2022 HKDSE History Answers & Marking Scheme

To answer this question, candidates need to identify the dual nature of the author's attitude: pride/triumph regarding Japan's newly achieved status, and caution/ambition regarding the maintenance of this status.

1. Pride/Confidence: The author boasts that Japan has become a 'first-class power' and ended Western discrimination. Clue: 'entered the ranks of the world's first-class powers' or 'No longer will the Western nations look down upon the yellow race.'
2. Caution/Ambition: The author warns against complacency and urges military expansion to secure colonies. Clue: 'we must not be complacent; we must continue to expand our navy... ensuring our dominance in East Asia.'

- Identify attitude (1 mark): Proud / confident / triumphant / ambitious / cautious.
- Quote and explain relevant clue (2 marks):
- e.g., Proud of military victory and status change (1 mark) because the text states Japan 'entered the ranks of the world's first-class powers' (1 mark).
- e.g., Ambitious/cautious about securing hegemony (1 mark) because the author warns they 'must not be complacent' and must 'expand our navy... to guard newly acquired interests' (1 mark).

Candidates can choose one of the following two major challenges presented in the source:

Option 1: Shortage of educational resources.
- Clue: The source states that the provinces face a 'severe shortage of modern teachers and textbooks' and there are 'not sufficient funds to establish new primary schools'.
- Explanation: Without teachers trained in western curriculum, modern textbooks, or funds, the transition from traditional schooling to modern education was highly impractical and stalled.

Option 2: Social instability / discontent of the traditional literati.
- Clue: The source notes that traditional scholars who studied Confucian classics are 'left with no livelihood, and they loudly voice their discontent'.
- Explanation: The abolition of the civil service exams alienated the educated elite class, creating a group of disgruntled, unemployed intellectuals who could threaten the regime's stability.

- Correctly identify one challenge (1 mark): e.g., Lack of resources OR Social instability caused by displaced scholars.
- Explain the challenge with reference to the source (2 marks):
- e.g., For resource shortage: Explain how lack of modern teachers/textbooks/funds hindered reform (1 mark), citing the relevant text (1 mark).
- e.g., For social instability: Explain how disenfranchising traditional scholars created a class of idle, angry literati who opposed the state (1 mark), citing their 'lack of livelihood' and 'discontent' (1 mark).

To answer this question, candidates need to analyze both aspects of Germany's attitude shown in the source:

1. Supportive and Committed: Germany shows strong loyalty to the Dual Alliance. Clue: Germany promises it 'will honor its treaty obligations and stand firmly by your side' if Russia mobilizes.
2. Cautious and Restrained: Germany is wary of escalation and does not want local Balkan issues to spark a major war. Clue: Germany advises 'moderation', calling a general war over 'a minor Balkan port' undesirable, and fears involving France and Britain.

- Identify attitude (1 mark): Committed/supportive, but cautious/restrained.
- Quote and explain clues (2 marks):
- e.g., Committed (1 mark): Germany states it will 'honor its treaty obligations' if Russia mobilizes against Austria-Hungary (1 mark).
- e.g., Cautious (1 mark): Germany advises 'moderation' as a war over a 'minor Balkan port' is undesirable and could drag in France and Britain (1 mark).

Candidates should discuss both sides of the statement before making a balanced judgment.

Points supporting "preserving traditional imperial autocracy":
- Source A: The Constitution guarantees absolute imperial sovereignty, stating the Emperor is 'sacred and inviolable' (Art. 3) and holds absolute executive and military powers (Art. 1, 11, 13).
- Own Knowledge: Under the Meiji system, the cabinet was responsible to the Emperor rather than the Diet. The military possessed the 'independence of supreme command', allowing them to bypass the civilian government. Non-elected oligarchs (Genro) held real power behind the scenes.

Points supporting "promoting modern democracy":
- Source B: The Constitution established Asia's first national parliament (the Diet) and granted the House of Representatives power over the budget, forcing oligarchs to negotiate with political parties. It laid the foundation for the rise of party cabinets in the 1920s.
- Own Knowledge: This constitutional framework allowed for the development of 'Taisho Democracy'. In 1918, Hara Takashi formed the first true party cabinet. In 1925, Japan passed the Universal Manhood Suffrage Act, significantly expanding democratic participation based on the constitutional system.

L1 (1-2 marks): Weak structure, one-sided arguments, or fails to use both sources and own knowledge.
L2 (3-5 marks): Reasonable attempt, utilizes one or both sources and some own knowledge, but lacks balanced evaluation or depth.
L3 (6-8 marks): Balanced evaluation, effective use of Source A, Source B, and relevant own knowledge. Clear stance and logical organization. (Max 2 marks for source-only or own-knowledge-only answers).

Introduction: Clarify the time frame (1945-1990) and state the thesis, arguing that while external assistance provided the indispensable initial spark and favorable global conditions, domestic reform served as the fundamental and sustainable engine of long-term economic growth. Argument for domestic reforms: 1. Post-war democratization reforms under SCAP, such as land reform which created a massive base of self-employed farmers, boosted purchasing power, and stimulated domestic markets; the dissolution of Zaibatsu which enhanced market competition; and labor reforms. 2. Active government intervention and industrial policy, particularly by the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI), which targeted key sectors like steel and shipbuilding through the priority production system. 3. Unique corporate practices including lifetime employment, seniority-based wages, enterprise unions, and high investment in technological research and development (e.g., Sony, Toyota), which maximized labor productivity. Argument for external assistance: 1. U.S. aid during the Occupation, including direct economic relief (GARIOA and EROA funds) and the Dodge Line which stabilized the hyperinflation. 2. Geopolitical windfalls, notably the Korean War (1950-1953) special procurement orders which injected billions of dollars into Japan's heavy industries, and later the Vietnam War. 3. Access to open international markets led by the US, favorable currency exchange rates (fixed at 360 yen per dollar), and cheap foreign technology licenses. Synthesis and Evaluation: External factors were crucial during the recovery phase (1945-1950s) by providing raw capital and initial demand. However, domestic reforms transformed Japan's economic structure, enabling it to sustain high-speed growth during the 1960s-1980s long after direct US aid ceased and war orders ended. Conclusion: Conclude by reiterating that domestic reforms were the primary driver of sustainable development, while external assistance acted as the vital catalyst.

Level 5 (21-25 marks): Demonstrates excellent analytical skills, well-structured arguments, and precise historical knowledge. Clearly compares domestic reforms and external assistance. Reaches a balanced, sophisticated conclusion. Level 4 (16-20 marks): Good organization with historical facts. Balanced discussion of both factors, but may be slightly weaker in comparative depth. Level 3 (11-15 marks): Provides a clear argument but tends to be descriptive rather than analytical. May focus too heavily on one factor while neglecting the other. Level 2 (6-10 marks): Weak structure, heavily descriptive, with limited or inaccurate historical data. Fails to compare the two factors effectively. Level 1 (1-5 marks): Random points, highly inaccurate, or fails to address the question prompt. No clear structure.

Introduction: Identify the chosen countries (e.g., Indonesia and Vietnam) and establish the thesis. Argue that while WWII acted as an indispensable catalyst by dismantling Western colonial rule and creating a power vacuum, the strategic leadership, organizational capacity, and mobilization by local nationalists were the decisive factors that turned this temporary window of opportunity into permanent independence. Case 1: Indonesia - Role of Nationalist Leaders: Sukarno and Hatta skillfully navigated the Japanese occupation, formulated Pancasila to unify the diverse archipelago, declared independence immediately in August 1945, and utilized a combined strategy of armed resistance (the Republican army) and international diplomacy (winning US support) to force the Dutch to recognize sovereignty in 1949. Impact of WWII: The Japanese invasion shattered the myth of Dutch supremacy, provided military training to local youth (PETA), and created a power vacuum upon Japan's sudden surrender in 1945. Case 2: Vietnam - Role of Nationalist Leaders: Ho Chi Minh unified communist and nationalist factions under the Viet Minh, organized effective guerrilla tactics, capitalized on the 1945 power vacuum to declare the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, and orchestrated victory at Dien Bien Phu (1954) while navigating complex cold war dynamics. Impact of WWII: The Japanese coup of March 1945 eliminated French colonial admin, and Japan's sudden defeat in August created the perfect window for the Viet Minh's August Revolution. Comparison and Synthesis: WWII was a necessary condition (it broke colonial authority and created a vacuum), but it was not a sufficient condition. Without the strategic, resilient, and popular leadership of Sukarno and Ho Chi Minh to mobilize the masses and counter post-war Allied attempts at recolonization, the opportunity of WWII would have resulted in chaos or recolonization rather than durable independence. Conclusion: Conclude that while WWII provided the ultimate historic opportunity, local nationalist leadership was indeed the key factor because they successfully capitalized on the opportunity and consolidated sovereign statehood.

Level 5 (21-25 marks): Well-structured, critical, and analytical. Selects two appropriate countries and demonstrates deep knowledge of both. Accurately compares the importance of local leadership vs. WWII, showing high-level synthesis. Level 4 (16-20 marks): Good discussion of both countries. Covers both factors, but may be more descriptive than comparative. Level 3 (11-15 marks): Discusses both factors but with uneven depth. May focus extensively on one country while neglecting the other (Note: Maximum of 12 marks if only one country is discussed). Level 2 (6-10 marks): Highly descriptive, lacks analytical structure. Poor understanding of either nationalist leaders or the impact of WWII. Level 1 (1-5 marks): Irrelevant or highly superficial answers with numerous factual errors.