they had rights both as
human beings and as women.
Female activists fought along men and participated to demonstrations and guerilla movements.
Women through different organizations also acted independently and organized bus boycotts,
campaigns against restrictive passes in Pretoria and Sharpeville. About 20 000 women attended
these kinds of demonstrations. Many participants were arrested, forced into exile or imprisoned.
At the same time women fought about gender discrimination and called for rights specific to
women such as family, children, gender equality and access to education.
Steve Biko
He established the Black Consciousness Movement.He organized strikes and demonstration
against apartheid. He organized meetings in townships. He encouraged blacks to take pride in
black culture, history and achievements. He inspired a spirit of fearlessness and resistance
among blacks. He was instrumental in organizing strikes such as the Soweto uprising of 1976-
7. His death led to international condemnation of the white government.
Desmond Tutu
Bishop Desmond Tutu called upon rich countries to stop trading with South Africa and to
withdraw their money they had invested in its industries. He believed that this would help force
the South African government to move towards a democratic, non-racial system of government.
FW de Klerk
He unbanned the ANC, PAC and SACP. He released political prisoners including Nelson
Mandela and the death sentence was abolished. He instructed the police not to arrest political
activists. He scrapped all petty apartheid to laws. By January 1993, all apartheid legislations
had been repealed. He negotiated with Mandela about the transition of power to the majority
blacks.

EXTERNAL FACTORS THAT LED TO THE END OF APARTHEID
The UN
The UN disapproved the South Africa’s apartheid policy. They recognized nationalist
movements in South Africa. They also imposed economic sanctions. As a result, investors
withdrew their money from South Africa. South Africa was isolated from the rest of the world.UN
sanctions crippled the economy of South Africa
Commonwealth Countries
South Africa was expelled from the common wealth. This meant thatSouth Africa lost its allies.
Sports boycotts isolated South Africa from the rest of the world.
Neighboring Countries
Neighboring countries hosted South African exiles.ANC and PAC continued with the armed
struggle from bases in neighboring countries. Black South Africans received military training and
financial assistance from Julius Nyerere, Ben Bella and other African leaders. The
independence of Namibia motivated black South African to continue resisting apartheid
APARTHEID ENDED DUE TO INTERNAL PRESSURE THAN EXTERNAL PRESSURE
The internal pressure played a very important role in ending apartheid because the constant
demonstrations that were carried out impacted heavily on the government by making the
country ungovernable which resulted in chaos and the lack of law and order.
The demonstrations also resulted in the killing of many by the police and during funerals of the
victims, new demonstrations erupted which took workers out of their works and in the process
weakened the country’s economy.
The external pressure also played an important role in ending apartheid because due to the
apartheid laws and activities such as Sharpeville massacre and Soweto uprising, the
international communities such as the UN decided to condemn apartheid and imposed
economic sanctions on South Africa which resulted in devastating economic effects in the
country in general and its trading partners. Fearful of losing friends in Africa as de-colonization
transformed the continent, powerful members of the Security Council, including Great Britain,
France, and the United States, succeeded in watering down the proposals. However, by the late
1970s, grassroots movements in Europe and the United States succeeded in pressuring their
governments into imposing economic and cultural sanctions on Pretoria. After the U.S.
Congress passed the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act in 1986, many large multinational
companies withdrew from South Africa. By the late 1980s, the South African economy was
struggling with the effects of the internal and external boycotts as well as the burden of its
military commitment in occupying Namibia.
WAS INTERNATIONAL OPPOSITION TO APARTHEID EFFECTIVE?

YES
The international opposition to apartheid was effective because the constant pressure of
sanctions on South Africa resulted in South Africa not to have a choice but to give in to the
pressure. The country’s economy was crippled as some investors took their money out of the
country and some countries stopped trading with South Africa. Thus it was impossible to rule a
country if one could not have trade links with others and they resorted to start arranging for free
and fair elections.
NO
The international opposition to apartheid was very much ineffective, because economic
sanctions were imposed on South Africa with the intention to cripple their economy by means of
forbidding trade to take place with other countries. However, this did not have a negative impact
on South Africa because some Western countries did not stop trading with South Africa.
Therefore, the intended sanctions did not play an effective role to cripple the economy and force
the country to change direction.
MEASURES OF THE STATE OF EMERGENCY DECLARED BY BOTHA IN 1985
• The police could arrest people without warrants.

• The police were free from all criminal proceedings.
• Thousands of people were arrested.
• Newspapers, radio and TV were banned from reporting demonstrations and strikes.
CHALLENGES FACED BY DE KLERK WHEN HE BECAME PRESIDENT
• There were increasing raids from ANC and PAC.

• There was increasing white opposition to apartheid.
• The townships were ungovernable.
• Many officials were attacked and often murdered.
• Economic sanctions were biting.
• There was disinvestment.
• De Klerk believed apartheid was unsustainable.
• There was no international sport.
• Church groups were speaking out against apartheid.
WHY AFRIKANERS OPPOSED DE KLERK?
Afrikaners felt betrayed by fellow Afrikaner F.W. de Klerk. Many said he turned his back on
them, their Afrikaner and their shared belief rooted in the Dutch Reformed Church that God
ordained whites would have their own nation in South Africa. Others felt that de Klerk has not
only betrayed his country but his father who was one of the founders of apartheid in the late
1940s and early 1950s and served as a minister in several governments.

De Klerk legalized black opposition parties and freed political prisoners including Nelson
Mandela. Furthermore, de Klerk opened negotiations with the once-banned African National
Congress for a new political and social order to replace the apartheid system under South
African whites has denied political rights to blacks.
Afrikaners expressed sentiments of fear, anger and religious resentment evoked by the
prospect of South Africa becoming ruled by blacks. They claimed they had their own culture and
Christian religion and no witch doctors which the blacks do.
EVALUATE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ROLES OF NELSON MANDELA, FW DE KLERK

AND OTHERS IN ENDING MINORITY RULE
Nelson Mandela
Mandela moved around the country in disguise mobilizing people to join the struggle against
apartheid. He travelled abroad seeking help in the struggle against apartheid. He was the first
leader of Umkhonto we Sizwe.He encouraged more people to join the struggle against
apartheid. The Revonia trials saw the imprisonment of Mandela and other leading figures. While
in prison he refused to renounce the use of violence against the white South Africa. Once free,
Mandela proved to be a very skillful negotiator; his behavior and moderation impressed many
South Africans. In a spirit of forgiveness and reconciliation, he appointed F.W. de Klerk as one
of the two vice-presidents.
FW de Klerk
He unbanned the ANC, PAC and SACP. He released political prisoners including Nelson
Mandela and the death sentence was abolished. He instructed the police not to arrest political
activists. He scrapped all petty apartheid to laws. By January 1993, all apartheid legislations
had been repealed. He negotiated with Mandela about the transition of power to the majority
blacks.
Other Role Players
Desmond Tutu
Bishop Desmond Tutu called upon rich countries to stop trading with South Africa and to
withdraw their money they had invested in its industries. He believed that this would help force
the South African government to move towards a democratic, non-racial system of government.
Steve Biko
He established the Black Consciousness Movement.He organized strikes and demonstration
against apartheid. He organized meetings in townships. He encouraged blacks to take pride in
black culture, history and achievements. He inspired a spirit of fearlessness and resistance
among blacks. He was instrumental in organizing strikes such as the Soweto uprising of 1976-
7. His death led to international condemnation of the white government.
Winnie Mandela

Winnie was imprisoned several times during the anti-apartheid struggle. She participated in a
march against the infamous pass law. She was arrested in particularly blamed for the Soweto
uprising after which she was sentenced to jail again. Winnie’s movements were restricted
several times in an attempt to isolate her from being involved in Anti-apartheid activities.

PAST EXAM QUESTIONS PAPER 1
Topic: Treaty of Versailles
2004
a) Describe what Clemenceau and Lloyd George each wanted to achieve in the peace settlement of
1919 – 20.
b) Why did the Treaty of Versailles cause problems for Germany in the years up to 1923?
c) Was the Treaty of Versailles fair? Explain your answer.
2007
a) Briefly describe the main terms of the Treaty of Versailles?

b) Explain the reasons why the terms of the Treaty of Versailles were so harsh on Germany.
c) To what extent were Britain, France and the United States satisfied with the Terms of the Treaty
of Versailles? Explain your answer.
2009
a) Describe the Terms of the Treaty of Versailles that applied to German armed force.
b) Why did the Treaty of Versailles cause economic problems for Germany in the 1920s? Explain
your answer.
c) “The Treaty of Versailles caused the Second World War”. How far do you agree with this
statement? Explain your answer.
2010
a) What were the aims of President Woodrow Wilson at the peace talks at Versailles?
b) Why did the Treaty of Versailles cause so much hatred in Germany? Explain your answer.
c) To what extent was the Treaty of Versailles fair towards Germany at that time? Explain your
answer.2011
a) Briefly describe the motives of the “Big Three” at the Treaty of Versailles in 1919.
b) Explain why the terms of the Treaty of Versailles caused so much bitterness in Germany.
c) “Germany’s military power was severely weakened by the Treaty of Versailles”. How far do you
agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2012
a) What land was taken from Germany in the Treaty of Versailles?

b) Explain how the Treaty of Versailles affected the lives of the German people between 1919 and
1924.
c) “The Big Three achieved everything that they wanted at the peace negotiations after World War
I.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.

2013
a) What were the aims of Lloyd George at the peace talks at Versailles?
b) Explain the reasons why President Wilson was dissatisfied with the Treaty of Versailles.
c) “The most important reason the Germans hated the Treaty of Versailles was that it was a “diktat
or dictated peace.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2014
a) Briefly describe the aims of Clemenceau during the peace negotiations at Versailles.
b) Explain why the German people criticized the reparations that Germany had to pay to the Allied
powers.
c) “Wilson was more satisfied than Clemenceau with the results of the peace negotiations.” How far
do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2015
a) Briefly describe the military restrictions imposed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles.
b) Explain the reasons why the German people were not happy with the territorial terms of the
Treaty of Versailles.
c) “France was more keen than Britain to punish Germany after the First World War.” How far do
you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2016
a) Briefly describe the territorial terms of the Treaty of Versailles.

b) Explain the impact on Germany of the occupation of the Ruhr in 1923.
c) “The Treaty of Versailles imposed harsh terms on Germany.” How far do you agree with this
2017
a) Briefly describe the aims of Woodrow Wilson during the peace negotiations at Versailles.
b) Why did Woodrow Wilson and Georges Clemenceau not get everything they wanted at the peace
negotiations at Versailles?
c) “The military restrictions on Germany were the main reason why the Germans thought the Treaty
of Versailles was not fair.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.

Topic: The League of Nations
2002
a) Describe two successes of the League of Nations had in the 1920s in solving disputes.
b) Why was the League of Nations quite successful in the first 10 years of its existence?
c) “The good work of the League was destroyed by the Depression of the 1930s.” Do you agree?
Explain your answer.
2003
a) How did the League of Nations hope to prevent future wars between nations?
b) Why did the League of Nations fail to restrict the aggression of Japan in the 1930s?
c) To what degree was the League of Nations a failure? Explain your answer.
2004
a) What were the aims of the League of Nations?
b) Why did the League of Nations have some successes during the 1920s?
c) To what degree can the failure of the League of Nations in the 1930s be blamed on the Great
Depression? Explain your answer.
2005
a) Describe the success of the League of Nations in the 1920s.
b) Why did the League fail to deal with Japanese aggression against Manchuria?
c) “it was the Abyssinian crisis that destroyed the League of Nations as an effective peace keeping
body.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2006
a) Describe the successes of the League of Nations in peace keeping in the 1920s.
b) Explain how the Japanese invasion of Manchuria showed the weaknesses of the League.
c) Which was the more important cause of the failure of the League of Nations – The World
Depression of the 1930s or the invasion of Abyssinia? Explain your answer.
2007
a) Briefly describe the work of any two specialized agencies of the League of Nations.
b) Explain the reasons why the League of Nations did not act against Mussolini when Italy invaded
Abyssinia?
c) "The League of Nations was more a success than a failure." To what extent do you agree?
2008
a) What were the aims of the League of Nations?
b) Explain the reasons why the USA did not join the League of Nations.
c) To what extent were Britain and France responsible for the failure of the League of Nations?
2009
a) Describe ways in which the League of Nations hopped to prevent future wars from taking place.

b) Why did the League of Nations fail to deal with the Italian invasion of Abyssinia effectively?
c) “The League of Nations was a failure from the start.” How far do you agree with this statement?
2010
a) Describe the organization of the League of Nations.
b) Why was the Japanese invasion of Manchuria a difficult problem for the League of Nations to
deal with? Explain your answer.
c) “The United States of America was responsible for the failure of the League of Nations”. To what
extent do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2011
a) Describe the work of the Secretariat of the League of Nations.
b) Explain how the structure of the League of Nations contributed to its failures.
c) “The League of Nations was successful in settling disputes among the smaller nations during the
1920’s.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2012
a) Describe the occupation of the Ruhr in 1923-1924.
b) Explain why the League of Nations did little when Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931.
c) “The Great Depression was the most important reason why the League of Nations failed.” How
far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2013
a) Describe the work of the International Labor Organization (ILO).
b) Explain why some major nations were not members of the League of Nations when it was first set
up.
c) “It was the Abyssinian Crisis that destroyed the League of Nations as an effective peacekeeping
body.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2014
a) Briefly describe the successes of the commissions (agencies) of the League of Nations.
b) Explain why the League of Nations’ successes were only minor.
c) “The failure of the League of Nations was due more to the absence of some of the major powers
than the lack of armed forces.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2015
a) Briefly describe the American attitude towards the League of Nations during the 1920s.
b) Explain how the Great Depression made the work of the League of Nations more difficult during
the 1930s.
c) “The League of Nations was ineffective in resolving conflicts between nations during the 1920s.”
How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.

2016
a) Briefly describe the aims of the League of Nations.
b) Explain why sanctions against Italy during the Abyssinia Crisis were ineffective.
c) “The behavior of Britain and France was the most important reason why the League of Nations
found it difficult to be effective.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2017
a) Briefly describe the successes of the League of Nations in solving disputes between member
states during the 1920s.
b) Explain why the League of Nations did not prevent Japanese aggression against Manchuria in the
early 1930s.
c) “The most important reason why the League of Nations was unsuccessful in the 1930s was the
Great Depression.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
Topic: The collapse of international peace
2001
a) Describe the events of 1938 which led to the Anschluss.
b) Why did Britain and France permit the Anschluss?
c) Were Hitler's policies towards Austria and Czechoslovakia successful? Explain your answer.
2002
a) Describe the attacks on China in the 1930s.
b) Why was Italy able to defeat the Abyssinians?
c) How important were Hitler's pact with Italy and Japan in relation to the events in Europe?
2003
a) When Hitler came to power, what did he hope to achieve in foreign policy?
b) Why did Britain go to war over Poland in 1939?
c) To what degree was the Treaty of Versailles to blame for the outbreak of war in 1939? Explain
your answer.
2006
a) What was agreed at the Munich Conference of September 1939?
b) Why was the Nazi-Soviet Pact of August 1939 important?
c) How far was the Treaty of Versailles to blame for the outbreak of war in 1939? Explain your
answer.
2007
a) What was the Nazi-Soviet Pact?
b) Explain why Stalin agreed to the Nazi-Soviet Pact?
c) Which one of the following factors contributed most to the outbreak of the Second World War?

i. Hitler's foreign policy
ii. The policy of appeasement
iii. The Nazi-Soviet Pact
2008
a) Describe the events leading to the Anschluss.
b) Explain the reasons why Britain and France allowed the Anschluss?
c) To what extent was the policy of appeasement successful? Explain your answer.
2009
a) What were the aims of Hitler’s foreign policy?
b) Why did Britain and France not act when Germany completed the Anschluss? Explain your
answer.
c) How far had Hitler achieved his aims in foreign policy by the end of 1939? Explain your answer.
2010
a) Describe how Hitler broke the terms of the Treaty of Versailles between 1933 and 1938.
b) Why did Britain and France follow a policy of appeasement in the 1930s? Explain your answer.
c) “The Nazi-Soviet Pact was responsible for the outbreak of the Second World War.” To what
extent do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2011
a) Describe the steps taken by Hitler to prepare Germany for war.
b) Explain the reasons why Hitler’s demands in 1938 over Sudetenland did not lead to war.
c) “The most important cause of war in 1939 was the Treaty of Versailles.” Do you agree with this
2012
a) Describe the main aims of Hitler’s foreign policy.
b) Explain why the majority of people in Europe supported Appeasement in the 1930s.
c) Was one of the following factors more important than the others in causing the Second World
War? Explain your answer.
• The Nazi-Soviet Pact

• The weaknesses of the League of Nations
• The Treaty of Versailles
2013
a) Describe the terms of the Non-Aggression Pact of 1939 between Germany and Russia.
b) Explain the reasons why Hitler remilitarized the Rhineland in 1936.
c) “Hitler’s foreign policy was the most important cause of the outbreak of the Second World War”.

2014
a) Describe the main features of the policy of appeasement.
b) Explain how the appeasement policy encouraged Hitler to pursue a foreign policy that became
more aggressive.
c) Which was more important as a step towards war, failure to act when the German army marched
into the Rhineland in 1936, or the German invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1939? Explain your
answer.
2016
a) Briefly describe the Austrian Anschluss in 1938.
b) Explain why Hitler followed a policy of aggression during the 1930s.
c) “The policy of appeasement could be justified at that time.” How far do you agree with this
Topic: The Cold War
2002
a) Who was the Vietcong and what part did they play in the Vietnam War?
b) Why did the USA’s involvement in the war become increasingly unpopular in the USA?
c) How important was the involvement of the UNO in the Korean War?
2003
a) What was decided at the Yalta Conference?
b) Why was Eastern Europe largely in the hands of the USSR by 1946?
c) “Only Stalin of the Allies achieved what he wanted as a result of the war with Germany.” Do you
agree? Explain your answer.
a) Describe the Bay of Pigs incident.

b) Why did the USSR install missile bases in Cuba?
c) “The Cuban Missile Crisis was not as serious as it appeared at the time.” Do you agree? Explain
your answer.
2004
a) Describe how the Berlin Wall affected the people living in Berlin.
b) Why was the Berlin Wall built?
c) To what degree can the decline of Soviet power in Eastern Europe be blamed on the Solidarity
movement? Explain your answer.
a) Describe relations between Cuba and the USA in the period 1959 – 1961.
b) Why was the USA concerned about Soviet Missiles in Cuba?
c) Khrushchev claimed that the Cuban Missile Crisis was a victory for the Soviet Union. Do you

2005
a) Who were the Vietcong?
b) Why did the USA get involved in the war in Vietnam?
c) How far can the American withdrawal from Vietnam be blamed on military failure? Explain your
answer.
2006
a) Describe the relations between Cuba and the USA in the period 1959 – 1961.
b) Why did Khrushchev send missiles to Cuba?
c) “Khrushchev handled the Cuban crisis better than Kennedy.” How far do you agree with the
2007
a) Briefly describe the "Bay of Pigs" invasion.
b) Explain the reasons why the USA was so worried about Russian missiles in Cuba.
c) "The victor in the Cuban Missile Crisis was the USA, not the USSR." To what extent do you
2008
a) What was the Cold War?
b) Explain the reasons why the USSR refused to be involved in the Marshall Aid programme.
c) To what extent was the USSR to blame for the Cold War? Explain your answer.
2009
a) Describe the Blockade and the Berlin Airlift of 1949.
b) Why did the USA-USSR Alliance of the Second World War break down? Explain your answer.
c) “The Cuban Missile Crisis was a victory for the USA.” Do you agree with this statement?
2010
a) What decisions were taken at the Yalta conference in February 1945?
b) Why did the Soviet Union blockade Berlin in 1948? Explain your answer.
c) “The Berlin blockade caused the Cold War.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?
2011
a) What was agreed at the Potsdam Conference in 1945?
b) Explain the reasons why the USSR wanted to control most of Eastern Europe by 1946.
c) Which one was more to blame for causing the Cold War, Truman or Stalin? Explain your
answer.
2012
a) Describe the division of Germany after World War II.
b) Explain why America, Britain and France airlifted supplies into West Berlin.
c) “The USSR was to blame for the Cold War.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain
your answer.

2013
a) Describe the main events of the Cuban Revolution.
b) Explain why the Bay of Pigs invasion took place in 1961.
c) “The Cuban Missile Crisis was handled better by the Soviet Union than by the USA.” How far do
2014
a) Briefly describe the membership and activities of the Vietcong.
b) Explain why American involvement in Vietnam increased from the early 1960s.
c) “The main reason why the Americans withdrew from Vietnam was the opposition to the war
inside the USA.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2015
a) Briefly describe the term Cold War.
b) Explain why Khrushchev had the Berlin Wall built in 1961.
c) “There would not have been a Cold War if the USA had not introduced the Truman Doctrine and
the Marshall Plan.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2016
a) Briefly describe the Marshall Plan.
b) Explain why it was difficult to reach agreement at the Yalta Conference of 1945
c) “It was so difficult to reach a satisfactory agreement at the Yalta Conference” How far do you
agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
Topic:Namibia under Germany
2008
a) Describe the role of Adolf Luderitz in the German colonization of Namibia.
b) Explain the reasons why the Germans wanted to colonize Namibia.
c) "The Namibian resistance against German colonization was successful." To what extent do you
2009
a) Describe the protection treaties between the Germans and the Namibians at the end of the 19 th
century.
b) Why did the War of National Resistance start in 1904? Explain your answer.
c) "The people of Namibia benefited from the First World War.” Do you agree with this statement?
2010
a) Describe the German occupation of South West Africa by 1904.
b) Why did the Herero and others rise up against the Germans? Explain your answer.
c) “Was Namibia better off, when it was a mandate or a colony?” Explain your answer.
2011
a) Describe the living conditions of the Namibians under the German colonial rule.
b) Explain the reasons why Namibia was occupied by Germany.

c) To what extent did the Namibians benefit from the German colonial rule? Explain your answer.
2013
a) Describe the relationship between the Namibian societies and the Germans.
b) Explain the reasons why more German troops were sent to Namibia by the late 1880s.
c) “The Germans used Namibia’s natural resources to develop the country”. How far do you agree
with this statement? Explain your answer.
2014
a) Briefly describe the role of the missionaries in Namibia during the 1880s.
b) Explain why the traditional leaders in Namibia were unwilling to sell land to the Germans in the
1880s?
c) “The confiscation of land was the main reason why the War of National Resistance started”. How
2016
a) Briefly describe the impact of colonial rule on the Namibian people.
b) Explain why the German colonial rulers confiscated Namibian land and forced Namibians into
reserves.
c) “The Namibian resistance to German rule in the period 1890 to 1907 was a complete failure”.
Topic: Namibia under South Africa
2007
a) Briefly describe the Pass Law System.
b) Explain the reasons why SWAPO started the armed struggle against South Africa.
c) To what extent was the Odendaal Plan of 1964 responsible for the division of the Namibian
people? Explain your answer.
a) Briefly describe the terms of United Nations Resolution 435 of 1978.

b) Explain the reasons why the United Nations and South Africa disagreed over Namibia.
c) "The role of the United Nations was the most important reason why Namibia became
independent." How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2008
a) What is a mandate?
b) Explain the reasons why the South African Government confiscated Namibia's land and cattle.
c) To what extent did the South African Government implement the conditions of the mandate?
2009
a) Briefly describe the aims of the Ovambo People’s Organisation (OPO).
b) Why did the people of the Old Location refuse to move to Katutura? Explain your answer.
c) How far do you agree that the United Nations and SWAPO were equally important in achieving
independence for Namibia? Explain your answer.

2010
a) Describe how South Africa kept control of Namibia after the Second World War.
b) Why did the United Nations Organization pass a resolution in 1966 ending the South African
mandate over Namibia? Explain your answer.
c) “Namibian independence was achieved by the Namibian people.” To what extent do you agree
2011
a) Describe the Odendaal Plan of 1964.
b) Explain how the Odendaal Plan negatively affected the Namibian people.
c) “The most important factor in Namibia’s achievement of independence was the role of the
independent churches.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2012
a) Describe the terms of Resolution 435.
b) Explain why the implementation of Resolution 435 was delayed for ten years.
c) “The Contract Labor System had a bad effect on the Namibian people.” How far do you agree
a) Describe Hosea Kutako’s role in the struggle for Namibia’s independence.

b) Explain why the Namibian people refused to move from the Old Location.
c) “The Odendaal Plan had a negative effect on Namibia.” How far do you agree with this
2013
a) Describe South Africa’s rule over Namibia.
b) Explain how the Namibian people reacted towards the introduction of apartheid.
c) “Apartheid only brought negative effects to the Namibian nation”. How far do you agree with this
2014
a) Briefly describe the duties of the United Nations Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG) in 1989
− 1990.
b) Explain why South Africa attacked Cassinga in Angola in 1978.
c) In 1978 the United Nations Resolution 435 proposed a ceasefire and free elections. Which was
more important? Explain your answer.
2015
a) Briefly describe the connections between OPO and SWAPO.
b) Explain why SWAPO, the UN and the OAU rejected the Turnhalle Conference and its proposals
during the mid 1970s.
c) ‘The political resistance to South African control of Namibia was justified’. How far do you agree
a) Briefly describe how the League of Nations Mandate of 1920 was meant to work in Namibia.
b) Explain how South Africa enforced apartheid in Namibia.
c) ‘The important reason why the Namibians hated apartheid was because of its human rights
abuses’. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2016
a) Briefly describe the role of the UN in the achievement of Namibian independence.
b) Explain how SWAPO gained support in its struggle for Namibian independence.

c) “The United Nations Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG) successfully dealt with the problems
in Namibia during the peace process and elections in the years 1989-1990” How far do you agree
Topic: South Africa since 1948
2007
a) Briefly describe the main features of apartheid.
b) Explain the reasons why the National Party introduced the apartheid system in the late 1940s and
the 1950s.
c) How successful was the South African government in imposing apartheid? Explain your answer.
2008
a) Describe the attempts to stop black resistance in South Africa during the 1960s.
b) Explain the reasons why the international community tried to bring about change in South Africa.
c) "Nelson Mandela played the most important role in ending Apartheid in South Africa." To what
extent do you agree? Explain your answer.
2009
a) Describe the apartheid system of South Africa in the 1950s.
b) Why did the National Party win the election in 1948? Explain your answer.
c) How successful was black protest against apartheid in South Africa? Explain your answer.
a) Describe the events in Sharpeville in 21 March 1960.

b) Why was the Sharpeville Massacre of 1960 important in the struggle against apartheid? Explain
your answer.
c) “Mandela was mainly responsible for the destruction of apartheid and minority government in
South Africa.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2010
a) Describe the Group Areas Act of 1950.
b) Why did the National Party introduce apartheid in South Africa? Explain your answer.
c) “F.W. de Klerk was the key player in ending minority rule in South Africa.” To what extent do
a) Describe the restrictions that the Pass Laws put on black South Africans.
b) Why did black South Africans start to oppose apartheid laws after 1950?
c) “Sharpeville attracted more reaction internationally than locally.” To what extent do you agree
with this statement? Explain you answer.
2011
a) Describe the terms of the Separate Amenities Act of 1953.
b) Explain why the National Party won the 1948 election.
c) The policy of Apartheid made the life of all South Africans worse. How far do you agree with
this statement? Explain your answer.
a) Describe the Black Consciousness Movement.
b) Explain the reasons why the ANC was banned.

c) “The ANC was the most important factor in defeating apartheid.” Do you agree with this
2012
a) Describe the aims and activities of ‘UmkhontoweSizwe’ (the Spear of the People).
b) Explain how the apartheid laws changed the lives of South Africans after 1948.
c) “The Group Areas Act was hated more than the Pass Laws.” How far do you agree with this
a) What did F.W. de Klerk do to end apartheid?

b) Explain why the Soweto uprising of 1976 took place.
c) “The Sharpeville incident was a victory for the blacks of South Africa.” How far do you agree
2013
a) Describe the role of Winnie Mandela during the apartheid era. [5]
b) Explain the reasons why the women in South Africa felt that the pass laws were against freedom
and justice.
c) “Women played a major role in opposing apartheid”. How far do you agree with this statement?
2014
a) Briefly describe the beliefs and policies of the National Party in 1948.
b) Explain why Umkhonto we Sizwe(MK) was set up in 1961.
c) “Resistance within South Africa was the most important reason for the ending of apartheid”. How
a) Briefly describe the part played by Steve Biko in the struggle against apartheid.
b) Explain how the creation of the Bantustans affected the lives of some black South Africans.
c) How effective was international opposition to apartheid? Explain your answer.
2015
a) Briefly describe the terms of the Bantu Education Act of 1953.
b) Explain how apartheid made white South Africans think about themselves and about black South
Africans.
c) ‘The Soweto uprising was the most important factor in ending apartheid’. How far do you agree
a) Briefly describe the role played by the trade unions in resisting apartheid in South Africa.
b) Explain why both Nelson Mandela and F.W. de Klerk were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in
1993.
c) ‘The majority of South Africans were denied the rights to rule themselves during the introduction
of apartheid’. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2016
a) Briefly describe the role played by Nelson Mandela in opposing apartheid up to 1964.
b) Explain why the South African government introduced apartheid laws.
c) “Apartheid was unpopular in South Africa”. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain
your answer.
2016

a) Briefly describe how apartheid could lead to the break-up of families.
b) Explain why there was world-wide opposition to apartheid in South Africa.
c) “The South African government was to blame for the unrest in the country in the period 1950 to
1976”. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.

DEPTH STUDY A: NAMIBIA- RESISTANCE TO FOREIGN RULE.
UNIT 1: RESISTANCE TO GERMAN RULE 1884-1915
Germany came in the colonial race very late. They were not interested in having Namibia as a
colony. First foreign people to enter Namibia were the missionaries and traders around the 17 th
century. Namibian ports where only seen as the place where the ships would stop and have
fresh water on their way to India. Walvis Bay however was already the territory of British. By
1883 the interest of Germany on Namibia changed.
DESCRIBE AND EXPLAIN HOW AND WHY NAMIBIA WAS COLONISED BY GERMANY
How Germany colonized Namibia
There were different factors that played a role in Germany ending up colonizing Namibia.
Different role players that contributed to the colonization.
1. Role played by Adolf Luderitz.
 The first step towards German colonization of the region came because of the activities
of a trader, named Franz Adolf Eduard Luderitz.
 In 1882 Luderitz requested protection from the German government. Luderitz wanted to
build a factory in AngraPeguena (now known as Luderitz) and to trade with the
indigenous people. He did not want to use the Walvis Bay harbour as it was owned by
the British.
 Councilor von Bismarck granted him the permission and granted his request.
 In 1883 Luderitz sent hid employee Vogelsang to buy land from a Nama chief Joseph
Fredrick of Bethanie. Volgesang was ordered to by all land within 8km of the
harbor.Vogelsang paid Fredricks the amount of 100 British pound and 200 riffles. The
territory was renamed LuderitzBucht( Luderitz Bay). He was afraid that the British will
declare the area as British protectorate.
 Later Vogelsang Continue to buy more land, this time from Luderitzbucht up to the
orange river, this was about 20miles (32KM) for another ther 500 Pounds and 60 riffles.
 1884 Luderitz put this whole area under the protection of the German government and it
was now known as the German South West Africa. By this time Fredricks realized that
he sold most of the land and his mining rights, because Luderitz tricked him by using
German miles rather than English Miles. ( you will learn about this later in Luderitz
Great fraud)
 Luderitz went on buying land land from the Topnaars, Afrikaners, and Swaartbooi
Communities. Luderitz now owned about 556 square km of land along the coastline and
all mineral rights on it.
 In 1886Luderitz drowned in the Orange River, the German Society for South West Africa
bought all land and mining rights that belong to Luderitz. By this time the Germans have
realized that Namibia was the only colony suitable for white settlement. The same year
the border between Angola and Namibia was negotiated between the Portuguese and
the Germans.

 1889 the first group of Schutztruppen arrived in Namibia and was based in otjimbingwe
with Captain Von Francois.
 1890 the first German military fort was built in Windhoek and the Caprivi Strip was
handed over to Germany. And Namibia was declared a Crown Colony of Germany and
additional troops were send to Namibia to set up a proper administration in Namibia.
 In 1894. Major Theodor Leutwein was appointed as the first governor of German South
West Africa.
The Great Luderitz land fraud
We have mentioned that Luderitz bought land from different Nama leaders. The first Chief
that sold land Luderitz was chief Fredicks from Bethanie. The agreement between chief
Fredricks was that Luderitz would obtain 5miles of the harbor for the amount of 100 pounds
and 200 riffles. Luderitz again bought land from Luderitz to Orange River around 20
geographical miles and paid 500 pounds and 60 riffles,
Joseph Fredricks was led to believe that the distance was in English miles. Luderitz did not
tell the chiefs that he was buying land on German miles and the chiefs thought they were
selling this land on English miles. Luderitz argued that he meant German miles and not
English miles. German miles are 5 times bigger than the English miles. Fredricks ended up
selling around 125 miles to Ludertiz without knowing. In this way Luderitz took over most of
the territory that belonged to Josef Fredricks and all the mineral rights that belong to him.
Luderitz used the same Method to buy land from the other chiefs. He bought the land from
the Topnaars that is located 20˚-26˚S Latitude. That is the coastline between Kaokoveld to
AngraPequena excluding Walvis Bay. He also gained Mineral rightsfrom the land that was
occupied by the Basters and Jan Jonker Afrikaner. Later he paid the Swaartboois 100
pounds for their land that later became known as the Kaokoveld. Some chiefs were selling
their land as little as 50 pounds. By 1885 Luderitz owned large part of the territory as well as
the mineral rights. The indigenous people were now forced into small reserves.
2. The Role of Missionaries and traders
The missionaries came into Namibia way before Luderitz came and occupied AngraPequena.
Missionaries came to Namibia to spread Christianity. They build Missionary stations and
Namibians will gather around this mission stations. They influenced the people to stop their
nomadic lifestyle and to settle on one place.
The traders came to exchange finished products with the raw materials. And they used the
mission stations to trade with the locals. Traders will go from one station to the next to trade with
people. Through traders Namibia was open to all kinds of foreign visitors, farmers, gold miners,
hunters and settlers.
The in fights between the Hereros and The Namas made the missionaries and the traders feel
unsafe. The two groups asked the British government for help but the British did not offer
protection outside Walvis Bay. Later on they seek protection from the German government and
the German government saw an opportunity to come into Namibia. As they saw the Mineral

wealth in Namibia and they needed to resettle poor Germans as the population grew in
Germany.
The Nature of German Colonialism
The Germans wanted to access the entire Namibia and too gain more land from the Namibians.
The Germans needed land for Number of reasons. German interest in occupying overseas
territory grew. Because,
 Of the need for raw materials

 The need for overseas Market
 The need for an outlet for excess population.
 And to divert the attention of the other European powers from the growing economic and
military strength of Germany.
The Germans thought of ways to obtain this land from the Namibians. They developed the
system of the protection treaties and divide and Rule Strategy.
The Protection Treaties
As from 1880 there were constant fights between the Hereros under Chief Maharero and the
Namas( Swaartboois) under the Jan Jonker and Jonker Afrikaner. They were mostly fighting
over cattle and land. The Germans saw this as an opportunity to extent their influence into the
central Namibia, and using this fights as the excuse to bring law and order to the country.
The German agents under the Authority of Nachtigal and H.E Goring convinced the local chiefs
sign protection treaties. Under these treaties, Germans offered protection to one Namibian
group against the other group, including the Europeans; in return Namibian should give
Germans access to their land and Mining rights. The chiefs saw this as a great opportunity and
signed these Treaties exceptMaharero and Witbooi.
In 1884 H.E Goring was trying to convince the Herero chief to sign the treaty with the Germans,
but Maharero was not interested, he wanted to sign with the British but the nama –Herero war
broke out again in the same year. Maherero did not get any response from the British and he
decided to sign the treaty with the Germans. He also gave away the mineral rights. Witbooi
refused to sign and he even warned Maharero not to sign away his independence.
In 1888 Maharero cancelled the protection treaty with the Germans. He informed Goring that the
treat was cancelled and it was Null and Void and that the Germans were no longer welcome on
the Herero land unless” they wanted to see their heads laying on their feet”
In 1889 von François came to Namibia with 21 Soldiers. He was ordered to avoid conflicts with
the Hereros and to sign protection treaties with all Namibians. He tried his best to sign
protection treaties with Namibian groups.
In 1890 Chief Maherero died, and the Germans helped Samuel Maharero to take after Chief
Maharero. In return, Samuel Maharero renewed the treaty that was cancelled by the Chief

Maharero. And in the process he signed away large part of the Hereroland. Witbooi still refused
to sign the protection treaty. He made it clear that “he will not become Subject of Germans”.
DISCUSS THE RESISTANCE OF GERMAN RULE BY NAMIBIANS INCLUDING THE

UPRISING OF 1893-1894
April 1893 Von Francois attacked Witbooi’s headquarters at Hornkrantz. Another 250 Soldiers
were again sent from Germany as reinforcement and launched a surprise attack on the Nama.
The Schuzttruppen killed large Number of Namas, 75 women and children were out of 85 killed
according to Witbooi. The Germans present at the battle claimed that they killed 150 people and
out of 150 only 60 were men and they captured 50 prisoners. The Nama army escaped and
fought back from the Gamsberg Mountains
In 1894 Von Francois was replaced with Leutwein when he failed to subdue the Namas, who
arrived with the orders to set up the white settler colony. After 18 months of fighting, in 1894
Witbooi surrendered and signed a peace treaty with Germans.
The country developed rapidly. Europeans were so eager to settle in Namibia. Land was
confiscated and given to the German settlers; very soon large part of Namibia was occupied by
the Germans.
Divide and rule Strategy (policy)
Germans were using the war between the Namas and the Hereros to their advantage. While the
two groups were fighting they were occupying land through protection treaties. As long as the
local people were fighting they were no chance of them uniting and stand as a united front
against the Germans. This concept was known as “divide and rule”. The Germans knew that
the indigenous people will be stronger when they unite and they were trying all means to stop
them from uniting. They do everything in their power to keep the local groups fighting this made
it easier to control them.
The objective of divide and rule was:
 Keep the cost minimum for Germany

 Make it clear that Germany was in control
As from 1892 the Government planned to mark out reserves for the indigenous people,
while the rest of the Country will become crown land for sale to settlers from Germany. This
plan was designed to:
 Help the government to control the movement of the indigenous people.

 To take away political independence of indigenous people.
 Making the local people dependent on the new government.

Concession companies were set up and land in the central and southern part of Namibia were
sold to this companies. This could only be done by expropriating the land from the local
people.
DETERMINE THE IMPACT OF COLONIAL RULE ON THE NAMIBIAN PEOPLE
THE IMPACT OF GERMAN COLONIAL RULE ON NAMIBIAN PEOPLE
NEGATIVE IMPACTS
• Namibian people were left without land for grazing their animals.
• They ended up without rights and freedoms in their own country.
• They were divided into ethnic groups.
• Many were beaten, wounded, tortured, arrested or killed.
• They were forced to become cheap labourers.
• Families / marriages broke up because of the contract labour system.
POSITIVE IMPACTS
• Namibians were provided with jobs.
• They were provided with education.
• They were converted to Christianity.
• Namibia received infrastructural development.
• Germans discovered some minerals.
• They traded with locals.
OPPOSITION/RESISTANCE TO GERMAN COLONIAL RULE
• Some chiefs like KapteinHendrickWitbooi refused to sign protection treaties with the
Germans.
• Some chiefs e.g. Maharero who had earlier singed, decided to cancel these treaties.
• Some chiefs e.gKahimemua refused to make their land available to the Germans.
• Chiefs such as HendrickWitbooi wrote letters to other leaders telling them not to sign
treaties or give land to the Germans.
• Some refused to see the Germans e.g. Kambonde rejected Leutwein’s request to visit
him in the north.
• Workers organised strikes, go-slow and escaped from work.
• The last resort was to take up arms against the Germans.
The colonial rule had more negative impacts on the indigenous people than the positive
impacts. The lives of the Namibian people changed forever.
Leutwein takes control
 On 8 March 1894 in order to establish German Authority over the territory Leutwein
executed the Nama Leader Andreas Lambert of Gobabis for the death of the German
trader.

 In 1894 then prepared another attack against Witbooi.
 Leutwein helped SamualMaharero to become the chief of the Hereros and won Samuel
Maharero support. He was given the right to place his troops in Okahandja.
 Leutwein used the Murder of a white man by Herero chief Manase to obtain control over
Damara area of Okombahe.
 He forced the Herero to accept SamuelMaharero as the paramount chief of all hereros
and force them to vacate the area as far as white Nossob River.
 He made an agreement with Samuel Maharero to confiscate herero cattle if they cross in
the white area and sell them at the auction
 He shifted the Mbanderu borders when the whites demanded for more land. He shifted it
in such a way that the Mbanderus lost land to Samuel Maharero.
 In 1896 the Eastern Hereros and /khauasNamas started an uprising but hey were
crushed by the Germans with the help of the Hereros and Namas under Witbooi.
 Leutwein intervened in the land clash between the Swartboois and the Herero of
Manase. He gave military training to the Namas. He later replaced kaptein David
Swartbooi with his brother Lazarus Swartbooi.
 In 1898 more unrest developed within the Swartboois, Leutwein used his Military to
crush them and move the entire tribe to Windhoek.
 In 1898 the Bondelswartz refused to pay taxes, Leutwein took his troops together with
Witbooi and met the Bondelswartz in Keetmanshoop and the Bondelswartz agreed to
pay taxes.
EXPLAIN THE WORSENING RELATIONS BETWEEN GERMANS AND NAMIBIANS
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NAMIBIANS AND GERMANS
• Many Germans came to Namibia for various reasons. Hunters and traders were
interested in making money, while missionaries wanted to covert people to Christianity.
• A trade relation develop between the Namibian Societies and the Germans, as the
local people realized that they could buy useful household goods such as buckets
and tools also sell cattle, food and other produced goods to the traders. Some
people became wealthier.
• Various Namibian Societies lost land, which led to wars in the country between the
Germans and various different groups.
• Protection treaties were signed, the treaty did have the effect of stabilising the situation
but pockets of the rebellion persisted and real peace was never achieved.
THE LIVING CONDITIONS OF THE NAMIBIANS UNDER GERMAN COLONIAL RULE
• Namibian farm workers were badly treated.

• Workers were beaten injured and even killed.
• Colonial Police sided with the colonial farmers.
• Workers badly / lowly paid / not enough money to buy basic necessities.

• Workers were subjected to minimum food rations and as a result farm workers resorted
to steal cattle and hunting wild animals.
THE RESISTANCE BY THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE.
DESCRIBE AND EXPLAIN THE RISING OF THE HERERO AND NAMAQUA 1904-1907
FACTORS THAT LED TO THE COLONIAL RESISTANCE.
1. Brutal oppression and discrimination

2. Confiscation of cattle
3. Confiscation of land
Uprisings from 1893-1904
 On 12 April 1893, Curt von Francois unexpectedly attacked the NamaofHendrikWitbooi

at Hornkrantz. Mainly women and children were killed andhomes were destroyed. After
this, Witbooi led his people into guerrilla warfareagainst the Germans.
 1894Andreas Lambert, chief of the /Khaua, refused to hand over the murderer ofa
German trader to Leutwein. His headquarters at Naosanabis were attackedand Lambert
was executed.
 1896 Mbanderu leaders (Kavikunua and Nguvauva) started to revolt about all theland
that Samuel Maharero had given to the Germans. Both were found guiltyof treason and
executed in the presence of Samuel Maharero.
 1898The Bondelswarts refused to pay tax and revolted against German rule. Amilitary
force was sent to crush the uprising. The Bondelswarts surrendered atKeetmanshoop
and a large part of their land in southern Namibia was taken by the Germans.
 1903Shooting broke out between a group of Bondelswarts and German forcesBoth the
Bondelswartskaptein as well as a German officer were killed.Leutwein rushed to the
south to solve the problem. While he was in thesouth, the Herero used the opportunity to
rebel against German control incentral Namibia. HendrikWitbooi was asked to punish the
Bondelswarts sinceLeutwein had to hurry back to Windhoek, but Witbooi refused.
 In early 1904, the Herero under the leadership of Samuel Maharerorevolted against
German rule by killing between 123 and 150 Germans, including Boers and women. This
officially marked the beginning of the War of National Resistance.
 1904 the same year the Nama under Witbooi revolted in the South against the Germans.
The Herero Uprising
1904, Samuel Maharero instructed his people to exterminate all white people, excluding the
English, Boers, Basters,missionaries and Berg Damaras,
On 12 January 1904, several hundred Herero invaded Okahandja, set buildings on fire and
killed 123 people most whom were Germans. With Leutwein still in the South, Maharero wrote

the letter to the Owambo, Basters and Namas to join him in the revolt. But the letter did not
reach the intended destination.
By 14 January, the violence had spread to Waterberg. The post office was destroyed and all
the soldiers at the military station were killed. More and more Herero people gathered around
Maharero.
On 16 January,Gobabis was besieged and a few days later a German military company was
trapped at Otjiwarongo.
Leutwein requested reinforcements from Germany. Leutwein began to organize his campaign.
After two bloody battles, the Germans started to get the upper hand.
May 1904, Lieutenant-General Lothar von Trotha replaced Leutwein. The German government
thought that Leutwein was too soft on the Hereros, with him came reinforcements of about 14
000 troops. The German forces encircled the Herero at Waterberg. Von Trotha gave order to
behead any Herero that is seen.
On 11 August the final battle, called battle of Hamakari, took place at Waterberg. The Hereros
were Defeated in the battle of Hamakari. Herero people, including Maharero, escaped through
the German lines and headed eastwards into the Kalahari Desert in an attempt to reach British
Bechuanaland.
Von Trotha gave orders to poison all water points, ordered all captured Herero to be shot. Many
of the Hereros died of thirst,and Starvation in the desert and others died by drinking poisoned
water.
The Nama Revolts
October 1904 while the Germans were fighting the Hereros the namas of Witbooi also revolted.
HendrikWitbooi decided to break his treaty with the Germans.
After the Herero defeat at Hamakari, The Germans now turned their attention to Witbooi.
Witbooi now was supported by the Fransman, the Rooinasie, Veldschendraers, Most
Bethaniens and the Bondelswatrz.
14 November 1904 Witbooi wrote a letter to Leutwein, claimingthat he had not broken the
protection treaty, but that it was the will of God.
1905 After the Brutal fighting for almost a year HendrickWitbooi was killed on 29 October 1905
near Vaalgras. Jacob Marengo took over the leadership and continued fighting.
1906 Some of the Nama Groups Surrendered and gave up on the fighting because they lost
hope after the death of their strong leader.
1907 Marengo was killed by the South African Police that was patrolling by the river. This
marked the end of resistance.

DESCRIBE THE GENOCIDE IN NAMIBIA AND ITS IMPACT ON THE NAMIBIAN PEOPLE
The genocide and its Impact on Namibian People
1. The Germans created the concentration camps on the shark Island were the
extermination continued for the ones they captured.
2. The Herero race was almost wiped out. The Hereros were around 60 000 before the war
and only 16 000 remained after the war.
3. The Nama population Drastically decreased compared to their pre-war sizes
4. All Hereroland were Confiscated.
5. The Survivors lost their land, cattle, freedom and even forced into cheap labour.
6. The Nama and the Herero were given smaller land in the reserved and were not allowed
to owned cattle.
7. Von Trotha’s order caused an Outcry and the German Government lift the order in
December 1904.
8. Missionaries tried to made efforts to help the starving Hereros
9. Leutwein also showed his sympathy by issuing a proclamation.
The Concentration camp
 Nama and Herero Survivors were put in to prisons also known as the labour camps of
concentration camps.
 These camp were located at Shark Island, Near Luderitz and Swakopmund
 The Conditions in these camps were harsh.
 Everyone in the Concentration camps was given a Number.
 Every death and the cause of the death was recorded
 German businesses could hire people to work for them from the camps
 About 50%-70% of the Hereros died in the camps and about 50% Namas.
 Many people died from Malnutrition, diseases and cold in the camps.
 Some of the Skull had to be taken to Germany as used as Exhibition in the museums
even for experimental purposes.
The Germans was willing to spend more money on the war rather than the development of the
colony. Germany spent about 600 million on the war of National resistance and on the
maintenance of the colony they would only spent about 14.5 Million.
Germany also had Master and servant act in place; it restricted the employees from asking for
better working conditions. People had few rights and the traditional leaders were appointed as
the agents of Germany in Maintaining law and order.

UNIT 2 RESISTANCE TO SOUTH AFRICAN RULE 1945-1990
Background
After the Germans lost the WW1 the Allied powers punished Germany and German Colonies
were taken away from Germany under the Territorial terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Namibia
was classified as a C mandate, as it needed guidance and to be prepared for independence.
Namibia was given to S.A under the terms of the mandate.
Under South African Rule Namibian suffered apartheid and South Africa was not willing to give
Namibia its independence, Namibians had to stand Together to fight for Namibian
independence.
Growth of Nationalism
As the Country developed and life in the reserves got harder the Namibian moved to towns and
cities where they learned about their common enemy. People could now read and write and
they understood that they had rights and this they needed to fight for themselves. They
developed the love and loyalty towards their country and they wanted it back from the foreigners
at al cost.
Factors that contributed to Nationalism:
1. Urbanisation
2. The outbreak of WW2
3. Education
4. Establishment of United Nations
Formation of the Nationalist Movements
Political Resistance to apartheid until the 1950’s was based on Ethnicity. Trade Unions,
University Students organizations and local political groups laid the foundation of sophisticated
resistance. Resistance to the South African control in the early years was organized by the
chiefs. As early as 1946 chiefs Hosea Kutako tried to send s delegation to UN to report the
situation in South West Africa.
EXPLAIN THE THE FORMATION OF DIFFERENT NATIONALIST MOVEMENTS IN NAMIBIA
These were political organisations formed to fight for freedom and independence of Namibia
9. The Herero chief’s council (HCC)

 It was formed in 19 by the Herero chiefs
 Hosea Kutako became its leader
Aims of the Herero chiefs council
 To fight for the rights of the Herero
 To win back the land of the Herero people which was taken by the whites

10. Ovambo people’s congress (OPC)
 It was formed in 1957 by the contract labourers who went to work in South Africa
 AndimbaToivoyaToivo became its leader
Aims of OPC
 To improve the living and working conditions of the contract workers
11. Ovamboland people’s organisation (OPO)

 It was formed in 1928
 It was a name change from OPC to OPO
 Sam Nujoma became its leader
Aims of OPO
 To improve the living and working conditions of contract workers
 To bring Namibia under the direct control of the UN
 To win the independence of Namibia
12. South West Africa National Union (SWANU)

 It was formed in 1959, by SWAPA and the Herero Chiefs Council members
Aims of SWANU
 To unite all south west African people in the struggle for independence
13. South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO)

 It was formed in 1960
 It was a name change from OPO to SWAPO
 Sam Nujoma became the leader of SWAPO
Why did they change the name from OPO to SWAPO?

 OPO was too exclusive, because of its name which was perceived to be representing
the Ovambo people only
 For the movement to have credibility in the eyes of the international organisation like the
UN and OAU
Aims of SWAPO
 To fight for the rights of all black Namibians
 To fight for the independence of Namibia
14. Caprivi African National Union (CANU)

 it was formed in 1964, by Brendan Simbwaye and MishakeMuyongo
Aims of CANU
 to end SA rule in Caprivi
 it want the UN to force SA out of Caprivi

15. Damara Tribal Council (DTC)
 Was formed in 1971, by a group of Damara speaking people, later it changed its name
to UDF (United Democratic Front of Namibia)
Aims of DTC
 To fight for the independence of Damara people
16. National Unity Democratic organisation (NUDO)

 it was formed in 1964, by Hosea Kutako and Clemens Kapuuo
Aims of NUDO
 wanted the equality for all South west African people
 to fight for independence for Namibia
 to end apartheid
Windhoek Massacre
The Windhoek Massacre was the first form of physical resistance against the South African rule.
For the first time in Namibian History Namibians stood up against the unfair treatment. This
even brought the turning point in the history of Namibia.
Accordance to group area act introduced by the South African regime, the Namibian was asked
to make way for the new suburb that was to be build for whites. In this location everyone had to
live accordance to their race. Namibians did not want to move due to the fact that:
1. The people have lived on this land for generations and their ancestors were buried there.
2. The houses that they were living in were theirs and they had their gardens there to feed
themselves from.
3. Kututura where they were being moved was very far from town, it will not be easy to
walk from there.
4. The Houses in Katutura belonged to the municipality meaning they have to pay rent
there.
The reason given by the municipality was that the old location was overcrowded and unhealthy.
Events that led to the Massacre
 On 9 December 1959 number of women decided to have a peaceful march to

see the Residence administrator, JaapSnyman. Snyman refused to see them or
listen to their complaints.
 The people decided to boycott the municipal buses, the Boycotts turned into
demonstrations.
 On the 10th December with the support from OPO and SWANU the inhabitants of
the old location marched to the beer hall.
 This got ugly and demonstrators started to throw stones at the building. There
were police officers and municipal officials in the building.

 Then people started to set police vehicles on fire, this turned disastrous. Police
came out and started to fire on the people.
 Ending up wounding 54 people whereby 2 later died in the hospital. Killed 11 and
arrest some.
 At the end of the day the people were forcefully removed from the old location
resulting in property damaged, the graves remained. The new location now is
known as the Hochland park,
 10 December is commemorated as the international human rights day.Windhoek
was the turning point in the Namibian History. After the Massacre the Namibian
people realized that South Africa will do anything to keep Namibian from
Achieving independence. Namibian people were now eager to fight for the
independence.
Ongulumbashe
After the Windhoek Massacre, OPO realized that all peaceful means were not working. In 1960
OPO changed its name to SWAPO (South West African People’s organization). In 1962 decided
to start an arm struggle. Plan fighters received help from Communist countries (China, Russia
and Cuba) and independence states in Africa like Tanzania, Angola and Zambia.
In 1965 OAU recognized SWAPO as the representative for the Namibian people and as the only
organization that was likely to bring change in Namibia.
Events that led to Ongulumbashe attacks
 1959 Windhoek Massacre took place in Namibia

 1962 SWAPO decided to take up arms against the Apartheid government
 1965 OAU and UN recognized SWAPO and Started to Support SWAPO
 1966 SWAPO established a base at Ongulumbashe to recruit and train local to become
soldiers. Unfortunately the news reached the South African administration.
 Om 26 August 1966 the South African defense force helicopters located the base and
major clashes broke out.
 The South African Police unit attacked the camp. Killing 2 PLAN fighters and arresting
others. Some PLAN fighters managed to escape.
This battle marked the beginning of a fierce arm struggle that would last about for the next
20 years. 26 August came to known as the Heroes day.
ToivoYaToivo’s Trail
After the Ongulumbashea number of SWAPO leaders were arrested. This included
AndimbaToivoyaToivo, Nathaniel Maxulili, John YaOtto andElliaserTuhadeleni.
100 people were arrested and out of this 37 had to stand for Trail.
The accused where charged for terrorism, treason and wanting to overthrow the government.

They argue that their reason was that all peaceful means have failed and that was the only way
of getting independence.
During this trail the accused also questioned the right of South African court to try and condemn
people from another country. (Remember this man where trailed in Pretoria in South Africa).
Yah Toivo and other Prisoners were sentenced to long term in prison. Toivo Received 20 years
of imprisonment and served 16. He was released from jail in 1986. He was to serve his prison
sentence at RobbenIsalnd.
DESCRIBE THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONS SUPPORTING RESISTANCE

INCLUDING THE CHURCHES, LABOUR UNIONS, STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS,
PRESSURE GROUPS ( EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL), POLITICAL PARTIES.
Namibian Resistance to South African rule came in number of different ways, both from inside
Namibia (internal) and from Outside Namibia (external).
Internal resistance
1. Trade Unions
1948, the first resistance against the contract labour system appeared when 2000 Owambo
workers went on strike in Tsumeb after the killing of a worker by a white foreman.
In 1949, a trade union was formed to represent all workers working in the fish factories of Walvis
Bay and Lüderitz. In 1952 and 1953, three strikes were organized to demand the improvement
of the working conditions and wages of these workers.
The Union organized the General strike in 1971, which was supported by the churches. They
demanded better working conditions for the workers and better wages.
In the same years SWAPO exhile established a secretary of labourin the person John Ya Otto.
John ya Otto worked to gain international support for the liberation struggle amongst the
national and international trade unions.
Trade union such as NUNW, NAPWU, MUN, NAFAU was established all of them aimed at
improving the lives and working conditions of workers.
NUNW was one of the first trade Unions in Namibia. They worked to Mobilize the struggle
amongst workers. SWAPO would recruit their members as Contract labourers so that they will
mobilize workers from Inside.
2. The churches.
By 1970, more and more churches joined the liberation struggle.
The referendum of 1971.

The South Africa government was trying to convince the international community that Namibian
people supported the South Africa. John Voster the prime Minister at that moment approached
Bishop Aula of ELOC (Evangelical Lutheran Owambo-Kavango Church) to hold a referendum.
The Congregations in the north took part in the referendum. The outcome of the referendum
showed that the Namibian people were not in favour of the South African rule and they were in
favour of the ICJ ruling that declared South Africa Illegal in Namibia.
They wrote an open letter
After the referendum, Number of churches sent an open letter to Vorster. It was written by
bishop Auala of ELOC and Bishop Gowaseb from ELC (evangelical Lutheran church). This
letter was published in the newspaper for the whole world to read. In this letter they criticized
and condemn the policy of apartheid and the violation of human rights. The open letter was
followed by the pastoral letter which was read in all churches
in Namibia. In the pastoral letter they outlined that they don’t support the apartheid policies and
that the church supported the liberation struggle.
On august 1971 the two leaders, Bishop Auala and Pastor Gowaseb confronted prime Minister
Vorster. They openly declared that they were against the South African rule, they spoke out
about the violence used on Namibian people and Auala gave his support to the general strike of
1971.
Student organisations:
SWAPO organized strikes nationwide strikes. It mobilized school children to boycott classes and
sabotage schools. During the 1980’s, the Namibia National Students Organisation(NANSO)
started organizing national strikes inNamibia their demands included:
 using English as the medium of instruction
 The immediate implementation of UN Resolution 435
 That SWATF and KOEVOET bases be removed from school premises
 For the right to commemorate Cassinga Day
 The release of all political prisoners.
External Support
1. Eastern European Countries
USA and USSR often secretly became involved to swing independent governments to
follow their ideological system. Namibia, Angola and South Africa were not different.
While the USA supported South Africa in the beginning, different Eastern European
communist countries gave their support to the liberation struggle. In the early years, the
USSR became SWAPO’s leading supplier of arms and money. In the late 1960s, PLAN
fighters also received training in guerrilla tactics from the Soviet army. Throughout the
liberation struggle, the USSR provided guerrilla fighters with AK-47 assault rifles, PPSH-
41 submachine guns and TT-33 pistols. When the use of landmines as part of the
Bushwar was adopted in the early 1970s, the Soviet Union supplied TMA-3 and TM-46
landmines.

Although the Soviet Union was the first communist country to support the armed struggle
in Namibia, other countries, like China and Cuba (which are not Eastern European
countries, but both are communist countries) also played a major role in the training of
soldiers and supply of weapons and aid to guerrilla fighters. Members of SWAPO were
always welcomed in these countries and received protection and financial assistance to
continue the struggle. China was one of the countries that contributed the most to the
Liberation Committee (LC) OF THE OAU. The liberation committee (LC) distributed the
money and weapons to liberation movements across Africa that were fighting for
independence.
2. The Western Contact Group
The WCG started to negotiate with South Africa, stressing that the UN would never
accept a government in Namibia that excluded SWAPO. These countries had not
participated in sanctions against South Africa, but they indicated that they would not be
able to protect South Africa any longer. A series of meetings took place between the
WCG, South Africa, SWAPO and some of Namibian’s neighbouring countries, including
Botswana, Angola and Zambia. In April 1978, an agreement was reached and was
approved by the UN on 27 July 1978. The points of agreement in April were incorporated
into the UN Security Council Resolution 435 of September 1978:
South Africa agreed to Resolution 435 in 1979, but before the elections could take place,
South Africa said that it would only reduce its troops in Namibia on condition that Cuba
withdrew from Angola. Arguments on this issue delayed Namibia’s independence for
another 10 years.
3. The Organization of African Unity (OAU)
A special liberation fund was established to which every OAU member state had to
contribute a certain percentage of its income.One of the biggest contributors to this fund
was the People’s Republic of China. The LC obtained £ 20 000 for Namibia. These
funds were offered to both SWANU and SWAPO, but when SWANU seemed unwilling to
guarantee that its share of the £20 000 would be used for the armed struggle, it was
awarded to SWAPO alone. The OAU then acknowledged SWAPO as the sole legitimate
representative of the Namibian people. This eventually led the UN and other
international bodies such as the Non-Aligned Movement and the Commonwealth of
Nations to also recognize SWAPO as the sole representative of Namibians.
 The OAU Liberation Committee (LC) supported SWAPO by providing resources

for the liberation struggle.
 It also provided training and bases to PLAN soldiers and helped them to open
diplomatic offices in London, Lusaka, and Cairo.
 The financial assistance from the LC made provision for funds for material goods
like military equipment, transport, training and other logistical support, and also
for the funding of administration and publicity activities.
 Throughout the years of the Bushwar, the OAU rendered vital support to
SWAPO.
4. The role of the United Nations Organization (UN)

 After World War II, the UN requested South Africa to put Namibia under direct
control of the UN.
 South Africa’s refusal paralyzed the UN since it did not have any means to put
pressure on South Africa, except for sanctions.
 The ICJ’s ruling in July 1966 that it did not have the authority to declare South
Africa’s presence in Namibia illegal came as a big blow to the Namibian people.
 The UN tried to set up a Council for Namibia.
 This council was to take over the administration of Namibia and would be under
chairmanship of Sean McBride.
 In 1970 the Security Council of the UN passed Resolution 283 in which it asked
for all UN member states to close their diplomatic offices in Namibia.
 It also recommended boycotts and voluntary sanctions against South Africa.
 In 1971 the ICJ reversed its earlier decision and declared that South Africa’s rule
in Namibia was illegal.
 The court also ruled that South Africa was under obligation to withdraw its
administration from Namibia immediately.
 This announcement of the ICJ inspired the independent churches in Namibia to
write the open letter to Vorster!
 In 1974 the UN recognized SWAPO as the sole representative of the Namibian
people. The UN also requested member states to increase sanctions against
South Africa.
 In January 1976, the UN passed Resolution 385 in which they called for South
Africa to allow free and fair elections in Namibia.
 The UN passed Resolution 435 on 29 September 1978, which set out the terms
for Namibia to achieve its independence.
 When South Africa refused to reduce their troops in Namibia if Cuba did not
withdraw from Angola, the UN continued with discussions among all participants.
Methods used in the resistance including petitioning, peaceful protest , strikes,

propaganda, rallies, armed struggle
1. Protests
At the beginning of the resistance efforts Namibians preferredpeaceful protests as a wayto bring
about changein the country. The firstprotest took place in 1959,when women marchedto protest
their forcedremoval from the OldLocation to Katutura.After that, the churchand different
delegationsprotested against SouthAfrican rule. However, it soon became clear thatSouth Africa
did not takeprotestors seriously. Yet,it focused the attentionthe internationalcommunity on
Namibia
2. Strikes
The first strike in Namibia took place in 1948 in Tsumeb. This was followed by three major
strikes in 1948 and 1953, during which strikers demanded that, their working conditions and

wages be improved. Although small localized strikes continued, the next major strike took place
in 1971. The magnitude of the general strike paralysed the Namibian economy and forced
South Africa to the negotiation table
3. Propaganda
In 1969, the 'Friendsof Namibia' group waslaunched in London.The great speaker was
MosesGaroeb. Friendsof Namibia createdplatforms on different Occasions for Namibiansand
other political figuresto advocate against SouthAfrican rule in Namibia.Reverend Michael
Scott'sAfrica Bureau also exposed apartheid practices inNamibia. SWAPC and several
churchmencampaigned constantly for Namibia’s freedom.
4. Petitioning
After South Africa refused to put Namibia under UN trusteeship, a wave of petitions flooded the
UN. First Petition was written by Chief Hosea Kutako, When they failed to sent representatives it
went through reverend Michael Scott, asking the UN to grant Namibia its independence.
Scott’s efforts to petition the UN and the ICJ fiercely during the late 1940s yielded an important
breakthrough in 1949. When the Trusteeship Committee allowed him to talk on behalf of the
indigenous people of Namibia, Petitioning bore more fruit when Namibian leaders were invited
to bring their case to the General Assembly of the UN. In 1956, DrMburumbaKerina was sent by
the Herero Chief Council to petition the General Assembly on behalf of the Herero people. After
that, various petitioners acted on behalf of Namibia, for example, HendrikWItoool in 1958,
ToivoyaToivo, also in 1958 and SimnonKaukungua in 1959
4. Rallies
In 1966, the General Assembly of the UN revoked the mandate of the League of Nations, calling
on South Africa to withdraw from Namibia. Anti-apartheid movements pressed the British
government to comply with the UN resolutions not to have any dealings with South Africa over
Namibia The Western Contact Group put pressure on South Africa and in 1978, the Security
Council endorsed a plan for transition to Namibian independence.
6. Armed struggle
SWAPO decided to take up arms against South African rule. Its military initiative survived the
Ongulumbashe and the Pretoria Trial. Guerrilla fighters of SWAPO were operating in Kavango,
Owambo- and Kaokoland despite the SADF patrolling the Caprivi Strip. South Africa had to
acknowledge the military threat in the north, which raised the reputation of SWAPO. The
independence of Angola in 1974 opened the way for activist movements in Lusaka and Luanda,
and it enabled PLAN fighters to penetrate the northern region of Namibia from bases in
southern Angola. 'Friends of Namibia met the needs of the liberation\struggle and continued to
lobby for support for SWAPO.
Explain Why SWAPO began to use force

After the Windhoek Massacre it was clear to all Namibians that South Africa Would do anything
to keep Namibia from getting independence. By now they have realized that they can go to an
extent of killing just to get what they want. The Namibians realized that the only method that can
work is to take up arms.
Reasons that forced SWAPO to take up arms
1. All peaceful means have failed. The Namibians have tried to deal with the Issue of
South African occupation in peaceful ways. In 1959 they had a protest against force
removal; they had strikes in 1948, 1953 and 1971. They tried sending petitions whereby
some passports were confiscated. United Nations sanctioned South Africa and Western
contact tried putting pressure on them. All this efforts failed.
2. The events of Windhoek massacre. After the killings at Windhoek massacre it was
evident to the Namibians that they need to level up. South Africa went to an extent of
killing Namibians just to have their way.
3. The decisions by the ICJ. The Decisions by the international court of Justice was a
blow to Namibia. They have waited for four years for this verdict hoping it will change
the fate of the Namibians just to be that ICJ cannot change the status of Namibia.
4. South Africa refused to sign the passes of the leading figures. Without passes it
was hard to move around Namibia, South Africa refused to sign this passes to stop the
leading figures from going around the country.
Evaluate the support Namibia received during the liberation struggle with specific
reference to Angolan and Cuban support
ANGOLA
When Angola received their independence from Portugal 1974, the doors were opened
for the PLAN fighters of SWAPO. SWAPO could now operate safely and improve their
supply lines.
 In 1978 Swapo was more organized in the north of Namibia and much stronger in
Ovamboland.
 Both UNITA and South Africa was being aided by USA while MPLA and SWAPO were
being aided by Russia.
 In 1975 Angola became the battle ground for Cold war in Africa.
 The PLAN fighters now were fighting from the bases in Angola.
Cuban Support
 The presence of Cuban troops made it impossible for South Africa to win their battle
against Namibia.
 Cuba was called in by the MPLA to help when the civil war broke out after 1975
 Cuba send Large Troops and weapons to Angola to assist MPLA from UNITA
 Cuban Soldiers who helped MPLA extended their help by training PLAN fighters in
guerrilla tactics.

 The Cubans also aided PLAN fighters with Weapons
 By now South African Government was aware that MPLA was helping SWAPO and they
extended their help to UNITA.
 The first battle between MPLA-Cuba and the SADF-UNITA took place at CuitoCunavale,
on 27 June 1988 Cuban forces bomb the Caluegge Hydro complex killing 12 SADF
Soldiers.
 Cuban troops only withdrew from Angola so that Resolution 435 could be implemented.
Explain the South African Reaction to Namibian resistance.
Declared state of emergency: the government thought that the law and order of the country is
breaking down and they are losing control of it. The government declared state of emergency.
During the state of emergency, people were not allowed to gather more than five (5); this was to
avoid rebellion or resistance. People would be detained without a trail and no movement was
allowed after Sundown.
They tighten the security legislation: apart from State of emergency South Africa passed
harsh laws to crush resistance. In 1967 it published the law on terrorism. The legislation was too
broad that any person or group that opposed South African rule could be found guilty. The
Punishment for this crime was the same as high treason, the death penalty or imprisonment
more than 5 years.
Military intervention (formation of KOEVOET and SWATF) The Moment that South Africa
realized that SWAPO has taken up arms; it increased their troops in Namibia and started a
special units which mainly consist of Namibian people, KOEVOET and SWATF. KOEVOET
was formed to track down and eliminate SWAPO guerillas that crossed the borders from
Angola. SWATF were securing the borders and to destroy bases in Angola.
Cassinga attacks. As more people joined the struggle, they flee to SWAPO bases. Cassinga
was one of the SWAPO refugee bases located 250km north of the Angolan border. South Africa
heard about this base and launched an attack on 4th May 1978. Killing more than 600 people
and captured about 200. South Africa Justified their actions by saying it was a training base for
PLAN fighters.
Explain the change in South African Attitudes towards Namibia

 UN recognised SWAPO as a sole and authentic representative of the Namibian people.
People.

territory.
DESCRIBE EFFORTS TO GRANT NAMIBIA SELF-GOVERNMENT

 UN recognised SWAPO as a sole and Authentic representative of the Namibian people .
People.

territory.
The Turnhalle Conference 1975
SA government asked the national party (NP) in Namibia to organise for a constitutional
conference for all ethnic groups in Namibia.
Aims of the Turnhalle Conference
 To draw up a constitution.
 To give some forms of independence to the Namibians.
 The representatives from the different ethnic groups met on 1 September 1975 in
Windhoek in the old gymnastic hall called Turnhalle
 Representatives of the Turnhalle conference were hand-picked by the SA authority
 SWAPO, SWANU and other political parties did not take part in the conference, because
the conference was based on:
 Ethnic grouping not political parties.
 It was dominated and chaired by whites.
 It was organised by SA instead of the UN.
Why did SWAPO, UN and OAU not recognise the turnhalle constitution?

 The conference was not a truly representatives of the Namibian people as delegates
were not elected but hand -picked by SA authorities.
 The conference was dominated and chaired by white South Africans.
 The conference was organised by NP not by the UN.
 It did not represent all Namibians as political parties were not invited.
 The conference did not meet the criteria set out in the UN resolution of free and fair
election.
 The ethnic appointment supported the policy of divide and rule.
The Western Contact Group/ (Western 5)

Member’s Countries of the Western Contact Group
 USA
 Canada
 Britain
 France
 West Germany
 They asked the UN to allow them to come and negotiate directly with SA
WHY?
 They had economic interest in SA that they wanted to protect
 They were scared, they would also be affected by the UN’s Sanctions on the SA since
South Africa had most of the commodities that they needed.
 They held discussions with SA, Namibia, Botswana, Zambia and Angola
 In their discussion the Western Contact Group persuaded the South African to:
 Suspend the Turnhalle constitution
 Allow free and fair election to be held under the supervision of the UN
 SA to appoint the administrator general (AG) to work together with the UN in
preparation for the election
Successes of the western contact group Failures of the western contact group
 It led to the agreed proposal to  SA continued to control the territory,

suspend the Turnhalle Constitution they held election under its own
and appointed the AG. supervision without the involvement
 The agreement was reached with of the UN and the AG controlled the
various players which laid the territory under SA rule.
foundation of the UN-supervised  Members of the western contact
election. group could not resolve their
differences as Britain had much
interests in the territory
 South Africa went on with the
implementation of the Turnhalle
Conference which was formalised in
1977.

Resolution 385 of 1976
 It was the UN’s response to the Turnhalle conference

 The resolution called for free and fair election to be held under the UN supervision
 However SA ignored resolution 385
 Then the UN imposed the economic sanctions on SA
The Multi-Party Conference (MPC)1983-1984
 After the Turnhalle conference and resolution 385 failed,

 This conference involved the members from different political parties no more members
from ethnic groups.
Members of MPC
 SWANU, DTA, DTC, SWAPO-D led by Andreas Shipanga and the NP which joined the
conference in 1984
Aims of MPC
 To draw the constitution of Namibia which will be recognised internationally and to led
Namibia towards independence
Failures of MPC
The conference was supported by the SA white authorities

SWAPO did not participate, therefore SWAPO accused the MPC as being SA tools
delaying the independence of Namibia
Why SWAPO refused to join the MPC?
 It indicated that it was used as a tool by SA authorities to delay Namibian independence

 MPC served the whites interest and not the people they claimed to represent
 SWAPO refused to participate in anything that was organised out of the UN resolutions
435
 It was organised by the whites SA and it was dominated by whites.
The Transitional Government Of National Unity (TGNU)
 It was formed by P.W Botha in 1985

 Most of the members who were serving in the TGNU were leaders of the MPC
 It consisted of 62 cabinet members, were mainly responsible for controlling Namibia until
independence
What problems were encountered by the TGNU?
 The TGNU was not a representative body, it was not truly multi-racial and its ministers
were not elected and SWAPO did not participate in it.
 The UN and OAU did not recognise the legitimacy of the TGNU.

UN Resolution 435
Terms of the resolution 435
 A cease-fire binding agreement to both SWAPO plan fighters and the SADF in their
bases
 The release of all Namibian political prisoners
 Return of all refugees and exiles
 Reduce the number of SA troops
 Arrange for free and fair election that would be accepted by the UN
 Election to held under UN supervision
Why resolution 435 took 10 years to be implemented?
 SA feared that SWAPO fighters in Namibia would be armed during the election
 SA demanded the withdrawal of the Cuban troops from Angola, because SA feared
Cuban troops in Angola would invade Namibia during the election, which was known as
linkage policy.
 The inclusion of Walvis Bay to an independent Namibia, SA wanted to keep Walvis Bay
as part of SA because of its economic benefits
 The size of the UN task force, SA expressed their unhappiness and opposition to the UN
sponsored election
 The date of the election, SA claimed that the date for election was too near, the asked
for more time to prepare themselves and this took time to reach on the agreement
The United Nations Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG)
 UNTAG was the UN peace-keeping force sent into Namibia in early 1989, to come and
monitor the independence process and ensuring that free and fair election in Namibia is
taking place.
The purpose of the UNTAG
 To help in managing the independence process

 To supervise the election and registration of voters
 To train election officials
 To ensure that people decide their future freely without fear or intimidation
 To implement resolution 435
 Repatriation of refugees and in exile
 The release of all Political prison
Registration and education of voters
 Registration points were set up all over Namibia.

 UNTAG undertook a multi-media campaign to inform voters about the aspects of the
election process in different local languages.
 Voters were informed about their rights and duties to vote.
 Everyone that was 18 years and above were registered as voters.
Repatriation of exile, refugees and the release of political prisoners
 The resolution stipulated that all exiles and refugees should be allowed to come back
home and participate in the election
 And all political prisoners to be leased and participate in the election
EVALUATE UNITED NATIONS (UN) INVOLVEMENT IN ACHIEVING INDEPENDENCE
 UN could only act as far as its structure allowed it to.

 The constitution of the UN does not allow it to interfere in the internal affairs of countries.
 It also cannot just take up arms to enforce its decision.
 Sanctions and resolutions are the many tool available to the UN with which to enforce its
decisions and unfortunately this tool involved a lengthy process.
 UN played a tremendous role and spent millions of dollars in promoting the
independence process in Namibia.
UN helped Namibia to gain independence in various ways:
 They passed various resolutions e.g. Resolution 385, Resolution 431 and resolution
435.
 They set up a special committee led by Sean MacBride.
 They Sent the UNTAG to organise Supervise elections.
 They also imposed sanctions on South Africa.

PAPER 2
• There are 3 Depth studies ( Namibia, Russia and Germany)
• Depth Studies will be done in a cycle of two years
• Namibia: 2020-2021
• Russia: 2022-2023
• Germany: 2024
• It carries 40 marks ( 33%)
• It is 2h15mins longer
• Paper 2 is a source- based paper
• Learners must answer one depth study prescribed per academic year.
• The question will be based on a range of sources and the primary focus is Assessment
Objective B, but aspects of Assessment objectives A1 and A2 will also be assessed
General guidelines for paper 2 type of questions
• What does this source tells you about….
• What is the message of this source?
• What can you learn from this source about……
• How far do these two sources agree?
• Note : these are comprehension questions
• They are usually the early questions
• They mean to be easy- they carry lower marks
Question 1
• What can you learn from this source /what does this source tell you about?
• Step 1: Infer to the source ( make a meaning from the source/identify Valid inference).
• Step 2: support your inference with the source

• Step 3: Add your knowledge regards the topic/ or consolidate your inference with other
sources in the paper that give the same view( Cross reference)
The main ingredients for this question are:
• Valid inferences + Support+ Contextual Knowledge/ Cross reference
Question 2
• How far do these two sources agree?
• Step 1: Make a choice, e.g the two sources agree/disagree
• Step 2: Identify the similarities/differences ( valid inferences of Sim/Differences
• Step 3: Support the inferences with the valid supports from both sources
• Step 4: Identify the other side ( sim/diff)
• Support it with the relevant part of both sources
• Add your knowledge of the topic ( please take timeframe into consideration)
• Remember the requirement of this questions is to:
• Identify valid inference(s) of Sim +Support from all Sources AND Valid inference(s) of Diff +
support from the sources Plus Contextual Knowledge / Cross references. In other words a
balance answer of Agree AND disagree is the requirement.
Question 3
• What is the message of this source
• Step 1: Infer from the source( make a meaning by interpreting the source
• Step 2:Explain the valid inference to work out the Big message (BM) of the source, the Big
message is = valid inference explained.
• To work out the BM, you should address words such as :so that, in order to…
• Support your message with the details of the source.
• Remember: face value from the cartoon can be used as a support.
• Every details of the source will help you to interpret the source.
2ndtype of questions: Evaluation questions.
How reliable is this source
How useful is this source.

Is one source more reliable/useful than the other…..
Do you trust this source?
Useful question.
A source may be more useful or less useful BUT not useless or not useful.
Sources are more useful or less useful depending on the question being asked of them. A
source can be More Useful about something but less useful about something else.E.g.the
source is more useful on how the Nazi used terrorism method to stay on power but it is less
useful in telling us other methods that were used by the Nazis.
To answer this type of question:
Step 1: make a choice e.g.it is more useful/Less useful.
Step 2: Address Useful for what by making valid assertion.
Support your claim with the source.
You can test the reliability of the source
To test the reliability.
Address the following:
Date: why was it said in that particular year?
Audiences: Who were the audiences and why did the author want them to hear that at that
time?
Author: Why is the author saying so by that time?
To test the reliability,
Please check the provenance (originality)
Where is the source from?
Who the author is?
The type of source: a speech, a diary,
The following types of sources may be done for different purposes, thus the degree ofReliability
may be different:
E.g. A public speech and
A Diary

A public speech may be less reliable than a Diary because when making a speech, the author
may select words that may be suitable to audiences, but a diary is a private book which may not
necessarily has audiences, thus author might not have any reason to lie in a diary, thus could
be more reliable.
A poster is designed to promote, persuade, convince A cartoon can be drawn to criticize,

convince etc.
Check whether a source was from a newspaper, radio, TV etc. as this will help you to work out
who the audiences were, thus work out the Reliability
Last question.
How far do these sources prove/support the view that …….
Step1: Candidate should treat each source separately e g SourceA, proves/support/agree

that…..
Step2: Support the choice with the correct part of the source.
NB: Please avoid paraphrasing and rephrasing of sources,
Testing of Reliability,
To test the reliability considers the following:
• Date
• Author
• Audiences
Please note that the following sources may have different purpose
Public speech:
Diary:
Newspaper:
Television/radio etc.
Posters are drawn with a purpose e.g. convince, persuade, encourage, propaganda purpose to
win the hearts/minds of people, promote etc.
Cartoons may be drawn to criticize/convince
In conclusion
When setting a paper, have a variety of sources: primary and secondary sources, Cartoons/
photographs

Important marking Grids indications
Choice C
No choice NC
Valid inference VI
Valid Assertion VA
Purpose P
Support Sup
Contextual Knowledge CK
Cross reference CR
Testing of Reliability TR
Paraphrasing Par
Misinterpretation Mis
Provenance Prov
Isolation Iso
Surprised S
Not surprised NS
More useful M.U
Less useful L.U
Limitation Lim
Reliable R
Not Reliable N/R
General Gen
Repetition Rep
Similarities Sim
Differences Diff

NAMIBIA SENIOR SECONDARY CERTIFICATE
HISTORY ORDINARY LEVEL 6138\1
PAPER 1
Marks 20 June 2020
Activity 1
Topic : The League of Nations
Study the cartoon and then answer the questions below
(a) Describe the work of the Health Committee. [5]
(b) Explain why some major nations were not members of the League of Nations when it was
first set up. [7]
(c) “It was the Abyssinian Crisis that destroyed the League of Nations as an effective
peacekeeping body.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. [8]

[20]
PAPER 1
Marks 20 June 2020

Activity 2
(a) Describe the social successes of the League of Nations. [5]
(b) Explain how the development of militarism in Japan weakened the work of the League of
Nations. [7]

(c) “The failure of the League of Nations was the most important cause of the Second World
War”. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. [8]
[20]
PAPER 1
Marks 20 June 2020
Activity 3
(a) Briefly describe the successes of the commissions (agencies) of the League of Nations. [5]
(b) Explain why the League of Nations’ successes were only minor. [7]
(c) “The failure of the League of Nations was due more to the absence of some of the major
powers than the lack of armed forces”. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your
answer. [8]
[20]
PAPER 1
Marks 20 June 2020
Activity 4
(a) Briefly describe the work of any two specialized agencies of the League of Nations. [5]
(b) Explain the reasons why the League of Nations did not act against Mussolini when Italy
invaded Abyssinia? [7]
(c) "The League of Nations was more a success than a failure.” To what extent do you agree?
Explain your answer. [8]
[20]

History 10 11

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

History 10 11

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA

KAVANGO WEST REGIONAL COUNCIL

When Excellence Becomes A Tradition, Greatness Will Sky-Rocket.

2|Page Kavango West Region

Background; The outbreak of WW1

How the war happened.

 Bosnia was under the rule of Austria-Hungary

3|Page Kavango West Region

Allied Powers Central Powers

Who was to be blamed for the out Break of The war?

4|Page Kavango West Region

5.1 The International relations since 1919

5.1.1 The Treaty of Versailles and its impact 1919-1923

David Lloyd George Prime Minister of Britain

He blamed Germany for starting WW1.

Woodrow Wilson President of USA

5|Page Kavango West Region

He wanted all countries to disarm, more armaments was a threat to peace.

He believed in Self-determination: he wanted all countries to rule themselves and be

He wanted formation of League of Nations: as a peace governing body, which will be

Georges Clemenceau the Prime Minister of France.

He wanted to Punish Germany harshly: he wanted Germany to be punished in such a way

The Terms of the Treaty of Versailles

6|Page Kavango West Region

1. Austria became a small, independent country andAnchluss was forbidden.(Germany

Military restrictions or terms

1. The German army was reduced to 100 000 men.

7|Page Kavango West Region

War guilt clause

8|Page Kavango West Region

David Lloyd George

What victors got from the Treaty of Versailles?

9|Page Kavango West Region

10 | P a g e Kavango West Region

Discuss the impact of the peace treaty on Germany up 1923

11 | P a g e Kavango West Region

12 | P a g e Kavango West Region

Why the Treaty of Versailles was Harsh/Severe on German

13 | P a g e Kavango West Region

14 | P a g e Kavango West Region

15 | P a g e Kavango West Region

5.1.2 THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

Aims of the League of Nations

 Discourage aggression from any nation / to prevent war

 Through the Covenant of the League of Nations.

 Through Collective Security.

 By imposing economic sanctions

 By use of military force

The structure of the League of Nations

16 | P a g e Kavango West Region

Functions of the structures of the League of Nations

 The Secretariat was headed by a Secretary General based in Geneva.

The International LabourOrganisation (ILO)

17 | P a g e Kavango West Region

 The Court was based at The Hague in the Netherlands.

AGENCIES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

 The Mandates Commission

FUNCTIONS OF THE AGENCIES OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

 The Mandates Commission

 The Health Committee

 The Refugees Committee

 The Slavery Commission

 The Disarmament Commission