From the May 2023 IBDP Paper 3 HL History exam
Markscheme:
The question requires that candidates offer a considered and balanced review of the statement that fear of the spread of communism led to the breakdown of the wartime alliance in Europe. Candidates may argue that the US suspected that Stalin wanted to convert the rest of the world to communism, and it was US duty to stop him. Candidates may point out that Truman saw Soviet domination of Eastern Europe as an act of aggression, and he was worried that this meant communism would spread into Western Europe. Candidates may challenge the statement arguing that the members of the Wartime Alliance had little in common, and conflicts arose after defeating Hitler. They may also argue that Stalin ́s policies were in fact focused on protecting the Soviet Union with a buffer zone rather than being interested in its expansion. They may also point out that the different plans for the future of Germany also led to the breakdown of the alliance. The use of atomic bombs in Japan could also be considered a reason for the breakdown. In 1946, Stalin accused America of using its atomic advantage to spread its control. Candidates’ opinions or conclusions will be presented clearly and supported by appropriate evidence.
Example from student written under exam conditions (click to enlarge):
The world was confronted by the spectre of communism as the Second World War came to an end. This ideological construct, a product of Marx and Engels' theory of class struggle, gained notoriety in the twentieth century after the Russian Revolution of 1917. As the concept began to pervade Eastern Europe in the aftermath of the war, fear grew in Western nations, notably in Britain and America. This essay will critically analyse the argument that it was this apprehension that led to the dissolution of the wartime alliance in Europe. This alliance, chiefly among the USA, USSR and Britain, was cemented due to the mutual need to oppose Hitler's belligerence. Nevertheless, the ideological divergence between the liberal-capitalist West and the communist East proved difficult to reconcile as time wore on.
Historians such as Gaddis have argued that the ideology of communism itself was a threat to Western ideals and way of life. This perspective argues that the nature of communism with its emphasis on state control, class equality and revolution was fundamentally antithetical to the capitalist and democratic principles of the West. Communism also challenged the Church, which held a powerful influence in Western societies. Indeed, the Marxist dictum that religion is the 'opium of the masses' was seen as an affront to Western religious values. Furthermore, communism's international nature, encapsulated in Marx's call for workers of the world to unite, was a threat to national identities. On the other hand, a revisionist viewpoint spearheaded by historians like Williams suggests that it was not so much the fear of communism but the economic interests of the West, particularly the United States, that precipitated the collapse of the alliance. Williams posits that the American capitalist system required expansion in the form of open markets to sustain itself. The spread of communism in Eastern Europe and Asia threatened this capitalist expansion, as communist nations typically advocated for closed economies and state control of resources. Hence, the fear of communism may not have been ideological but economic in essence.
However, the post-revisionist school, represented by historians such as Leffler and Westad, offer a more nuanced view. They contend that while ideology and economics played a role, they were part of a larger security concern that each superpower had. The Soviet Union, ravaged by two World Wars, was keen on creating a buffer zone in Eastern Europe to protect itself from future invasions. In contrast, the United States, now the most potent economic and military power, was concerned about its role in ensuring global peace. The security dilemma, where actions taken by one party for its security are perceived as threats by the other, exacerbated the tensions between the two superpowers.
Conclusively, whilst the fear of communism spreading through Europe certainly had a role in the breakdown of the wartime alliance, it would be overly simplistic to ascribe it as the sole cause. The differing economic models of East and West, along with security concerns, were equally important factors. It is the interaction of these multifaceted aspects that shaped the trajectory of the post-war world order. As such, the historiographical analysis of the causes for the disintegration of the alliance must take into account the complex interplay of ideology, economic interests, and security concerns.
