2026 MEMO HISTORY P.1 MAY-JUNE FINAL EXAMS GRADE 12 PAPER 1 TERM 2 PREP THUNDEREDUC , GRADE 12

Added: 2026-05-14

[00:00:00]It's a pleasant moment to meet you great girls. Welcome to the discussion on history paper one for the May June examinations. [sighs and gasps] All right. Um [clears throat] we understand uh that um the May June uh examination for 2026 which has just been recently uh written. We are going to go through the discussion of the paper and also we are going to elaborate on uh the possible responses uh to the given questions in the paper and also try to explain how best we can approach uh the questions for the sake of preparing those who are yet to write. Right. Uh so that is our paper history paper one May June examinations.

[00:00:46]Uh as usual our paper is uh a paper out of 150 marks with three uh source based questions and three uh essay uh questions uh from uh those given options.

[00:01:01]uh for the sake of uh the discussion we're going to go through uh the wallpaper [snorts] right but as uh learners in the examinations as candidates we understand we are supposed to answer only three questions out of the six uh which may come in the form of two source based questions and one essay question or you can answer two essay questions and one source based question right u [clears throat] we take it to the first question.

[00:01:31]Our focus of the question, question number one we understand is the origins of cold war. Uh it says how did the North Atlantic treaty and the war so packed intensify the cold war between the USA and the Soviet Union in the 1940s and the 1950s.

[00:01:52]We want to look at how the formation of the opposing military for military um organizations led to the intensification of cold war changes between uh the two superpowers at the extreme of the USA and the side of the USS arm. Right? So we understand that the North Atlantic treat organization was for the capitalist side and the war was for the communist side. those were opposing military uh organizations. Right? Let's go to our questions.

[00:02:27]Our first question is saying how uh did how according to the source did the use of veto in the security council by Russia affected the United Nations? How did the use of veto in security council by Russia affected the United Nations?

[00:02:48]Right. This is an level one question which is an extraction question. We're supposed to get our response directly from uh the addendum as it is right.

[00:02:58]We're going to look at source 1 a.

[00:03:00]Source 1 a it says has been taken from an article n and they picked by the tenant n wner and it was published in the centa militia in 1987.

[00:03:14]It gives reasons for the formation of north atlantic treaty in 1949.

[00:03:18]Right. If we check there uh the first part that is where we extract our answer. Our first party is saying um the indiscriminate or unselective use of the veto in security council of the United Nations by Russia ostensibly [clears throat] or apparently to further her own ends resulted in the it resulted in the inability of this organization to resolve conflicts.

[00:03:57]We are saying the UN was now unable to reside resulted in the inability of this organization to resolve conflicts. Why?

[00:04:05]Because of the veto powers. The veto powers you have saying that is the power to refuse or to reject an official suggestion or an official proposal. So it means the UN was now having inability to resolve conflicts. and number two to institute adequate arms control. So those are our two responses for the first uh question. The first response we are saying um it resulted in inability to resolve conflicts and it also institute adequate adequate arms control.

[00:05:07]Those were the limitations that were brought by the veto powers that were rested at the disposal of the USSR. The UN could not resolve conflicts and also could not institute adequate arms control.

[00:05:22]Question number 1.1.2 it says define the term veto in your own words. But when defining veto in our own words we can say can define this as the constitutional right the constitutional right to reject a decision or proposal.

[00:05:51]A decision or a proposal made by a law making body.

[00:06:07]A law making body, right? That's a veto.

[00:06:15]So when you're looking at the term veto, we are saying this is the constitutional right to reject a decision or to reject a proposal that is made by a law makingaking body. So in this instance you are saying the United Nations could not effectively institute conflict resolution because Russia had got veto rights in the security council of the UN. it would reject some of the proposals or it will reject the decisions because of the veto powers vested in it according to the constitution that is veto right we look at number 113 according [clears throat] to the source why did the Soviet Union introduce commun Soviet Union introducing uh communiform right it says um starting from um [clears throat] year. In addition to this, the Soviet rejection of the American initiated martial aid plan in June 197 1947 and the enforced compliance with this police by its satellite states led to the West's suspicions being well founded especially after the Soviet introduction of the communal plan.

[00:07:41]Right. So the question says why did um the USSR according to the source why did the Soviet Union introduce the common form?

[00:07:54]So the common form was introduced in this incent plan.

[00:08:02]It was a counter action to the actions that were taken by the allied powers.

[00:08:07]When the allied powers took an action to introduce the uh Marshall plan, the Russians they also retaliated by introducing the commun form as a solution to their own problems in their communist zone.

[00:08:25]So we can safely uh in this dimension say that um the common form was introduced as an answer to the mesh plan. They also did their own solution as to solving their own economic problems though they were not financially capable but they added an initiative to counter the Marshall plan by introducing the common form which served the same purpose as the Marshall plan. Right. Number 114 [clears throat] says, "Using the information in the source and your own knowledge, explain why the idea of a defensive alliance among Western nations was initially suggested by um Churchill in 1946.

[00:09:20]Why did Martial suggest the um idea of a defensive alliance?" Right.

[00:09:28]Uh we're going to look at um [clears throat] the source and find the reason why uh Churchill Winston Churchill opted for uh the idea of a defensive uh alliance.

[00:09:42]Right? If you look at our source, we can see that it talks about Churchill in the second statement of the last paragraph where it says the idea of a defensive force, defensive alliance amongst the nations of the west within the framework of the United Nations was initially suggested by Churchill in 1946 and taken up a year later by Louisis St. Laurent, Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs.

[00:10:12]The more concrete form of a proposal of a type of western union was put forward by Mr. Nis be in a speech in the House of Commons in January 1948.

[00:10:22]He mentioned the dunick trick of March 1947 where in a firm basis had been laid for mutual assistance between France and um Britain primarily for the protection against a resurgent arising Germany.

[00:10:38]Right. So if we can check from uh those ideas uh that are presented there we can figure out that the reason that was there was for a need for mutual assistance.

[00:10:53]There was need for mutual assistance and for protection. So the need for forming a defensive alliance if you to look at it from an open perspective we are saying [clears throat] the idea of a defensive uh military alliance amongst the western nations. It was suggested for the sake of the need for mutual assistance.

[00:11:33]in case of attack.

[00:11:44]What it meant here is uh these countries they needed to have mutual assistance to assist each other in times of difficulty. Now there was a threat of communism and they felt threatened by communist countries. In any event, a communist country had the capability of attacking on any one of the western powers. So the need for a defense force or a defensive alliance was that if any one country within the alliance is attacked, it means an attack on all and they will assist each other. That is mutual assistance in case of an attack or an aggression from the communist world. Right?

[00:12:22]We go to question number 1.2.

[00:12:24]Explain the symbolic uh representation of the following. Right, we're looking at source one B. [clears throat] Source 1B is our cartoon heading for the topping out ceremony and was drawn by German cartoonist V and appeared in the German newspaper Manheim Morgan on 24th March 1949. It illustrates the role of the US in establishing a defense alliance amongst the western countries. From left we have Dean Axon who is the US secretary of state. We have NS Beaven who is the British foreign secretary and have Robert Kumman who is the French foreign minister. Right. So um our first question as you can see there we are seeing Dean Axon being the builder of the wall and we are seeing Ernest Beaven and Robert Kumman appearing as assistants to Dean Axon. Right. So our question is saying explain the symbolic uh representation of those uh following in the cartoon.

[00:13:39]Right? So if you're looking at Dean Ason we are saying he's a representative of the USA.

[00:13:45]So if you are seeing also there he's the one who is doing the construction of the wall. So we are looking at uh USA leading role in establishing a defense alliance.

[00:14:25]among the west western countries. So din a basically is representing the USA's leading role in establishing a defense alliance. And then if you look at countries whose bricks have been used to construct the wall. If you check there, we can see that uh USA, England, uh there's Netherland, there's Belgium, there's Luxembourg, there's Canada, all those countries their bricks have been used to um build the wall. What is the pres symbolic representation of that? Uh it means there that those countries they are in one dimension. They are fully supporting members of the defense alliance and fully supporting members who had actually joined the alliance.

[00:15:32]Their bricks have been used. So the implication is they have ultimately joined in building a defense alliance which is the wall. So they are fully supporting and they are commitment was shown by them having joined the defense alliance.

[00:15:51]Then if you also look at countries whose bricks have not been used in the construction of the wall. If you check we see that there are some countries whose bricks are still lying here. the likes of Ireland, Portugal, Denmark, Italy, Norway, right? What's the implication of these countries here?

[00:16:09]What it implies there is uh those are countries who are yet to join the alliance.

[00:16:21]Countries supporting the decision.

[00:16:43]So if you look at those countries, these are countries who are supporting the alliance idea but who are yet to join.

[00:16:50]They haven't joined yet but they were on the way off getting to become members.

[00:16:58]So we are seeing them being the having their bricks not yet being used on the construction of the wall. But the bricks are just laid close to the wall which means they are on the way to be used in the construction of the wall which implies that they are on their way to be part of the uh defense alliance. Right.

[00:17:22][clears throat] Uh moving on to the next part.

[00:17:29]The next part we are going to look at question number 1.2.2. Using the source and your own knowledge explain the significance of both Ernest Beaven and Robert Kumman in the cartoon.

[00:17:42]We are seeing those two guys. They are representing their two countries which is the British and the French. What is the significance of both of them being shown there? Right? The significance there of the two of them being shown there is to show the unit that existed between those countries.

[00:18:09]Britain and France they were united in support of America or we can say they are there to show the support given to USA in the formation of the defense alliance. They are there to give support to the USA as colleagues to or as allies to the decision of the defense alliance.

[00:18:35]Or we can also look at shows the commitment to the idea of the defense alliance.

[00:18:50]So some of those ideas that is what you can use. You can say that it shows unit and basically they united for the sake of the success of the defense alliance or we can also look at it was support which is shown there because they are assisting the USA to construct the defense alliance which is the wall and also we can also look at it from the sake of commitment. They are committed to do the task to ensure that they are safely protected from any invasion from the communist side. Right. Then um number 1.3 says stud source 1 A and 1 B.

[00:19:28]Explain how the information in source 1 A supports the evidence in source 1 B regarding the formation of a defense alliance. Right here we understand we use a format of comparison where we say source 1 A says this and this is supported by source 1 B which shows something else our source 1B remember is a visual source so it shows right so I'm going to make comparisons which are direct but as you are comparing for the learners who are to write the examinations make sure you use the format which is correct source 1 A says this And this is supported by source 1B which says this which shows this in this instance. And make sure that you do not copy the sources. Do not copy the ideas as they are but get do not copy the words of the source. Get the idea from the source and express how the same idea is portrayed in the visual source. So I will use uh this format for the sake of discussion.

[00:20:31]This is my source 1 A and I'll compare it to source 1 B.

[00:20:39]Right? I'll pick an idea from source 1 A and show how the same idea is portrayed in the other source.

[00:20:50]Right? Like for example um source 1 a talks about mutual assistance between France and Britain.

[00:21:06][clears throat] That is my information from source 1 A and that information is supported by source 1 B which is portrayed by Beaven and Skumman working together that is the same idea how it's portrayed it talks about mutual assistant meaning to A is joint assistance. You assist each other either way between Britain and France. And we are seeing Bevin for Britain and schoolman for France working together. That shows that there's mutual assistance there. Right. And also we can look at um [clears throat] the other idea that we can also portray in the two sources, right? He talks about um idea of a defense alliance.

[00:22:29]In source 1 A they talk about the idea of a defense alliance. A defense alliance supposed to be formed. And in source 1B, it shows countries that were members of the alliance and those who are yet to join.

[00:23:15]You see how those ideas are interlin.

[00:23:18]They're talking about the idea of a defense alliance in the first source and in the second source they are showing countries which are supporting the idea of a defense alliance at countries who are yet to be part of the defense alliance. So basically that is how you compare uh your sources or also if you want to get deeper there you can also find other comparisons like for example there's also a comparison which talks about the Canadian secretary of state who took up the decision from the initial decision and it also portrayed by Canada as being shown as one of the members of the countries like we are seeing here it talks about in source 1 a it talks about the initial idea of forming the defense alliance it was um taken and put forward by Mr. Luis Lorent who is a Canadian secretary of state.

[00:24:21]We are saying the initial idea was done by Winston Churchill but a year later it was [snorts] put into action by Canadian secretary of state and also we are seeing Canada being one of the members here which is portrayed on the members which are to be part of the defense alliance. So it's supporting either way. Canadian secretary taking up the idea and also Canada participating as a member of the defense alliance. Right. Uh we move on to the next question.

[00:25:00]Next question is question number 1.4.

[00:25:02]Question number 141. It says name and two peaceful principles of the United Nations stated in the source that were binding to countries that signed the North Atlantic Treaty. two peaceful principles. Right? We have to go to the source and identify the peaceful principles.

[00:25:25]Right?

[00:25:27]We are now on source one C and the context of our source is there.

[00:25:34]Right? It says um there this treaty is a single document. The nations who sign it agree to abide by peaceful principles of the United Nations.

[00:25:46]Right. What are the peaceful principles?

[00:25:49]To maintain friendly relations and economic cooperation with one another.

[00:25:58]That's one principle. The second principle to consult together whenever the territory or independence of any of them is threatened and lastly to come to the aid of any one of them who may be attacked.

[00:26:22]Right? So if we check those are our three possible responses. Number one, to maintain friendly relations and economic cooperation with one another. Number two, to consult together whenever the territorial independence of any of uh any of them is threatened and then number three to come to the aid of any one of them who may be attacked. Right?

[00:26:46]We move on to the next question. Quote from the source how the signitories of the North Atlantic Treat undertook to abide by the provisions of the UN charter.

[00:26:59]How did they undertake to be abided by the provisions of the UN charter? Right?

[00:27:07]That is number 142. We check again that is a level one in extraction question.

[00:27:11]Our answers are in the source.

[00:27:15]Right?

[00:27:17]Uh if we look at um our second paragraph, it talks about through this treaty we undertake to conduct our international affairs in accordance to the provisions of the UN uh charter, we undertake to exercise our right of collective or individual self-defense against armed attack with accordance to article 51 of the charter and subject to such measures as Security Council may take to maintain and restore international peace and security.

[00:27:56]Right? So we are saying they will undertake to exercise their right of collective or individual self-defense against armed attack. That is in accordance to the UN charter article number 51.

[00:28:17]and also subject to such measures. A security council may maintain.

[00:28:23]A security council may maintain to may take to maintain and restore international peace and security.

[00:28:36]And it continues to say in this treat we seek to establish freedom from aggression and from the fuse of force in the North Atlantic treat.

[00:28:48]They seek to establish freedom from aggression and from the use of force in the North Atlantic treat. Right. So for the sake of our question, our question is asking us to uh quote from the source how the signitories of the treaty will undertook to abide by the provisions of the UN uh charter. Right? Explain the implication of the phrase we seek to establish freedom from aggression in the context of signing the North Atlantic Treaty. We seek to establish freedom from aggression.

[00:29:28]Right? So what is the implication of that statement when they say we seek to establish freedom from um aggression? In this instance, our aggression automatically comes from uh the eastern powers who are communist powers. They seek to establish a freedom uh from aggression. So what it implies there is countries that sign the treaty.

[00:30:06]We're prepared to defend each other.

[00:30:20]Uh unfortunately this response is supposed to come at the top is form number 1.4.3.

[00:30:27]We are saying in this instance the implication of the statement is um that countries that signed the treaty.

[00:30:45]We're prepared to defend each other.

[00:31:01]from forceful invasion by communists.

[00:31:19]That's the main idea there. If they say we seek to establish freedom from aggression, it means they are prepared to defend each other from forceful invasion by any communist country.

[00:31:31]Then number 1.4.4. What according to the source bound the countries represented in the North Atlantic Treaty together?

[00:31:39]What was a binding factor to the countries in the common in the North Atlantic Treaty? Right, this is an extraction question.

[00:31:49]Um we can see our answer here. The nations represented here are bound together by number one types of longstanding.

[00:32:02]They are born together because of having a common heritage of democracy and also they are bound together by individual liberty and the rule of law. Those are their common principles.

[00:32:22]So they are bound together by having the common principles. The long-standing ties of long-standing we are joined by common heritage of democracy. So it means those countries have got or are known by a common heritage of democracy and on top of that individual liberty and rule of law.

[00:32:59]Those are their principles.

[00:33:01]And those is what help them remain together. They are bound together by those principles because they abide by those principles. Comment on the usefulness of the source for a historian researching the information of the North Atlantic Treaty.

[00:33:17][clears throat] Right. The usefulness is that um the source it uh shows our member countries where to conduct themselves.

[00:33:43]The source gives us information about how the member countries of the North Atlantic Treat where to conduct themselves for the success of um the defense alliance. And also if you check the source, it talks about the binding principles, the binding principles of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization which is also useful information and also it talks about the influence it gives us about the influence of NATO.

[00:34:31]on world peace.

[00:34:36]All those are pieces of useful information from the sources. So we can safely say those are some of the pieces of usefulness that we can extract from the source. Right? We take it to the next question. It says name according to the source any two founding members of the war so pect. Right? The members of the war was so pect there are many. We are going to look at them from the source and try to highlight uh the members. We are now on source 1D. Right.

[00:35:03]Founding members included Soviet Union, Poland, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria.

[00:35:18]So n of those the Soviet Union as the key member we have Poland, we have East Germany, we have Czechoslovakia, we have Hungary, we have Romania, we have Bulgaria, right?

[00:35:33]Explain the concept Marxism Leninism.

[00:35:38]Right? These two gentlemen are communist, communist ideologists. We look at Marxism, we are looking at Carl Max.

[00:35:47]Then you look at Leninism, we are looking at Vlad Malanin.

[00:35:52]So a combination of the two, we understand that the baking of the ideas of communism, they were rooted in the ideas of Kalmax in his writings, the D capital. And also we are seeing Lenin coming in as the leader of the USSR and trying to adopt some of those ideas and mix them with his own understanding which is what we call the interpretation of Marxism by Lenin which became Marxism Leninism. So when you're looking at that ideology, we are saying um we can define this as the doctrine of KMAX as interpreted.

[00:36:50]and put into effect in Soviet Union by learning.

[00:37:12]So it's the interpretation of Marxist ideologies by Lenin and how he implemented them in the Soviet Union. We can also look at the dimension from Maong of China. But specifically in this instance we are looking at the ideas of Kmax as interpretated and effected by um Vlad Malanin.

[00:37:37]comment on why East Germany was included in the war so packed. East Germany, why was it included uh in the uh Soviet um in the war so packed right?

[00:37:53]One of the obvious reasons is East German was under USSR control.

[00:38:11]So if Germany could easily be manipulated into the war because it was controlled by USSR and also it was also there to mark significant to mark uh significant extension of Soviet influence of USSR influence in central Europe, right? It was also a way of showing um the capitalist countries that it was possible to extend its influence even into central into central Europe, not only in East Europe. So they wanted to show the capitalist that they can extend their influence into central Europe and initially we're also seeing East German being under the influence of the USSR after the split of Germany into zones of occupation. Right? We take you to number 154. What according to the source was a direct consequence of the rearmament of West Germany when they joined NATO in 1955.

[00:39:37]What according to the source? We can check from the source to find our evidence. Right? It said this move prompted a need. It prompted a need for a coercive or unified military response amongst communist nations.

[00:40:04]When West German was allowed to rearm under the control of the capitalists, it was a threat now to West East German and it prompted them to have a need for a cohesive or unified mil response amongst the communist nation. They were supposed also to make a collective effort to defend themselves given that West Germany had rearmed.

[00:40:28]Right, that is our last question.

[00:40:30]Question number 1.54. uh we are now going to our high order question which is our source based our paragraph question right I'll highlight how we are supposed to answer that question and then you pick the sources of a piece of evidence in the um different sources right the question is saying using the information in the relevant sources and your own knowledge write a paragraph of about eight lines which is about 80 words explaining how the North Atlantic treated the war was so packed intensified the cold war between USA and uh the Soviet Union. So we are supposed to answer our paragraph in PE format. We want a point which is an answer to the question and then we want our explanation and then we want our evidence and then we want to link back to the answer or to the question.

[00:41:24]We are saying how explaining how the two intensified cold war. So we can say the formation of the North Atlantic Treaty and the Warso pact it formalized the division of Europe into true hostile and it transformed regional disputes into global crisis.

[00:42:35]That can be a possible response.

[00:42:38]How did it intensify? Because it formalized the divisions. Divisions were now formal. Countries were belonging to one of the two which means that Europe was divided formally. And the division also was not a division which was ordinary. It was a division which was hostile. There were two hostile camps.

[00:42:56]Why were those two defense alliance formed? They were meant to cover up for each of the member countries who have been attacked. So it means there were hostile camps that further widened the rift and also it transformed European disputes into global crisis. Right? Then you explain like in your explanation we can say the formation of the two it fueled armed race arms race.

[00:43:30]It established rigid military spheres of influence.

[00:43:56]It ensured ensured that conflicts involving a member could lead to direct confrontation.

[00:44:27]direct confrontation between USSR and USA.

[00:44:38]So we are trying to give substance to the fact that the formation of NATO and also pect it formalized the divisions of Europe into two hostile camps. How was it? It led to the effect that if there was conflict between any one of the member countries, it could end up being a direct confrontation between the leading superpowers which is the USA and the USSR.

[00:45:04]Then you now go to your sources and find supporting evidence in the different uh sources. you are now trying to substantiate what you were saying in the first um line of your argument or your answer by finding supporting evidence in the um different sources. And remember, you're supposed to use only relevant uh evidence to support your line of argument in the question. You support your uh theme of the answer to the question.

[00:45:41]Like you can demonstrate some piece of evidence like here we are seeing countries that had joined the North Atlantic treaty to defend each other as represented in the cartoon and also countries who are willing to join so as that they can be part of the defense alliance and also you can go to uh the next source which talks about um the North Atlantic treaty requirements for countries to follow and how they must conduct themselves. You pick from some evidence there to support that it was a commitment by countries that whatever was going to happen in one of them they were also supposed to defend each other. You also look at the principles of trying to maintain peace and you also go and p look at some piece of evidence on the other side. Like you look at um [clears throat] how Russia was influential in trying to influence other countries in forming the treaty to defend themselves on their side of communism. Then you can also look at uh the last source you pick relevant evidence there. Then when you come to the end of your discussion, then you're supposed to provide a linking statement which is summing up your paragraph and relating back to the question to show that whatever you were saying in the paragraph is answering the question. So here you are citing your evidence and you put your source in brackets at the end of the statement. You have to paraphrase this statement. Don't copy it as it is from the source. You just have to pick the idea and you put the idea in the the source reference in the uh brackets at the end of the statement and then you also provide a link. How is this answering the question? That is your last statement. Right? That takes us to the end of question number one. We move on to question number two which is independent Africa. We are looking at a case study for Angola. Right? Our question is saying how why did the Soviet Union support the popular movement for the liberation of Angola the MLA in the Angolan civil war from 1975.

[00:48:06]We are looking at the reasons why Russia was supporting the MPLA in the conflict in Angola from 1975.

[00:48:16]Right. Without wasting much time, let's go to our uh questions. Number 211, why according to the source, why was communism of a particular concern in Europe during the 1920s?

[00:48:31]That is an extraction question. We just have to pick our response from um the source. It says the fear was that communism would spread to other African countries like wild fire. That is why communism was a threat. So we are saying our extraction it says the fear was that communism would spread to other African countries like wildfire.

[00:49:26]That was the concern. Then says comment on the implication of the words. Angola was a perfect storm for a prox war in the context of the civil war in Angola.

[00:49:38]Angola was a perfect storm.

[00:49:40][clears throat] Was a perfect storm for a prox war. What is the implication there?

[00:49:50]Uh the implication we can say a war was most probable.

[00:50:06]two breakout in Angola amongst the superpowers.

[00:50:33]In this sense we are saying uh because of the interaction that was happening between the competing superpowers in Angola and their conduct in Angola there were high chances that Angola was going to become um a proxy ground a proxy ground for the war.

[00:50:55]It was going to be the ground that would facilitate the harmful effect of the war and hence it was going to be a destructive war on Angola. So Angola was a perfect storm for a prox war a prox war we are saying it's a war which is fought by some countries mainly the super powers in another country. So in Angola it is probable, it was most probable that um the outbreak of the war was going to be realized in Angola because the superpowers were now having direct confrontation in Angola trying to influence the liberation movements of Angola. But then it says name the following role players in the source who were fighting for control over Angola.

[00:51:50]Right. Who was fighting for the control of Angola?

[00:51:54]Any two foreign countries? The foreign countries who were fighting for the control of Angola are listed in the source. We are seeing uh not only was the US getting involved in Angola. So number one is the US.

[00:52:10]So was the Soviet Union. Number two, Cuba with Portugal with South Africa with China and also Zahiri. So all those countries they were ultimately advocating for the control of Angola.

[00:52:28]They were in favor of the control of Angola. So all those many countries from USA to the USSR to also Cuba to the Portuguese uh South Africa and China inclusive of the neighboring Zahiri.

[00:52:57]Right. any two liberation movements.

[00:53:01]We understand there were three liberation movements there in Angola.

[00:53:04]The first one which is being the FNLA which was supported by communists and we had uh the MPLA initially who was supported by the communist and FNLA was supported by the capitalists and also UNITA which was also supported by the capitalists inclusive of South Africa.

[00:53:26]Right. Explain why you think the Soviet communist agenda in Angola would not be considered legitimate.

[00:53:36]Right? Why we think that if we get get a clue from the source, why would we say it was not legitimate support? Right? If we see here, it says the Soviet Union's actions seemed to show complete disregard of their communist agenda. as they did not seem to care about the political ideology of the MPLA.

[00:54:02]So if we see there if they not caring about the political ideology which is conforming to their own of a revolutionary organization in Angola and then what else are they looking for? It means it was illegitimate because of the fact that they did not seem to care about the political ideology of the M pla.

[00:54:26]They seem not to care about the political ideology by the MPLA ideology.

[00:54:47]If it was by ideology that they were supporting the MPLA, they could have gone further to forward their ideology than focusing on other things. So we can also say in this instance uh the Soviet Union they were interested in Angola resources.

[00:55:09]They're interested in Angolan resources and control of the ports more than fighting for ideology.

[00:55:30]If we look at it from an open perspective, there is no reason why a country can spend a lot of money fighting for the forwarding of its ideology without any return. You fight for the spread of communism and then what are you going to benefit?

[00:55:46]It means they had a hidden agenda. They were fighting indirectly for the Angolan resources and also to try and get access to the control of the ports of Angola.

[00:55:59]Right. Then we take it to question number uh 2.2 consult source 2B. Who according to the source was a member of the Soviet communist party pollute bro and chairman of the party control commission? That is an extraction question. We just have to get the answer from the source. We have aid pel.

[00:56:20]So our response for the first question is a pearls.

[00:56:35]Right. Define the term independence in your own words. We can define independence openly as freedom from control by an external force.

[00:57:01]That is freedom from control by an external force. You are independent. No one from outside is in influencing your decision making then you are independent. Name any true forms of Soviet military aid in the source that were given to MPLA.

[00:57:17]We are looking at Soviet military aid the forms of Soviet military aid. Let's look at them in the from the source.

[00:57:26]Right. It says immediately after Angolan independence, the Soviet Union massively increased its military aid to the MPLA.

[00:57:36]Some estimates of Soviet aid to the MPLA for the liberation of Angola exceeded $300 million.

[00:57:49]So we are also seeing that they provided uh financial assistance of about 300 million which is exceed 300 million and then we are also seeing that besides the supply of the financial um aid to Angola besides the forms the finance They also supplied the military equipment.

[00:58:22]So it's military aid, monetary military aid and also military equipment. If you check, we have all those forms of military equipment which were supplied like the anti-aircraft guns, the 120 mm, the 144 artillery, the 122 mm rockets, all those forms. But in this instance, the question says, identify any two forms of military aid. So it's financial aid on one side and then they provided military equipment and the different military equipments are the ones which are listed there. But we want forms. Our question is saying forms of military of Soviet military aid. So it's financial aid and also military equipment. Right. So 224 explain why the Portuguese high commissioner was convinced that if he could not hand over power to two or three of the Angolan movements, he would just get on the plane and leave.

[00:59:40]Explain why it was like that. Right. The issue which we are seeing there is um the main issue was that the ongoing dispute.

[01:00:03]the transition to independence was a difficult task for Portugal.

[01:00:27]uh the transition from uh colonialism to independence for Angola it was a difficult transition and Portugal could not handle it properly they even failed to do a perfect transition that is why they ended up even calling out for the alpha agreement which also failed so it means if he saying he was convinced that if he could not hand over power to two or three of the angul movements he would just get on plane which means it was a difficult task for them to decide who was supposed to lead Angola. That is why now they were opting to give power to two or three and hence it was not feasible to give power to two movement for liberation movements which are opposing each other or to give to the three of them. They would still continue to fight for who are supposed to establish the formal government the legitimate government of Angola. So we can also uh look at it from the dimension of the dispute in Angola.

[01:01:32]The dispute was difficult to resolve and hence they were supposed to leave Anga to its own determination.

[01:01:51]By the way, when he saying he will just get on the plane and leave, it means he was to leave the situation as it was.

[01:01:58]Which means it was very difficult for them to decide on who was supposed to lead and also to resolve the conflict between the three competing liberation movements. And hence by leaving he's saying he's going to leave Angola to its own determination to decide on its future on its own because Portugal would have failed to do that. Comment on the implication of the phrase to the Kremlin the MPLA remained the vanguard and the leader of the Angolan people in the context of Soviet Union involvement in Angola. In this instance, you are seeing uh the USSR was assured that their support to MPLA was worth it as it was the leading movement.

[01:03:24]So in other words, you are saying um when they saying to the Kremlin, they are referring to their fortress, their government, their residents of their governments in Russia. They are saying to the Kremlin, the MPLA remain the vulgard and the leader of the Angolan people. So it means that the USSR is assured that whatever it's doing there is worth it because the movement that is supporting is the one which is leading and also the one which has got potential of forming the national government for the independent Angola.

[01:03:59]Right. Then number 2.3 comment on the symbolic representation of the military tank in the cartoon.

[01:04:07]comment on the symbolic um [clears throat] representation of the military tank in the cartoon. Right? If we check there, we see our source. There is a military tank that we see there and we are seeing these two gentlemen, Fidel Castrol of Cuba and Brv of the Soviet Union. Right? So what is the implication of this of this um tener? Then we can say um number one that tangle there is there to show that uh USSR gave military support to the MPLA. Okay.

[01:05:04]Or it can mean that the USSR provided heavy artillery not only missile equipment, ordinary missile equipment, but heavy.

[01:05:26]Or we can also say it's an indication that the MPLA got the strongest military support.

[01:05:46]We can also look at it from that perspective.

[01:05:49]Right? Those are the perspectives but not limited only to those ones. explain the historical significance of depicting Castro and br standing next to each other.

[01:06:02]Ultimately the significance there is to show mutual support or to show the unit of the maxist or basically you can uh also show to show that are supported MPLA.

[01:06:40]So basically it means they working together standing next to each other is shows mutual support. They were supporting each other and also it shows the unit that they had as Marxist organizations Marxist political ideologists and also to show that both of them they were in support of the MPAN uh political movement in Angola. Then we look on question number 2.4. for refer sources 2B and source 2 C. Explain how the information in source 2 B supports the evidence in source um 2C regarding the role played by Soviet Union in Angola. Right? I will still use the uh simple format for comparison. Though you must know that when you are doing a comparison, you must follow the right uh format. I'll just do it for the sake of uh making an illustration and also for the sake of uh using our time effectively. Right? We are comparing source 2 B to source um to C.

[01:08:00]But if you look at source 2B, uh basically talks about US the union massively increasing its military aid to MPLA. There is our idea that we want to compare. The Soviet Union massively increased its military aid to MPLA.

[01:08:24]Right?

[01:08:26]So we want to see how that idea is also portrayed increasing military aid and also we are seeing one of the military equipments that were supplied.

[01:08:39]So those two ideas are supporting each other. So we're saying USSR increased military aid to the MPLA.

[01:08:59]And how is it supported?

[01:09:01]supported by a tanker which is a heavy one shown on the source.

[01:09:15]You are seeing how those two ideas.

[01:09:20]Then if you also check it talks also about um here where it says it talks about the NPLA controlled ports and airports aboard which brought the they were brought on Cuban and Soviet vessels.

[01:09:39]So it talks about um those military equipments that were shipped into Angola. They were shipped via the Cuban and the Soviet vessels. So how is that supported in the visual source? He talks about Cuban and Soviet vessels which is supported by Cuban and Soviet leaders standing together.

[01:10:25]So we are saying Cuban and Soviet vessels, they are the ones that shipped military equipment which shows that the Cubans and the Soviets were working together. It is also supported by the two leaders who are standing together. It shows that they were mutually working in the support of each other. And then you can find any other ideas that you can convey there between those two sources to show the similarity of the two sources. We move on to question 2.51.

[01:10:57]Give three reasons stated in the source why the Cuban occupation of Angola was destructive. Right? That is an extraction question or answer we find it in the source.

[01:11:08]We are now at one source source 1C.

[01:11:11]Right. The Cuban occupation of Angola has been profoundly destructive in our country. It has twarted or prevented or hindered progress and the triumph of democracy.

[01:11:27]It has imposed on Angola a regime of a lonely unpopular Soviet click where group and also it has paralyzed the productive forces and destroyed the economy of the country.

[01:11:47]It is perpetrating war, violence and bloodshed.

[01:11:54]It has demanded of the Angolan people a price that is extraordinarily high for their liberty, dignity and national independence.

[01:12:06]It has been promoting disunityity amongst the people. So if you check all those ideas they are basically explaining the negative implication of the Soviet occupation of Angola. Number one it has prevented or hindered progress the triumph of democracy. Meaning to say communist ideas are preventing Angola from achieving the main goal of democracy. Number two, it has imposed on Angola a regime of lonely unpopular Soviet clicky which means it is now imposing a unfair government on Angola which is unpopular and which is a lonely government. It has paralyzed productive forces and destroyed the economy of the country. Meaning to say production was also affected because of the interference by the USSR. It is perpetrating war, violence and bloodshed which means continued fighting in Angola is being promoted by the Cuban Soviet occupation and we are also looking at the Angolan people have to pay a price which is extraordinarily high for their libert and dignity and national independence and it has promoted disunityity amongst the people.

[01:13:21]That is question number 151. We look at question number 552.

[01:13:27]Explain the concept propaganda campaign.

[01:13:30]What is a propaganda campaign? Right.

[01:13:36]We can say propaganda campaign is an operation to spread misleading information.

[01:14:10]and falsehoods to justify imperialistic tendencies.

[01:14:33]Right. So when I explaining the concept of propaganda campaign in the context of Soviet Union's expansionist policies, we are saying uh the Soviet Union is using propaganda to mislead people as to its intelligence in its policy of extending into other countries.

[01:14:55]Why is it getting involved in Angola?

[01:14:57]It's hiding the main idea of involvement in Angola. But the main idea there is imperialistic idea. But we are seeing that they want to fool the people by telling them lies and telling them misleading information. So when it's a propaganda campaign, we are now saying it's an operation to spread misleading information and falsehood so as to justify its imperialistic uh tendencies.

[01:15:25]What it targets to achieve is not what it tells the people. It tells the people a different image but at the end of the day they are hiding behind their main theme of intervening in other countries.

[01:15:37]Right. Then next question says um why do you think um the Soviet Cuban occupation of Angola would make Angola's task of national reconstruction difficult right if we check them in the source you can find also there's supporting evidence which can guarantee us a response it seeded bitterness is among the nationalist movements or amongst the ethnic groups.

[01:16:35]But for that reason we are saying the Cuban Soviet the Soviet Cuban occupation of Angola it will make it difficult for Angola to reconstruct in future. Why?

[01:16:45]Because of the bitterness that was seeded by their involvement in the politics of the country. They are fueling fighting. They are fueling bloodshed. They are fueling chaos in the country. And the chaos is happening amongst people of the same nation. And at the end of the day, the people will develop bitterness against each other and they will continue fighting which is going to hinder the progress of the country in the future because of the longlasting bitterness that has been seeded amongst the people as a result of the intervention of Soviet Union and Cuba. Right, we take it to next question number 254.

[01:17:21]comment on the limitations of the source for a historian researching unit as responses to the Soviet Cuban occupation. We are looking at limitations. We are saying what does the source provide us which we were supposed to have or that the source is not providing us an accurate image.

[01:17:46]So the limitations there we can say the source is biased.

[01:17:54]Why is it biased? It only talks about unit perspective.

[01:18:05]So for that sake we can say that source is biased and also we can say it has propaganda.

[01:18:15]It's a propaganda source. It's not an informative source. Where do we get the propaganda? It is meant to tarnish.

[01:18:36]Soviet Cuban intervention.

[01:18:45]It's also propaganda in the sense that whatever it is saying there is meant to tarnish the image of the Soviet Union on Cuba as they intervened in the politics of Angola and also it ignores the negative role of capitalists.

[01:19:10]It only talks about the bed of the intervention of [snorts] Cuba and USSR.

[01:19:18]But it also ignores that the USA was also fueling hatred amongst the people of Angola. It was also seeding bitterness. It was also promoting bloodshed and fighting but it ignores all that. So it's limited. Or also if you look at uh the language, it also has emotive language there like where it says uh the Soviet socialist imperialists labeling uh the Soviet Union and Cuba as um imperialists.

[01:19:48]Right? So those are the limitations using the information in the relevant sources and your own knowledge. write a paragraph about eight lines explaining why the Soviet Union supported the MPLA.

[01:20:03]So in your response you can say your point Soviet Union supported the MPLA because of political and economic reasons.

[01:20:42]That can be your answer.

[01:20:45]It supported the MPLA because of political and economic reasons. You explain what were the political reasons.

[01:20:52]both were maxist organizations or they follow the Marxist ideology. The Cubans and the the Russians and the MPLA they were following Marxist ideology.

[01:21:11]They were Maxist. They were pro Maxist formations. So for that sake they were sharing the same ideology. That is why they opted to support the MPLA. And also if you check you can say for economic reasons the um MPLA controlled the vast resources the majority of the resources or the greater share the greater share of Angolan resources for example oil, minerals and the ports of entry and airports. Much of them were controlled by the MPLA. So it was an economic benefit for uh the Soviet Union. Then you now go to your um evidence extract relevant information from the sources source 2 a if it's source 2 a which supports the reasons for the support of the MP of um the Soviet Union to the MPLA and then lastly you link back to your question to show that whatever you were saying in the paragraph was answering the question that is basically how you answer the parag question. Right, we move on to question number three. Question number three, our special focus is what experiences did Elizabeth Eford face during an attempt to disegregate Central High School in Little Rock, Kansas in 1967.

[01:23:05]Right without wasting much of our time, we go to the questions. So our first question is saying according to the source how was education declared a principal instrument of the life of a child name any two. Why was education declared a principal instrument of the life in the life of a child?

[01:23:27]Right? If we check from our source we can find out evidence.

[01:23:31]Right? It says today it referring to education is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values in preparing him for later professional training and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. So number one is preparing him for later professional training with education. We are training the child to prepare them for later professional training and also in helping him to adjust normally to his environment.

[01:24:08]Right? So those are the responses for the first question. We move on to the second question. Why according to the source would it be difficult for a child to succeed in life? Again it's extraction. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education.

[01:24:32]Such an opportunity where the state has undertaken to provide it, it is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms. So our question is saying why according to the source would be it be doubtful to a child for a child to succeed in a life. Why according would it be doubtful? It would be doubtful [gasps] for a child to succeed.

[01:25:06]It is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Which means the child if they are denied their chances of success success or being successful in life they are very are very low because of that denial. So if he is denied the opportunity of an education then the chances will be very slim.

[01:25:36]Define the term segregation in your own words. Segregation we can define it simply as uh forciful separation of people in their lives based on their race.

[01:26:11]That can be a definition of segregation. We are saying it's forceful separation of people in their daily lives based on their race. We don't want people of different races to mix and we don't want them to use the same facility. We separate them. comment on why separating black children from others of similar age in a school might have generated a feeling of inferiority in the context of school segregation.

[01:26:42]Right? This issue of segregating black um children from others, they could have developed a sense of inferiority in the sense that it negatively affected their self-confidence.

[01:27:12]The self-confidence is lost and hence they will inherit a feeling of inferiority because they are separated from the main group. Then they will lose confidence or they will lose their pride and then automatically a sense of inferiority will replace the confidence which has been lost.

[01:27:32]Explain the reliability of this source for historian studying desegregation in schools. Right. Uh we are looking at the reliability. You are saying can we trust the source? Yes, we can trust that it's a reliable source because it's a United States Supreme Court ruling.

[01:28:00]So it's reliable for the sake that is a source which is coming from a Supreme Court ruling.

[01:28:06]And also uh this extract is of 1954 which was during the time of segregation and also we can rely on this because it talks about the 14th amendment.

[01:28:38]which is a known law. It's a common law which is known the 14th amendment.

[01:28:47]Right? So basically we can rely on that based on those and other aspects. Name the group of students in the source that attempted to attend the central high school because of desegregation.

[01:28:59]What was the group of the students? They were called the little rock nine.

[01:29:05]The little rock nine.

[01:29:14]A little rock nine. Give any two reasons in the source why Elizabeth Xford was ex was attracted to Central High School.

[01:29:25]Why was she attracted to Central High School? We can get that from the source, right?

[01:29:32]Uh, I expected that there may be something more available to me at Central High School that was not available at Denver that there might be more courses I could pursue and that there were more options available.

[01:29:51]So basically the idea here is she thought that there was something more available to her which was not available at her school that there might be more courses that she could pursue and also that there were more options that were available for her.

[01:30:09]Right. Why do you think it is important for Daisy Bates to arrange for some ministers to accompany the little rock n students as a group to central high school? We are looking at religious ministers here to accompany the uh children.

[01:30:26]Right? We can say it was a way of demonstrating unity.

[01:30:37]Demonstrating unity.

[01:30:42]And also we can look at it from a religious perspective or to highlight moral grounds.

[01:30:54]to show that segregation was not a good practice or moral grounds and hence we use religious leaders and also we can say for physical protection because those children were at harm from the protesters. So they needed to be physically protected can also be another reason for physical protection or to ensure the safety of uh the children.

[01:31:21]Right. Comment on why you think Elizabeth Ecford felt that the screaming of people sounded like a mob to her.

[01:31:32]The sounding of the screaming of the people sounded like a mob to her.

[01:31:38]Right. It was like a mob to her in her ears mainly because um the people were angry.

[01:31:54]She felt she was going to be attacked.

[01:31:57]The crowd which was demonstrating was angry and hence he felt like she was being attacked. And if you also check according to her experiences, she was ultimately terrified. She was tormented by the experience. So she felt like she was going to be attacked.

[01:32:30]Now that dimension, she were feeling like those people wanted to attack her and they were actually angry at her when she had an encounter of being banned from entering the school. Number 331.

[01:32:42]Explain the significance of the following in the photograph in the context of Elisa Eford's experience um on the FS day at Central High School.

[01:32:56]Right. uh we are looking at it from the perspective of this um [snorts] of Elizabeth Xford and also of um the presence of Akanas National Guard and also the presence of the media. What is uh the significance of such Elizabeth sitting at the bus stop? Uh the significance there we can say uh it was there to show that she was tormented by the experience.

[01:33:45]There is an element of her being tormented by the experience there. The experience was not good for her. And also we can look at it to show her compost but ter.

[01:34:17]She was composed but she was terrorist stricken in the same sense. The way she was seated at the bus stop it actually shows that she was someone who was almost getting out of her mind from the experience that she faced.

[01:34:32]So we can actually see that she was a tormented soul from the experience that she has just encountered.

[01:34:39]But she looks so composed as you are seeing there there right. Then also the presence of the um Aza National Guard.

[01:34:47]We are seeing the National Guard being present also these guys in helmets.

[01:34:54]What is the significance of um their presence there?

[01:35:01]We can say uh their presence there is to show that there was law enforcement or we can look at it from the perspective of for law and order to avoid any instance of violence amongst the protesters. Right? And also we can see um the presence of the media.

[01:35:26]What can we say on the presence of the media? Basically, we can say the media there was to provide coverage to inform the public and to educate them about the issue of segregation and disegregation. The media was supposed to provide coverage and was supposed to give information to the public and also to give education.

[01:35:58]Comment on why people were captured behind Elizabeth expert as bystanders.

[01:36:06]Why were they captured there? I can say they just captured there as passive elements.

[01:36:15]as passive elements of the environment or as unended witnesses to the event.

[01:36:46]They are just passive elements. They are bystanders. They have nothing to do with what is happening there. They are passive elements of the environment or they are unintended witnesses uh to uh the invent.

[01:36:57]Right. We look at question number 3.4.

[01:37:00]Refer to source 3B and source 3 C.

[01:37:02]Explain how the information in source 3B supports um the evidence in source 3 C regarding the experiences that Elizabeth Eford faced when she wanted to enter Central High School.

[01:37:19]Right? Uh we can compare those two sources again using our same format. We are comparing source A, source 3 A and source 3 C.

[01:37:36]The ideas that we use there we can say in source 3 A talks about the Kansas National Guards.

[01:37:58]who were called and also the guards in source 3C are shown in their uniform is comparison we can see the two and also it show talks about the crowd >> [snorts] >> behind Elizabeth.

[01:38:27]It explains how the crowd was behind Elizabeth and also in the source C we see some people behind her but now are standing as bystanders shown on photo and also we see uh that Elizabeth Eford after she was barred from the school she had to get to the bus for safety from the school entrance. She had to get to the bus stop for safety. That was her only way to get safety so that she would get into the bus. And we are also seeing Elizabeth seated at the bus stop.

[01:39:25]Right, that's basically the idea that we need to look at there.

[01:39:29]Right. Uh the next question says um what according to the source motivated people to turn Elizabeth Eford away from the school on her first day.

[01:39:40]Give three responses. This is an extraction question. We want to look at why people turned her away. Right. She was turned away by people who were afraid of change.

[01:39:53]People were afraid of change and also people who were instructed by ignorance and also people who were hating what they simply could not understand.

[01:40:05]So these are our three responses. People were afraid of change, people instructed by ignorance and people who hated what they simply could not understand.

[01:40:16]Then number 352 [snorts] um explain the concept constitutional rights.

[01:40:25]Uh what we call the constitutional rights. When are looking at uh the constitution in our simple understanding we are saying a constitution is a body of uh laws that are said to be used to govern uh the country. So when you are saying uh constitutional uh rights in this instance we are now looking at the rights as in universal freedoms which are enshrined into the body of the law.

[01:41:01]So we can say constitutional rights they are basic protections and freedoms.

[01:41:09]basic protections and freedoms.

[01:41:23]that a country's constitution guarantees to people.

[01:41:50]Right? So basically those are basic protections and freedoms that are guaranteed in the country's constitution which is a legal document which stipulates the laws that govern a country that is our constitution. So if those freedoms and those protections are enshrined in that body of laws, then they are constitutional rights. Right?

[01:42:12]What did Clinton imply by the statement?

[01:42:14]40 years later, we know that there still there are still more doors to be opened in the context of ending segregation in the USA.

[01:42:26]There are still more doors to be opened in the context of ending segregation.

[01:42:32]It means they still needed to do more for the sake of the black Americans.

[01:43:06]So when they said they need still need to do to open more doors, there were still more doors to be opened 40 years later. You see that there was still need to do more for the sake of the black Americans. They were disadvantaged. they were segregated and there's need to correct that and there's need to rectify the issue of segregation which was supposed to be addressed as a long-term concern. Then number 354 name any two organizations in the source that who came to America to redeem the promise of America. The two organizations we find them in the last part. Um it says 40 years later we know the question of race is more complex and more important than ever embracing no longer just blacks and whites or blacks and whites and Hispanics and Native Americans but now people from all parts of the earth coming here to redeem the um promise of America.

[01:44:09]So we're looking at Hispanics and natives Americans, right? Uh we are seeing that um [clears throat] we are supposed to answer the paragraph question which says explain the experiences of Elizabeth Eford. Explaining the experiences.

[01:44:37]So we want to figure out an answer which gives us a picture of the experiences.

[01:44:43]What kind of experiences?

[01:44:45]So we can say Elizabeth Eford faced um a terrifying it was frightening violent mob alone.

[01:45:05]Why trying to enter Central High School, right? Then you go on to explain what you explained there. You are now supporting how terrifying it was and how she got to attempt to enter the school alone. Uh the issue which was there was um in your explanation it was due to not having a telephone.

[01:45:44]She could not organize herself and get to combine with others to get into the school. She missed the message and hence she got to encounter a situation where she was supposed to enter central high school alone and then she was exposed to racist elements.

[01:46:09]She was exposed to racist elements as she was trying to enter the school.

[01:46:15]And you also talk of now if you are looking at your evidence you can talk of the accusers gods who blocked her.

[01:46:31]You caught the evidence. You look at the angry mob behind her.

[01:46:39]You caught your source.

[01:46:42]You also look at her rushing to the bus stop for safety.

[01:46:50]She had to rush to the bus stop for safety.

[01:46:54]You quote the source and hence you link back to the line of argument to show that it was a terrifying experience that she faced in an attempt to attain desegregation. That takes us to the end of section A. We now quickly move on to our section B which are our essay questions and we are going to just highlight on how you're supposed to answer those questions. uh basically the content remains the same but I'm going to guide you on the approach to uh the questions how you should address the line of argument of the question and also how you must create uh your introduction which is contextualized and how you must go around trying to attempt the line of argument and maintain the line of argument in the discussion until it reaches the end of the essay. Right.

[01:47:42]The first question is independent Africa Mo introduced only political changes to the newly independent Congo in 1960s. Do you agree with this statement? It's saying Mou only political changes. He introduced only. So our question is do you agree with the statement? Do we have to agree with the statement that Moubu introduced only political changes?

[01:48:10]We must disagree with this statement because we know Moubu did not only introduce political, he introduced political, he introduced social and he also introduced economic uh changes to the economy of Congo. So we tend to disagree with this statement. So in our introduction as usual remember when you're writing this is question four which is Congo.

[01:48:36]When you're writing this, you need to adopt a line of argument which you can be able to support. So in this instance, we are saying in our answer in disagreement, we disagree with the statement.

[01:48:55]Moubu did not not only introduce political changes.

[01:49:16]Rather, he introduced also economic and social changes.

[01:49:37]Right, that is our answer. Then we go on to our reasons.

[01:49:43]Why are we saying he did not introduce only political but rather he introduced also social? Moubu [snorts] introduced policies such as Nationalization.

[01:50:12]If you look at nationalization as a policy, we can say this is an economic polic like what the question is suggesting us to take that line of argument of only taking the um the taking only the side of political movement of political changes. We are looking at it as more boot taking uh economic changes like him taking um nationalization as an economic policy or we can also look at Moubu introducing sinization which is also an economic policy and also if you can look at it we can look at the issue of Moubu having also some social changes that he introduced amongst the people of Congo.

[01:51:12]He also introduced the polic of authenticide which is an um a social policy. Then we elaborate uh this essay will further explain on the policies that way introduced my boot in independent Congo.

[01:51:55]Right? That is your question number five. Unfortunately, I was saying question number four. This is question number five.

[01:52:02]Right? So, if you contextualize your introduction like this, then it means you are now able to defend your line of argument. You now have to explain your points. Your points are common. You focus on the main points of the essay which are always the same. When you're looking at it from the perspective of uh the political policies, you look at it from the side of the social policies, you look at it from the side of um this uh the economic policies, you address aspects just in passing just to make a list of what you must address.

[01:52:37]You address political policies like the issue of political instability.

[01:52:46]How he handled political instability is political. You look at how he also handled the issue of Moubuism which was a personal cult. You also look at the creation of one party state.

[01:53:05]Then you also look at his view of democracy.

[01:53:10]You can also look at um the polic of kleptocracy which can be political or economic at the same time. You also look at other um [clears throat] aspects like um the support from the USA, him as an anti-communist, his approach as an anti-communist. You also look at other aspects like um how he handled the Katanga rebellion.

[01:53:41]Then all these are political policies.

[01:53:43]Then you go on to look at economic policies. Then you address issues like inheriting a capitalist economy and how he handled it. Then you also look at other aspects like his policy of Zionization and its implication and also you link it to show that it was not a political polic. And also you look at um the policies like um the policy of retroession after nationalization. You look at rest uh retroession and also you look at other uh policies like nationalization without compensation.

[01:54:25]All those are the ideas that you can use for uh the essay section. you are trying to link to show that um it was not only political. You also look at his failures like the dependence on aid on multilateral institutions like the IMF and the fail of the economy. Then you also look to go and look at social policies. You look at policies like eliticism.

[01:54:57]You look at also aspects like um French as a medium of instruction.

[01:55:04]You also look at other aspects like uh you look at um how he changed the clothing and how he impacted on the people through change of clothing and also you also address other issues like um what he did to education and nonpayment of workers and also the poor service delivery. You also look at other policies like um the authenticite.

[01:55:39]All those are the points that you can use for the essay. Then you tie up your argument with a relevant conclusion.

[01:55:47]Right? Then also we need to look at question number four. We had looked at question number five. The question number four is saying to what extent the United States military dominance was rendered ineffective.

[01:56:04]To what extent was the US military dominance rendered ineffective? We know that the US was defeated by the Vietkong. So it means its military dominance was rendered ineffective. So it means to a greater extent. We want to show the extent. So we are saying in our response to a greater extent the military dominance was rendered ineffective. That is question number four. So our answer is to a great extent the US dominance was rendered ineffective by the Vietkong strategies.

[01:56:49]Right? That is our line of argument.

[01:56:51]Then we need to find uh reasons to support our line of argument. We now give general reasons. We are saying the USA uh over relied on conventional they over relied on conventional warfare.

[01:57:15]For example, the operation rolling thunder which proved ineffective at the hands of nonconventional methods.

[01:57:38]nonconventional uh gorilla methods by the Vietkong.

[01:57:53]We are give we've given the reason why we are saying the methods were rendered ineffective. Then we give an elaboration. What is the essay about?

[01:58:01]This essay is going to further explain on the tactics that were used by the USA and the Viet gorillas in the Vietkong war in the Vietnam war. That is your elaboration. Then you now go on to highlight on the military tactics and strategies that were used by the two sides. We are looking at it from the perspective of the Americans. And when you are linking it, make sure that you link it in such a way that the tactics of America prove ineffective and the tactics of the USA prove effective. So you can look at the American side. You can look at policies like the safe village as a point. You can also explain on um young and inexperienced soldiers on the side of the Americans. You can also look at it on the side of um the myai massacre.

[01:59:06]You look at operation rolling thunder.

[01:59:12]You also look at other strategies like uh chemical warfare.

[01:59:22]You also look at other tactics like the rangeand also look at other strategies like um rolling thunder. We've talked about that. We've talked about chemical warfare. You look at also other strategies like the tal offensive by the gorillas. Then you also look on the side of the gorillas. At the same time you need to look at hit and run tactics.

[01:59:55]You look at the tunnels by the gorillas.

[01:59:59]You look at the use of what you mean trail.

[02:00:05]You look at also other aspects like support from USSR.

[02:00:13]You also China and also North Vietnam.

[02:00:16]Then also look at um other strategies that were used by uh the gorillas as they went through the war. They also got support from peasants.

[02:00:32]You can also talk about their geographical knowledge.

[02:00:38]You can also talk about kafledge.

[02:00:43]All these are the ideas that you use in the essay and you explain them in paragraphs and then you come to the end of your discussion and you tie up your argument with a relative uh with a relevant uh conclusion. But also remember that you are linking your points in such a way that you show the ineffectiveness of the American strategies and you counter it with the effectiveness of the gorilla uh tactics.

[02:01:08]Right? Then uh we come to our last question which is uh the question on the black power movement. It says the black power movement uh adopted a radical approach in its in all its aspects in attempts to end discrimination. We are saying they adopted a radical approach which means they were now no longer accepting anything besides a change. They wanted to attain a change in their way to freedom. So are we saying that is an approved statement or we can disapprove the statement. But in this instance we know that the black power movement was an advancement from the civil rights movement. It took a more radical approach. They wanted change. They wanted to end discretion and segregation. That was their main purpose. So with this essay we need to take a line of argument of approval.

[02:02:04]So which means we are saying the black power movement adopted and radical approach right and then why are we saying so we are saying so because it advocated for aspects like black [snorts] self-reliance which was a move towards change or it advocated for black self-defense against police brutality and also it enhanced the aspect of cultural pride of the black people. But this is a critical discussion. We must also look at it from the other side.

[02:02:55]However, some of the methods adopted by the BM were not that radical.

[02:03:18]Then you also site examples of the methods which are not radical and then you give an elaboration. This essay is going to explain on the methods that were used by the blink power movement to end discrimination and to end segregation. So that's your line of argument. It's a dual line of argument for a critical discussion. It must have two sides so that you have a critique in your uh presentation of the facts. So when you are now explaining um your ideas, you are now um explaining basically on the points of the philosophy that was followed by the black power uh movement. You look at a philosophy of self-reliance, philosophy of black pride.

[02:04:13]Explain on the philosophy of control of politics in their own communities in own communities. Right? You explain that as a philosophy. Then you also go on to look at the influence of the Black Panther Party.

[02:04:33]in instituting self-defense against police brutality. You explain along those lines. You look at also self-reliance programs like feeding schemes to eradicate hunger amongst the youth.

[02:04:57]It was also another the move of the moves that were taken. Then you can also look at um child care projects, the Black Panda.

[02:05:07]You look at um Black Panther Party child care projects and then you can also look at um uh the Black Panther Party literacy projects.

[02:05:27]You also look at other aspects like the black panda party patrols on streets to monitor police.

[02:05:46]But some of those ideas you also look at um the demand that history must be taught in schools.

[02:05:56]It was also another move that they advocated for history to be taught in schools.

[02:06:01]the concept of black pride which they encompassed in their philosophy to enhance the self-confidence of the black person encouraging African-Ameans to stand for themselves to be able to stand for themselves.

[02:06:28]If you look at also um the issue of um chemical, you are look at what he advocated for and also you look at um the exclusion of white liberals of white liberals from the ideas. They wanted to exclude uh the white liberals as a philosophy of African-Americans and also if you look at it they also were against the USA's involvement in Vietnam. they advocated for the withdrawal of the vim of uh the USA's involvement in the Vietnam war which caused a lot of um economic [clears throat] damage and also loss of lives of ordinary Americans right so if you look at that then basically those are the ideas that you use in this particular presentation to come out with a an argument and at the end remember you're supposed to tie up your argument you go back to the question you refer back to the question and and you can reaffirm key points as a way of tying up your argument. Right? So basically that's the picture of the focus of this particular this particular essay questions. What is most important for you there is to contextualize your question in your introduction so that whatever you say is in line with the demands of the question and is aligned to what the question has demanded or has commanded uh you to do. Right? With that being said and done, uh this uh marks the end of uh this our discussion and I hope this discussion is going to assist you as uh those who will be writing in coming sessions and also for those who have written it can give you a picture of how best you would have scored in your uh June examinations for this particular session. Uh with that being said and done, thank you for watching.

[02:08:51]will meet in other sessions to follow your worst uh in