World+War+II

This page focuses on what students most need to know about this topic in preparation for the IB exam.

1. IB Definition of Topic
For examinations 2010-16:

The Second World War and post-war Western Europe 1939-2000
This section deals with the Second World War, post-war recovery and the effects of the Cold War in the second half of the 20th century and, in some cases the transition from authoritarian to democratic government. It requires examination of the social, political and economic issues facing states and the methods used to cope with the challenges, either within individual states or in the move towards a system of European integration, in pursuit of mutually acceptable political, economic and foreign policy goals.
 * Second World War in Europe; Cold War: impact on Germany, NATO and military cooperation
 * Post-war problems and political and economic recovery in Western Europe: devastation; debt 1945-9
 * Establishment and consolidation of the Federal Republic of Germany to German reunification
 * Moves towards political and economic integration, cooperation and enlargement post-1945: EEC, EC, EU
 * Spain: Franco’s regime and the transition to, and establishment of, democracy under Juan Carlos
 * Case study of one Western European state between 1945 and 2000 (excluding Germany and Spain): the nature of the government; domestic policies; opposition and dissent

Questions in Chronological Order
2002-M

QUESTION 20 For what reasons could it be argued that the Second World War in Europe was ‘total war?’

This question was very popular, but was answered very poorly by almost all candidates. Most responses did not understand the concept of Total War beyond conceiving it as a war fought by a lot of nations over a large area, and/or involving a lot of weapons. There was no mature analysis of the mobilizing of war economies or the extent to which civilians were involved other than as the target for bombing. Many candidates also insisted on writing about the war outside Europe. This question was a disaster for many candidates and teachers should steer their candidates away from this question unless it has been specifically taught in school.

2002-N

QUESTION 20 Why, and with what effects on Europe, was the Nazi-Soviet Pact signed in August 1939?

Candidates knew the terms of the Nazi-Soviet Pact but were far more uncertain on the effects that it had on Europe-particularly the long-term effects. Few candidates linked the Pact to the Nazi invasion of the USSR in 1941 and no mention was made of the effect on the development of the Big Three - Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin.

2005-N

QUESTION 21 Account for the successes of Nazi Germany in Europe between 1938 and 1942.

The main problem with this question on Nazi successes in Europe, 1938-1942, is that few went beyond the invasion of Poland. Even the invasion of Russia was rarely mentioned. Instead candidates wrote about policies pre 1938 which they said were responsible for later successes.

2006-M

QUESTION 21 Assess the political consequences of the Second World War in two European countries between 1939 and 1950.

Another question that has not been asked in this way before, and which confused some candidates. This was surprising, because when asked for ‘economic consequences’ many resort to political ones, but a few knew what this question required.

2006-N

QUESTION 21 Analyse the importance of one of the following to the eventual outcome of the Second World War in Europe: war in the air; war at sea; war on land.

A few analytical answers of the war in the air were seen, but again descriptive accounts predominated.

2008-M

QUESTION 20. Why did the Second World War break out in 1939?

Candidates considered that the main causes of the Second World War were the Treaty of Versailles, Hitler and appeasement, which were described rather than analyzed at some length, but few addressed 1939

2011-N

QUESTION 10

This was a popular question. Some answers showed an ability to link the war to events in Russia although the vast majority struggled to make links to the war after 1918. Weaker answers tended to narrate the sequence of events often with limited detail such as vague references to defeat without naming at least one major battle, or arguing that one of the reasons Bolshevik support increased was because of the determination to make peace.

QUESTION 12

A reasonably popular question with most answers addressing a number of factors which led to defeat. The greatest weakness was that the focus was very largely on Germany and the western front which is reasonable up to a point but it was a world war and the question asks about the Central powers.

2012-M

QUESTION 19 Why had Germany been divided into East and West by 1949?

Popular, however many turned this into a “causes of the Cold war” answer which was fine up to a point but links had to made to detailed events in Germany to show how Cold War tensions led to the official division of Germany into two separate states by 1949.

2013-M

QUESTION 17 Assess Stalin’s role in the collapse of the wartime alliance.

There were some very good answers to this question with good in-depth knowledge and well-balanced arguments which were able to make use of historians’ views by testing their hypotheses against the facts. A significant number of answers however had very limited knowledge and did not understand the term “wartime alliance” and made reference instead to the Nazi-Soviet Pact. Others blamed Stalin entirely

QUESTION 19 Why were the Axis powers defeated in Europe in the Second World War (1939–1945)?

This too was a very popular question with some extremely good responses supported by a wealth of detail regarding the various factors such as strategic mistakes, overstretching of supply lines etc. At times however these factors were known but analysis did not fully indicate the impact of them on the chances of the Axis powers. Some answers focused exclusively on Germany and ignored the issue of Italy a weak ally who undermined Germany by continually needing assistance. There was also an over-emphasis on the importance of the coldness of the Russian winter when arguably the scorched earth policy was also a key contributory factor to the failure of Barbarossa. Materials on events in the Pacific were not relevant as the questions said very specifically “in Europe “

2014-M

QUESTION 17

There were some extremely good answers for this question. They examined – with some detail - the internal impact of the war on the Soviet Union, referencing the economy, casualty rates, and leadership etc. Some candidates were, however, tempted to discuss the ways in which the Soviet Union emerged as a superpower. This was fine so long as they did not move far beyond the end date of 1945.

QUESTION 20

Responses varied greatly with a large number accepting the statement uncritically. Most had some knowledge of the events of the post-Second World War period and wanted to write a ‘causes of the Cold War’ answer. Nevertheless others were able to examine the situation with a more analytical approach and considered several other possible reasons underpinning the formation of NATO. However, some thought that NATO and the United Nations were interchangeable and there were several responses in which candidates had written descriptions of events up to and including the formation of the Warsaw Pact. These were not relevant responses.

2014-N

QUESTION 19

There were some good answers here as candidates were able to consider a range of factors covering the early days through to the last campaigns of the Second World War. Some candidates focused on the dropping of the Atomic bombs; something that was not relevant to the European theatre of war.

Causes of WW II
1. Assess the importance of each of the following in causing the First or the Second World War: nationalism; alliances; economic factors.
 * Examiners: Quite possibly, this was the most popular question on the paper with the majority of candidates choosing to assess the causes of the Second World War. Most attempted to determine the importance of all three factors mentioned in the question, although too many responses resorted to a recounting of the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, the impact of the Great Depression and made do with rather vague references to Lebensraum. It was a pity that so few candidates considered events outside of Europe or, indeed, outside of Germany seeing this, instead, as an opportunity to narrate the rise to power of Hitler. Much could have been said about the impact of treaties other than Versailles, and more focus placed upon agreements made in the 1930s that had a more immediate impact upon the outbreak of war. Similarly, the Great Depression had consequences beyond causing (it could be argued) the end of Weimar Germany and it was good to see some responses mention how economic problems also gave rise to Japanese expansionism. Some candidates linked ideology not only to Nazism/Fascism but also to Communism, demonstrating how the fears this raised contributed to the support for more extreme nationalism. The best answers did make explicit links to the outbreak of war in 1939. Some candidates chose to address the causes of the First World War. However these responses were all too often quite limited in scope with probably the majority not even approaching 1914 but becoming embroiled in alliances and imperialism. Again, specific knowledge linking treaties (alliances would do), economic circumstances and ideology (especially nationalism) to the outbreak of war, was well rewarded.

2. Examine the reasons for the failure of collective security before the Second World War (1939–1945).
 * Examiners: Possibly, this was the most popular question on the paper with some strong linkage of “collective security” to the League of Nations and its subsequent failure to prevent another war of the magnitude of the First World War. Some candidates did get waylaid by the temptation to narrate the terms of the Treaty of Versailles and so did not manage their time well enough to take their arguments up to the outbreak of war in 1939. In general, many candidates provided a well supported analysis of the weaknesses of the League of Nations; mentioned not only the absence of the USA but outlined why this was a problem; discussed Manchuria and Abyssinia with some authority only to come to an abrupt halt in 1936. Candidates need to read the question very carefully and to make sure they meet its demands fully for a very good/excellent mark.

3. How important were appeasement and the collapse of the League of Nations as causes of the Second World War?
 * Hardly surprisingly this was extremely popular but the candidates demonstrated tremendous fluctuations in the quality of their essays. It was quite remarkable how many responses only focused on the League of Nations or appeasement. There was also confusion as answers often started on the foundations of the League and spent far too much time referring to the 1920s. This meant that the latter part of the question was ignored. Very few candidates could actually define the term ‘appeasement’. A third approach was to ignore the focus of the question and argue that it was all Hitler’s fault anyway.

4. To what extent did collective security become a victim of economic problems in the inter-war years?
 * The two required concepts, ‘collective security’ and ‘economic problems’, were quite difficult for candidates to combine, but many tried to do so.

5.
 * Candidates considered that the main causes of the Second World War were the Treaty of Versailles, Hitler and appeasement, which were described rather than analyzed at some length, but few addressed 1939.

6. Assess the social and economic causes of one twentieth century war.

7. In what ways did the causes of the Second World War differ from the causes of the First World War?

Course of WW II
1. Assess the significance of naval warfare in determining the outcome of one twentieth century war.
 * Examiners:The significance of naval warfare in determining the outcome of one twentieth century war was tackled with reference to either the First World War or the Second World War (usually only in relation to the Pacific) Answers tended to focus heavily upon the USA in both cases- reiterating yet again quite wrongly that it was the sinking of the Lusitania which brought the USA into the war. Better responses did have knowledge of blockades, the use of carriers, submarine warfare, major invasion attempts etc. and were able to also comment on „other factors‟ which may have been significant in determining the outcome.

2. In what ways did advances in technology affect the nature and outcome of warfare in the first half of the twentieth century?
 * Examiners: Although the level of knowledge concerning the ways in which wars are fought is often impressive, few responses to this question demonstrated more than rather basic detail on the kind of technology used in the wars chosen. Most candidates chose a war where technology won out (such as the Gulf War) or where it was no match for the resilience of guerrilla fighters (such as Vietnam) but, more often than not, failed to support arguments with good detailed knowledge.

3. For what reasons could it be argued that the Second World War in Europe was ‘total war?’
 * This question was very popular, but was answered very poorly by almost all candidates. Most responses did not understand the concept of Total War beyond conceiving it as a war fought by a lot of nations over a large area, and/or involving a lot of weapons. There was no mature analysis of the mobilizing of war economies or the extent to which civilians were involved other than as the target for bombing. Many candidates also insisted on writing about the war outside Europe. This question was a disaster for many candidates and teachers should steer their candidates away from this question unless it has been specifically taught in school.

4. Analyse the importance of one of the following to the eventual outcome of the Second World War in Europe: war in the air; war at sea; war on land.
 * A few analytical answers of the war in the air were seen, but again descriptive accounts predominated.

5. In what ways, and with what results for Europe between 1939 and 1949, was the Second World War a “total war”?
 * Whether it is in paper 2, for a world perspective, or in Europe in this paper, most candidates still cannot define and produce many examples of „total war‟. Also they failed to understand the differences in terms of results between a war and total war.

6. To what extent did technological developments ensure victory in 20th Century Wars?

7. Account for the defeat of the Axis powers in the Second World War.

8. In what ways, and with what results for twentieth century wars, did tactics change between World War I and World War II?

9. Assess the impact and significance of wartime leadership in two out of the Big Three allies.

Effects of WW II
1. Analyse the economic and social effects of two wars in the second half of the twentieth century.
 * Examiners: Very few good responses were seen to this question and most responses were very general. The majority of candidates who attempted this question did distinguish between economic and social effects, but detailed knowledge was, mostly, rather limited. World War One was the most common example chosen and candidates tended to look at post-war effects, although it would have been quite acceptable to have focused on the social and economic impact as the war was being fought during the period 1914 -18. There was a tendency to give an account of the Treaty of Versailles and the impact of reparations on Germany as economic effects and the return of women to the home as the social impact. It may be advisable to warn candidates that a good deal of detailed knowledge is needed to address questions on social and economic history effectively and unsupported assertions do not score well.

2. Assess the political consequences of the Second World War in two European countries between 1939 and 1950.
 * Another question that has not been asked in this way before, and which confused some candidates. This was surprising, because when asked for ‘economic consequences’ many resort to political ones, but a few knew what this question required.

3. Other Content Review Materials
Here is a detailed outline(s) and other great review materials for this unit, prepared by Shannon Leggett for her IB classes.
 * [[file:WW2 Causes-Outline-Leggett.doc]]