Hitler's aims and a weak world order
Hitler's aims were connected. Destroy Versailles by rearming, remilitarising the Rhineland and reclaiming territory. Unite all German-speakers (Grossdeutschland): Anschluss with Austria and the Sudeten Germans of Czechoslovakia. Underlying all was Lebensraum — expanding eastward into Poland and the USSR, not just recovering 1919 losses. Versailles left resentment to exploit, and the League's failures over Manchuria and Abyssinia showed Britain and France would not use force.
Was Hitler solely to blame? Both sides
Hitler chiefly to blame: his aims were expansionist; he broke the Treaty (rearmament, the Rhineland 1936); then the Anschluss (1938); broke Munich by seizing the rest of Czechoslovakia (March 1939); and invaded Poland (1 September 1939). Blame shared: appeasement rewarded each unpunished act; the League had already failed (Manchuria, Abyssinia); Versailles bred the resentment; and the Nazi-Soviet Pact (1939) removed his two-front-war fear. Judge whose choices drove events.
Drawn from real examiner reports.
Lebensraum is not Anschluss or Sudetenland
Lebensraum ("living space") is Hitler's aim of seizing territory eastward, in Poland and the USSR, for land and resources. Candidates misapply it: some confuse it with Anschluss or the Sudetenland — those were about uniting German-speakers, not seizing land further east. Others treat it as a domestic policy. To show why it raised tension, name Poland or the USSR.
Digest (## B3): Lebensraum is frequently misunderstood — confused with Anschluss or Sudetenland annexation, or treated as a domestic rather than an eastward-expansion policy; candidates don't apply it to why it increased tension (Poland/USSR as targets) (Paper 1).
Munich Agreement (1938) ≠ Putsch (1923)
Some confuse the Munich Agreement (September 1938, handing Germany the Sudetenland) with the separate Munich Putsch (1923, his failed bid for power) — fifteen years apart. Others muddle the final sequence: seizing the rest of Czechoslovakia (March 1939), the Nazi-Soviet Pact (August 1939) and the invasion of Poland (1 September 1939) must stay in order.
Digest (## B3): Munich Agreement (1938) confused with the Munich Putsch (1923); chronology muddled between the Agreement's collapse, the Nazi-Soviet Pact, and the invasion of Poland (Paper 1).
"Before 1936" bars Rhineland, Anschluss
On "preparations for war before 1936" questions, candidates wrongly include events after the cut-off: the remilitarisation of the Rhineland (March 1936), the Spanish Civil War (1936-39) and the Anschluss (1938) all happened after 1936 and are irrelevant to a pre-1936 question. Check every example against the date range the question sets.
Digest (## B3): preparations for war "before 1936" wrongly include later events (Rhineland remilitarisation, Spanish Civil War, Anschluss 1938) outside the set date range (Paper 1).
Spain won Hitler Mussolini, not Franco
Some frame the Spanish Civil War's benefit to Hitler as Franco becoming a WWII ally. That is the wrong link: the real benefits were testing weapons and tactics, and drawing Hitler and Mussolini closer (the Rome-Berlin Axis). Franco kept Spain largely neutral, so the gain was Mussolini, not Franco.
Digest (## B3): the Spanish Civil War's benefit to Hitler is sometimes wrongly framed as Franco becoming a WWII ally, rather than the correct link (gaining Mussolini as an ally) (Paper 1).
Nazi-Soviet Pact: give Hitler's reasons
Asked why Hitler signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact (August 1939), candidates often explain Stalin's motives instead, diluting focus. Keep to Hitler's reasons: the Pact removed the risk of a two-front war, let him invade Poland with a secret protocol dividing it, and bought time as Germany was not ready for a long war against the USSR. Answer the person the question names.
Digest (## B3): on the Nazi-Soviet Pact, candidates often explain Stalin's motives when the question asks specifically about Hitler's reasons, diluting focus (Paper 1).
The Rhineland move was not an "invasion"
First, calling the Rhineland's remilitarisation (March 1936) an "invasion": the Rhineland was already German, only demilitarised by Versailles, so moving troops there broke the Treaty, not invaded. Second, claiming the Sudetenland "previously belonged to Germany": it did not — it was German-speaking but became part of Czechoslovakia from 1919, never former German land.
Digest (## B3): some wrongly label the Rhineland remilitarisation an "invasion," or claim the Sudetenland previously belonged to Germany (Paper 1).
Build the blame essay on dated events
In a "how far to blame" essay, do not just narrate the 1930s. Build the FOR case on dated events — Rhineland (1936), Anschluss and Munich (1938), Czechoslovakia and Poland (1939) — saying what each shows. Then develop the counter-case (appeasement, League failure, the Pact).
Part (c): say which side is stronger
A Part (c) conclusion must say which side is stronger, not just assert "how far" or restate both sides. Reach a weighed judgement — e.g. Hitler's aims were the fundamental cause, but appeasement set how far he got unchecked. Say why one factor outweighs the others.
Read the cartoon's big message from details
For a Paper 2 cartoon "message" question, use all the details together for the overall "big" message, not describing each in turn or taking a caption literally. Identify who is depicted, then the point the cartoonist makes. A biased cartoon still evidences an attitude.
By 1939, Europe was at war again only two decades after Versailles. This Key Question asks how far Hitler's foreign policy — as opposed to other factors such as appeasement, the League of Nations' weakness, or the actions of other powers — was to blame for that outbreak.
Full notes, flashcards, Q&A and the topic quiz for every premium subject.
Premium plans are US$8.99/month or US$49.99/year — first month free.
Studying with a parent's blessing? Show them this.
