【樣本試卷】二戰丨《慕尼黑協定》

題目拆解

參考答案(中文版)

(a) 根據資料E，張伯倫將慕尼黑協議持甚麼態度？試參考資料E，解釋你的答案。（1+2分）

評分準則

態度（1分）: - 欣賞/ 支持 解釋（2分） L1 解釋含混，未能有效引用相關線索。 [最多1分] L2 解釋清晰，能有效引用相關線索。 [最多2分]

線索： - 「心中充滿喜悅和感激」 - 「我感到應可向理智之路邁進一步」

參考答案

張伯倫對慕尼黑協議持欣賞的正面態度。 資料E指正在聆聽張伯倫演說的人「心中都充滿喜悅和感激」，心情愉快，並認為「他們的禱告得到回應」，民眾百性所希望的終於得到實現，故張伯倫持滿意的正面態度。 其次，資料E指捷克問題是「最近期」和「最危險的」，但隨著慕尼黑協議的簽訂，捷克問題經已被「克服」，更帶領英國前往「理智之路」，可見張伯倫持支持的正面態度。

(b) 你認為邱吉爾會否支持慕尼黑協議？試參考資料F中的用語和論據，解釋你的答案。（2+2分）

評分準則

L1 解釋欠均衡，僅能引用資料中的用語或論據。 [最多2分] L2 解釋清潔均衡，能引用資料中的用語和論據。 [最多4分] 立場：

不會支持。 用語︰ 例︰ - 以「靜寂，淒涼，離棄，破碎」等貶詞形容慕尼黑協議簽訂後的情況。 - 將慕尼黑協議形客為希特拉的「險勝」。 論據︰ 例︰ - 慕尼黑協議簽訂後，捷克國運將步入黑暗期。 - 慕尼黑協議並沒有「凝聚各種力量以威攝侵略者」，亦沒有「以摯誠的努力平反冤情」。

參考答案

邱吉爾不會支持慕尼黑協議。 先從用語方面解釋。 參考資料F，邱吉爾形容希特拉於慕尼黑協議的勝利僅是「險勝」，意味著希特拉以微弱的優勢取勝，獲得利益擴張，故邱吉爾不會支持慕尼黑協議。 其次，邱吉爾形容慕尼黑協議為「靜寂，淒涼，離棄，破碎」等負面詞語，認為慕尼黑協議將後患無窮，局勢進一步嚴峻，故邱吉爾不會支持慕尼黑協議。 現從論據方面解釋。 邱吉爾於演說開首就表明「我不能同意已實行的各個步驟」，明確表示對慕尼黑協議的不同意，並且主張維持和平「有賴於凝聚各種力量以威攝侵略者」，以強硬的力量制衡侵略者，因此他不會支持以妥協為首的慕尼黑協議。 最後，邱吉爾認為慕尼黑會議的簽訂令「捷克隠沒於黑暗中」，前路一片黑暗，沒有曙光失去希望，故他不會支持慕尼黑協議。

(c) 若你是1938年的一個英國人，你會支持張伯倫與邱吉爾哪一位的看法？試參考資料E及F，並就你所知，解釋你的答案。（7分）

評分參考

L1 論述含混，未能有效運用資料及相關史實。[最多2分] L2 論述欠均衡，僅能運用資料或相關史實。[最多4分] L3 論述合理及均衡，能同時運用資料及相關史實。[最多7分] 支持張伯倫︰ 例︰ - 慕尼黑協議能消除「那些長久以來令局勢變得烏煙瘴氣的猜忌和仇恨」。（資料E） - 邱吉爾認為慕尼黑協議將「捷克隱沒於暗黑之中」（資料F）的想法未免過於悲觀，因為慕尼黑協議只允許希特拉將捷克的三分之一領土（蘇台德地區）劃歸納粹德國。而直至1938年

底，此情況亦以持續。（個人史識） - 英國仍未從全球經濟大衰退中恢復元氣，綏靖安撫最為符合其國家利益。（個人史識） - 德國若強大，便可遏制蘇聯向西歐擴張，令英國可繼續穩定發展。（個人史識） 支持邱吉爾︰ 例︰ - 要維持和平，便應「凝聚各種力量以威攝侵略者，並以摯誠的努力平反冤情」，而非與希特拉妥協。（資料F） - 作為歐洲大國，英國「應該一開始便毫不猶豫地宣告會與其他各國一同保衛捷克」。（資料

F） - 張伯倫以為慕尼黑協議已克服了「最近期，或許也是最危險」的捷克問題（資料E），實際上卻令「捷克隱沒於暗黑之中。」（資料F） - 英國是一個民主及熱愛和平的國家，不應與納粹強權合作。（個人史識） - 希特拉上台後旨在擴張德國領土，其野心不會因慕尼黑協議而滿足，早晚會威脅歐洲的和平，英國將難倖免。（個人史識）

參考答案

我會支持邱吉爾的看法。 從資料F分析，邱吉爾指出維持和平應「凝聚各種力量以威攝侵略者」，認為強硬手段阻止侵略者行動方會取得成效，所以英國應毫不猶豫地「保衛捷克」，以防侵略者的野心得以滋長。 就我所知，隨著納粹德國於1935年重新徵兵制，便逐步擴張，如1936年將萊茵河地區軍事化，反映妥協談判讓侵略野野心滋長，成效不大，故支持邱氏的強硬手段阻止侵略者。 同時，資料F指邱吉爾認為慕尼黑協議乃屬於「希特拉先生的勝利」，慕尼黑協議未能締造和平，反讓納粹德國得到利益，以作下一步侵略。 就我所知，慕尼黑協議一方面讓納粹德國獲得300萬日耳曼人的蘇台德區；另一方面使捷克失去重要的屏障防守，容易被侵略者作下一步侵略，實為希特拉的勝利，所以支持邱氏的看法。 再加上，邱吉爾指慕尼黑協議將讓「捷克隠沒於暗黑之中」，前路一片黑暗，看不到曙光，喻意捷克將會被侵略者所侵佔，危機四伏。 就我所知，隨著1938年慕尼黑協議讓希特拉取得蘇台德區，奠定納粹德國向東的侵略行動，捷克將存全面被侵略的危機，因此我支持邱氏的看法。 然後，對於張伯倫樂觀的看法實在不敢苟同。 從資料E指出張伯倫認為慕尼黑協議乃「禱告得到回應」，一直祈求的願望得到允許，更讓「最近期」和「最危機的」捷克得以解決，並往「理智之路」進發。 然而就我所知，自納粹黨在1933年取得政權後，逐步擴張發動侵略，至1938年更已吞併奧地利，所以慕尼黑協議的簽訂不但未能維持和平，反使讓和平進一步受到威脅，故不能同意張氏的看法。 可見，作為1938年的英國人，我將會支持邱吉爾的看法。

參考答案(英文版)

(a) According to Source E, what was Chamberlain’s attitude towards the Munich Agreement? Explain your answer with reference to Source E. (1 +2 marks)

Marking Scheme

L1 Vague explanation, and ineffective in using relevant clues from Source. [max. 1] L2 Clear explanation, and effective in using relevant clues from Source. [max. 2]

Attitude:

- appreciate/ support [1 mark]

Clues: - ‘Today we all meet in joy and thankfulness …’ - ‘I feel that it may be possible to make further progress along the road to sanity.’

Suggested Answer

Chamberlain held appreciative positive attitude towards the Munich Agreement. According to Source E, people who were listening to Chamberlain’s speech were all “in joy and thankfulness” that “the prayers of millions have been answered.” People were in good mood as their wishes were about to be realized. Therefore, Chamberlain held satisfied positive attitude. According to Source E, the question of Czechoslovakia was “the latest” and “the most dangerous”. However, as the Munich Agreement was signed, people had “got past” the question and Britain was brought to “make further progress along the road to sanity”. Therefore, Chamberlain held supportive positive attitude.

(b) Do you think Churchill would have supported the Munich Agreement? Explain your answer with reference to the language and argument used in Source F.(2 + 2 marks)

Marking Scheme

L1 Explanation lacks balance, only referring to language or argument of Source. [max. 2] L2 Clear explanation, referring to both language and argument of Source. [max.4]

Stance:

No.

Language: e.g. – Use pessimistic phrases – ‘silent, mournful, abandoned, broken’ – to describe the situation after the signing of the Munich Agreement. - Describe the Munich Agreement as being ‘won upon the narrowest of margins’. Argument: e.g. – Czechoslovakia entered an era of darkness after the signing of the Munich Agreement. - The Munich Agreement failed to provide ‘accumulation of deterrents against the aggressors’, neither was it ‘a sincere effort to redress grievances’.

Suggested Answer

Churchill would not have supported the Munich Agreement. In term of language, according to Source F, Churchill described that Hitler’s victory in the Munich Conference was “won upon the narrowest of margins”. It means that Hitler won the victory and gained more interests with little advantage only. Therefore, Churchill would not have supported the Munich Agreement. Moreover, Churchill described the Munich Agreement as “silent, mournful, abandoned, broken”, which were all negative adjectives. It implies that Churchill believed the Munich Agreement would make the situation more severe. Thus, Churchill would not have supported the Munich Agreement. In term of arguments, Churchill claimed that “I cannot myself express my agreement with the steps which have been taken” at the very beginning of his speech, clearly expressing his disagreement towards the Munich Agreement. Also, he advocated that ‘the maintenance of peace depends upon the accumulation of deterrents against the aggressor”. Firm and tough means should be used to confront against the aggressor. Therefore, Churchill would not have supported the Munich Agreement. Lastly, Churchill believed that “Czechoslovakia recedes into the darkness” due to the signing of the Munich Agreement. Czechoslovakia had entered into the era of darkness and lost the hope. Therefore, Churchill would not have supported the Munich Agreement.

(c) If you were a British in 1938, whose view – Chamberlain’s or Churchill’s – would you support? Explain your answer with reference to Sources E and F, and using your own knowledge. (7 marks)

Marking Scheme

L1 Vague argument, ineffective in using both Source and own knowledge. [max. 2] L2 Unbalanced argument, using Source or own knowledge only. [max. 4] L3 Reasonable and balanced argument, using both Source and own knowledge. [max. 7] Chamberlain: e.g.

- The Munich Agreement could remove ‘those suspicions and animosities which have so long poisoned the air.’ (Source E) - Churchill was over-pessimistic by stating that the Munich Agreement had made ‘Czechoslovakia recede into the darkness’ (Source F), as the Agreement only allowed Hitlerite Germany one-third of Czechoslovakia (Sudetenland). This condition remained until the end of 1938. (own knowledge) - A stronger Germany would deter the Soviet Union from expanding to Western Europe. This would help Britain to recover stably. (own knowledge) Churchill: e.g.

- To maintain peace, one should pursue ‘accumulation of deterrents against the aggressors, coupled with a sincere effort to redress grievances’ rather than seeking compromise with Hitler. (Source F) - As a European power, Britain should ‘declare straight out and a long time beforehand that she would, with others, join to defend Czechoslovakia … ‘(Source F) - Chamberlain thought that the Munich Agreement had successfully dealt with the question of Czechoslovakia which was ‘the latest and perhaps the most dangerous’, but it actually had made ‘Czechoslovakia recede into the darkness’. (Source F) - Britain was a democratic and peace-loving country, and should not cooperate with the Nazi autocracy. (own knowledge) - Hitler, after gaining ascendancy, aimed at expanding German territory. His ambition might not be satisfied by the Munich Agreement, and would sooner or late give new threat to peace of Europe in which Britain was a part. (own knowledge)

Suggested Answer

I would support Churchill’s view. According to Source F, Churchill advocated that ‘the maintenance of peace depends upon the accumulation of deterrents against the aggressor”. Only by tough means could the aggressions be stopped so Britain should ‘defend Czechoslovakia” with no hesitation in order that the ambition of the aggressors would not continue to grow. According to my own knowledge, since Nazi Germany rearmed itself in 1935, it gradually expanded its power. For example, Rhineland was re-militarized in 1936. It reflects that negotiation was ineffective that it would only encourage the ambition of the aggressor. Therefore, I would support Churchill’s view which advocated using tough means to stop the aggressor. Meanwhile, according to Source F, Churchill believed that the signing of the Munich Agreement was “Hitler’s victory”, implying that the Munich Agreement could not maintain peace but had benefited Nazi Germany for its next aggression. According to my knowledge, the Munich Agreement allowed Nazi Germany to gain Sudetenland inhabited by 3 million Germans. On the other hand, Czechoslovakia lost the important part of its defenses that it made the aggression of Germany easier. Therefore, the Munich Agreement was indeed Hitler’s victory and I would support Churchill’s view. Additionally, Churchill pointed out that “Czechoslovakia recedes into the darkness” due to the signing of the Munich Agreement. Czechoslovakia had entered the era of darkness and lost the hope. It implies that Czechoslovakia was in danger that it would soon be invaded by the aggressor. According to my knowledge, as the Munich Agreement was signed in 1938, Hitler gained the Sudetenland and German aggression was directed to the East. Czechoslovakia then faced the crisis of being wholly occupied by Nazi Germany. Thus, I would support Churchill’s view.  However, I would not agree with Chamberlain’s optimistic view. According to Source E, Chamberlain thought that “the prayers of millions have been answered” as the Munich Agreement was signed. The wishes of the people were finally realized and “the latest” and “the most dangerous” question of Czechoslovakia was eventually settled. Britain was thus brought to “the road to sanity”. However, in my knowledge, since the Nazi Party took the power in 1933, Germany gradually initiated aggression and it even occupied Austria in 1938. Therefore, the signing of the Munich Agreement could not maintain but further threaten the world peace. Thus, I would not support Chamberlain’s view. To conclude, if I were a British in 1938, I would support Churchill’s view.