EDEXCEL GCSE HISTORY: THE USA, 1954-75: CONFLICT AT HOME AND ABROAD (EXAMS FROM 2026) | ANSWERS

These answers have been updated for exams from 2026 onwards.

1 The lives of Black Americans in the early 1950s

1 Give two things you can infer from Source A about the reasons why Black people demanded their civil rights. (4)

Mark scheme

You can award four marks for this question, two for each inference. Award one mark for a valid inference, and one mark for accurate supporting detail from the source.

An example of a four-mark answer

1. (i)   What I can infer: Black people in the southern states of the USA were struggling economically. (1)

Details in the source that tell me this: The source shows a protestor holding a placard that reads ‘The SOUTH is POOR’ and suggests segregation will make it worse. (1)

2. (ii)  What I can infer: Black people were inspired by the USA’s role in the Second World War. (1)

Details in the source that tell me this: The source shows a protestor holding a placard that rejects communism and fascism but calls for democracy for Black people. (1)

2 Explain why life was more difficult for Black people in the south than in the north in the early 1950s. (12)

Mark scheme

An example of a Level 1 answer

There was much racism in the south. Black people were not allowed to go where white people went, and ‘Jim Crow’ state laws were harsh. Black people were treated unfairly as a result.

An example of a Level 2 answer

There was much racism in the south. Black people were not allowed to go where white people went or use the same public facilities.

‘Jim Crow’ state laws stopped Black people from voting and organising. They also faced attacks and threats if they tried to do so.

Black people were also kept to poorer areas on the edges of communities.

An example of a Level 3 answer

One legacy of slavery was the degree of racism in the south; slavery had never been legal in the north. As a result, Black people were kept separate from white people and were not allowed to use the same public facilities. They were also barred from attending universities.

A further legacy of slavery was ‘Jim Crow’ state laws. These unfair state laws were used to prevent Black people from accessing their rights to vote and organise. The ‘Grandfather clause’ forced Black people to apply to register to vote, and literacy tests and poll taxes were put in place to stop them succeeding. Black people also faced violence and intimidation when they tried to exercise their rights, making their lives much more difficult.

Finally, Black people’s access to jobs and housing was worse in the south than in the north. In the south, Black people worked as tenant farmers or sharecroppers, or as servants such as maids and cooks. They were kept to poor-quality houses on the edges of their communities and were kept out of ‘white-only’ areas by white landlords.

An example of a Level 4 answer

One legacy of slavery was the degree of racism in the south; slavery had never been legal in the north. As a result, there was segregation: Black people were kept separate from white people and were not allowed to use the same public facilities, such as schools, parks, and buses. They were also barred from attending universities. This led to inequalities and a lack of opportunities for Black people.

A further legacy of slavery in the south, but not the north, were ‘Jim Crow’ state laws. These unfair state laws were used in the south to prevent Black people from accessing their rights to vote and organise. The so-called ‘Grandfather clause’ forced Black people to apply to register to vote and many barriers were put in place to stop them succeeding, such as literacy tests and poll taxes. Black people also faced violence and intimidation when they tried to exercise their rights, making their lives much more difficult.

Finally, Black people’s access to jobs and housing was worse in the south than in the north. In the south, Black people worked as tenant farmers or sharecroppers, or as servants such as maids and cooks. They were kept to poor-quality houses on the edges of small rural communities and were kept out of ‘white-only’ areas by white landlords. Although, in the north, Black people also struggled with job opportunities and housing, it was worse in the south, where they could lose their job if they voted.

2 The Civil Rights Movement, 1954–60

1 How useful are Sources A and B for an enquiry into the importance of events at Little Rock in 1957?
Explain your answer, using Sources A and B and your knowledge of the historical context. (8)

Mark scheme

An example of a Level 1 answer

Source A tells us that segregation ‘has a detrimental effect’. The source also says that ‘separate but equal’ is actually unequal.

Source B is an extract from the Southern Manifesto. It shows that the southern Democrats disliked the Supreme Court decision.

An example of a Level 2 answer

Source A gives us some of the reasons why events at Little Rock were important. It states that segregation was ‘detrimental’ and causes ‘inferiority’. It describes the educational damage that school segregation caused and declares the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ as ‘inherently unequal’. White schools had better funding, better teachers, and better facilities. However, the source does not address the events at Little Rock directly.

Source B is an extract from the Southern Manifesto, a document signed in opposition to Source A, the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v Topeka. There was much resistance to desegregation, as shown by the events at Little Rock and the need for the 101st Airborne Division to protect the nine Black students from a thousand-strong mob. Source B gives evidence of why they objected, but again does not address the events directly.

An example of a Level 3 answer

Source A is useful for helping us understand why the nine Little Rock Black students made their stand and for understanding the importance of defeating segregation in schools. It states that segregation was ‘detrimental’ and causes ‘a sense of inferiority’. It describes the educational damage that school segregation had and declares the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ as ‘inherently unequal’. I know that this is true because white schools had better funding, better teachers, and better facilities than the Black schools. However, the source does not address the events at Little Rock directly, so is limited in its use.

Source A is an extract from the Supreme Court’s decision on Brown v Topeka, the case won by the NAACP, which made the Little Rock protest possible. As a court enquiry, the decision is very reliable in describing the issues of segregation and the importance of ending it. However, as the decision was made in 1954, it is less useful for directly assessing the events at Little Rock, which happened in 1957.

Source B is an extract from the Southern Manifesto, a document signed in opposition to Source A, the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v Topeka. There was much resistance to desegregation, as shown by the events at Little Rock and the need for the 101st Airborne Division of the US Army to protect the nine Black students from a thousand-strong mob. This gives evidence of why they objected, but again does not address the events directly, so is limited in its use. The manifesto was signed the year before Little Rock.

Source B is reliable as an expression of anti-segregation views, as the southern Democrats represented the racist white population and needed to appeal to their voters. However, what I know about the issues that Black people faced in the south (such as ‘Jim Crow’ state laws and segregation, and the violent actions at Little Rock) makes me sceptical about the truth of their claim of ‘friendly relations’ between Black and white people in the south.

2 Study Interpretations 1 and 2.
They give different views about the importance of events at Little Rock in 1957.
What is the main difference between these views?
Explain your answer, using details from both interpretations.(4)

Mark scheme

An example of a Level 1 answer

Interpretation 1 suggests the events at Little Rock were very important to fighting inequality.

On the other hand, Interpretation 2 suggests the opposite, as it showed the strength of white resistance.

An example of a Level 2 answer

Interpretation 1 suggests that the events at Little Rock were very important, because they ‘forced’ US President Eisenhower to act to defend the rights of Black people. It says that Little Rock exposed the lie of American democracy being ‘based on principles of justice and equality’ to the watching world.

On the other hand, Interpretation 2 gives a more negative interpretation of the impact. It suggests that the Governor’s re-election after Little Rock ‘killed the NAACP’s hopes’ and revealed the popular support for ‘the worst attitudes of white voters’.

3 Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about the importance of events at Little Rock in 1957. You may use Sources A and B to help explain your answer. (4)

Mark scheme

An example of a Level 1 answer

The interpretations give different views about the importance of events at Little Rock because they focus on different consequences: one for civil rights and the other for white resistance.

An example of a Level 2 answer

The interpretations give different views about the importance of events at Little Rock because they focus on different consequences, for civil rights and for white resistance. Interpretation 1 focuses on the national and global impact of the media coverage on the US government, which was forced to act to stop the USA looking bad internationally. Interpretation 2 focuses on the local impact in the south of the strength of white resistance, which is supported in the Southern Manifesto quoted in Source B.

4 How far do you agree with Interpretation 1 about the importance of events at Little Rock in 1957?
Explain your answer, using both interpretations and your knowledge of the historical context. (16)

Mark scheme

An example of a Level 1 answer

I agree with the interpretation, because there were more than 250 reporters covering the events at Little Rock and the violence of the white mob shocked the world. It forced the president to act and added pressure to the 1957 Civil Rights Act, signed on 9 September.

An example of a Level 2 answer

Interpretation 1 focuses on the national and global impact of the media coverage on the US government, with more than 250 reporters and TV crews covering the events at Little Rock. The violence of the white mob shocked the world and made the USA look bad, and the USSR took advantage of this damage.

The interpretation suggests that Little Rock became ‘a massive worldwide news story’ that questioned and undermined the ideal of American democracy. The interpretation says that ‘Eisenhower was forced to act’, which he was, because he sent in the 101st Airbourne Division to defend the nine Little Rock Black students from a mob a thousand-strong, so that they could exercise their rights.

The interpretation ends by arguing that the violent discrimination seen in the USA ‘reinforced’ to the US president the issue of race in the country’s international relations. We can see this in the drive for the 1957 Civil Rights Act of September 1957, signed shortly after the troubles at Little Rock began.

Interpretation 2 argues that the events’ impact was more negative, that it ‘killed the NAACP’s hopes’, but I agree with Interpretation 1 about the importance of the events at Little Rock.

An example of a Level 3 answer

Interpretation 1 focuses on the national and global impact of the media coverage on the US government, with more than 250 reporters and TV crews covering the events at Little Rock. The violence of the white mob shocked the world and made the USA look bad, and the USSR took advantage of this damage.

The interpretation suggests that Little Rock became ‘a massive worldwide news story’ that questioned and undermined the ideal of American democracy. The interpretation says that ‘Eisenhower was forced to act’, which he was, because he sent in the 101st Airbourne Division to defend the nine Little Rock Black Students from a mob a thousand-strong, so that they could exercise their rights.

The interpretation ends by arguing that the violent discrimination seen in the USA ‘reinforced’ to the US president the issue of race in the country’s international relations. We can see this in the drive for the 1957 Civil Rights Act of September 1957, signed shortly after the troubles at Little Rock began.

Interpretation 2 focuses on the south and the local impact of the strength of white resistance. It argues that the events’ impact was more negative, that it ‘killed the NAACP’s hopes’, because the Governor of Arkansas was ‘triumphant’ and re-elected on the wave of popular support for resisting segregation in the south. It argues that the events at Little Rock revealed the level of opposition to integration and showed southern politicians that many votes could be won ‘by appealing to the worst attitudes’ of their voters.

There certainly was a wealth of opposition to desegregation, as voiced by the Southern Manifesto in 1956, signed by around 100 southern Democrats in response to the Supreme Court ruling in Brown v Topeka. Although 723 school districts had desegregated by the summer of 1957, there was still much resistance to desegregation in the south. Black students and teachers faced hostility and intimidation, and many Black schools were closed. The hostility also caused a 40% drop in NAACP membership.

In conclusion, although the Governor’s re-election does show the strength and confidence of white resistance to desegregation, I agree with Interpretation 1. The media coverage and negative press forced the government to intervene to defend Black rights.

An example of a Level 4 answer

I largely agree with the view in Interpretation 1 about the importance of the events at Little Rock in 1957 for the quest for civil rights. While the white backlash was indeed strong, and caused problems implementing changes, the negative press was vital in pushing the US government into action.

Interpretation 1 focuses on the national and global impact of the media coverage on the US government, with more than 250 reporters and TV crews covering the events at Little Rock and broadcasting worldwide. The violence of the thousand-strong white mob shocked the world and made the USA look bad internationally, which the USSR took capitalised on as propaganda in its ongoing Cold War with the USA.

The interpretation suggests that Little Rock became ‘a massive worldwide news story’ that questioned and undermined the ideal of American democracy. The interpretation says that ‘Eisenhower was forced to act’, which he was, because he sent in the 101st Airbourne Division of the US Army to defend the nine Little Rock Black students from a thousand-strong mob, so that they could exercise their rights. This led to scenes of violent white protestors clashing with soldiers as they tried to intimidate the young students and stop them from enrolling.

The interpretation ends by arguing that the violent discrimination seen in the USA ‘reinforced’ to the US president the issue of race in the country’s international relations. We can see this in the drive for the 1957 Civil Rights Act of September 1957, signed shortly after the troubles at Little Rock began to bring an end to such public clashes of racism. Democracy could not be seen as triumphant when military force was needed to keep peace on the streets!

On the other hand, Interpretation 2 focuses on the local impact in the south of the strength of white resistance. It argues that the events’ impact was more negative, that it ‘killed the NAACP’s hopes’, because the Governor of Arkansas was ‘triumphant’ and re-elected on the wave of popular support for resisting segregation in the south. It argues that the events revealed the level of opposition to integration and showed southern politicians the many votes to be won ‘by appealing to the worst attitudes’ of their voters.

There certainly was a wealth of opposition to desegregation, as voiced by the Southern Manifesto in 1956, signed by around 100 southern Democrats in response to the Supreme Court ruling in Brown v Topeka. Although more than 700 school districts had desegregated by the summer of 1957, there was still much resistance to desegregation in the south. Black students and teachers faced hostility and intimidation, and many Black schools were closed. The hostility also caused a 40% drop in NAACP membership. Desegregation was slow and contested at every turn, but progress was made, nonetheless, thanks to the media attention and subsequent pressure from events such as that at Little Rock.

In summary, I strongly agree that the events at Little Rock – and the ‘worldwide’ publicity it gave to civil rights issues in the USA – was very important in advancing civil rights for Black Americans. It forced the government into action defending Black rights, making the achievements that followed possible. However, I also agree with Interpretation 2’s view that, initially, progress was slow due to an upsurge in southern racist opposition. Indeed, it wasn’t until 1972 that Little Rock’s schools were fully desegregated.

3 Opposition to the Civil Rights Movement

1 Give two things you can infer from Source A about the murder of Emmett Till. (4)

Mark scheme

You can award four marks for this question, two for each inference. Award one mark for a valid inference, and one mark for accurate supporting detail from the source.

For example:

1. (i)    What I can infer: Thousands of people were outraged at Till’s murder.

Details in the source that tell me this: A protest meeting in October drew ‘12,000’ people, ‘4000 jammed into a 2,500 capacity auditorium’.

2. (ii)   What I can infer: People were outraged across the whole USA, not just locally.

Details in the source that tell me this: The article is from a Detroit newspaper; Till was from Chicago and murdered in Money, Mississippi.

2 Explain why it was difficult for Black people to stand up for their civil rights in southern states in the late 1950s. (12)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• The legacy of slavery in the south was much racism and hatred among southern whites, who formed groups such as the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) to spread violence against Black people; this intimidation was especially aimed at stopping Black people from voting or campaigning. Mobs of white racists often took ‘the law’ into their own hands, lynching Black people for perceived ‘crimes’; around 5000 lynchings were recorded between 1882 and 1968. These murders went unpunished because the authorities turned a blind eye: many policemen and judges were members of the KKK.
• Black people were dependent on white people for their jobs as tenant farmers or servants. From July 1954, White Citizens’ Councils (WCCs) sprang up across the south to mobilise middle-class white people to organise threats and intimidation of Black workers. These organisations threatened to cut Black jobs if workers tried to vote or protest their rights. They also encouraged violence. Membership of WCC reached around 250,000 across the USA in 1957.
• There was also strong political resistance to Black civil rights. Southern Democrats, or ‘Dixiecrats’, claimed to fight for state independence but resisted civil rights legislation at every turn. To appeal to the popular white vote, southern senators and representatives used speeches and delaying tactics to block legislation. Even the president was reluctant to force the issue and spoke against his own Civil Rights Act in 1957.

4 The Civil Rights Movement, 1960–65

1 How useful are Sources A and B for an enquiry into the importance of the different participants in the fight for civil rights in Mississippi in the years 1961 to 1962?
Explain your answer, using Sources A and B and your knowledge of the historical context. (8)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Source A is useful because it tells us that the states of Mississippi and Alabama were in chaos during the Freedom Rides, with people with a variety of motives trying to travel, and a violent and indiscriminate mob. It shows the government’s concern and need to intervene.
• There were scenes of violence all along the Freedom Riders’ route. At Anniston, Alabama, one bus was firebombed, and the fleeing Riders were beaten by a hundred-strong mob. In Montgomery, the mob had swollen to a thousand people. Federal marshals had to be mobilised when a mob confronted a church rally led by Martin Luther King.
• Source A is written by the Attorney General Robert Kennedy, who would have had detailed information about what was happening. The Kennedys were supportive of the Civil Rights Movement.
• Source B is useful because it reveals the language and motives of white opposition to civil rights and provides an alternative view of events. However, its bias is clear in its language, making it far less likely to be a trustworthy account. It tries to lay the blame on ‘trouble makers’ and ‘judicial oppression’.
• Source B refers to the role of the press and of the Kennedy administration in supporting civil rights. Large numbers of reporters and TV crews certainly played a key role in publicising protests and broadcasting scenes of white mob violence across the world. The negative publicity was used by the USSR in its Cold War struggle with the USA, painting the USA in a negative light. President Kennedy had promised to support the peaceful protesters during his election campaign and introduced a Civil Rights Act in 1963.
• Ross Barnett was the Governor of Mississippi and a staunch opponent of desegregation. His rhetoric, shortly before Meredith’s attempt to register at the university, was no doubt broadcast to stir up local white antagonism and resistance.

2 Study Interpretations 1 and 2.
They give different views about the importance of the different participants in the fight for civil rights in Mississippi in the years 1961 to 1962.
What is the main difference between these views?
Explain your answer, using details from both interpretations.(4)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Interpretation 1 is critical of the role of the Kennedys in the Meredith case and their failure to understand Mississippi.
• Interpretation 2 suggests that President Kennedy’s eventual actions gained great support among Black Americans.

3 Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about the importance of the different participants in the fight for civil rights in Mississippi in the years 1961 to 1962.
You may use Sources A and B to help explain your answer. (4)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• The interpretations emphasise different aspects. For example:
• Interpretation 1 focuses on the short-term impact locally (Doherty is an Ole Miss historian) and seems to be defending the university.
• Interpretation 2 focuses on President Kennedy and has a longer-term view of his impact on Black civil rights and resultant popularity.

4 How far do you agree with Interpretation 1 about the importance of the different participants in the fight for civil rights in Mississippi in the years 1961 to 1962?
Explain your answer, using both interpretations and your knowledge of the historical context. (16)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Interpretation 1 is critical of the participants involved in the Ole Miss protests of 1962, including Meredith himself and the media, but is especially critical of the Kennedy administration’s handling of the protests: Doherty claims the Kennedys didn’t understand the local context.
• President Kennedy had promised more support to the Civil Rights Movement but failed to show this in the summer of 1961 with the Freedom Rides, only eventually threatening to enforce desegregation in November. He therefore could not afford to delay again in 1962. He quickly sent in federal marshals to ensure Meredith’s registration and attendance.
• Interpretation 2 argues that President Kennedy’s earlier delay was rapidly forgotten by Black Americans when he committed the US Army to fight for Black civil rights. It suggests that his executive order on housing was a great step towards equal opportunity and that, as a result, his popularity soared.
• Kennedy introduced a Civil Rights Act in 1963, but it met with much resistance. Kennedy’s assassination allowed Johnson to force the Act through as Kennedy’s ‘legacy’. The Act banned public segregation and job discrimination; however, it did not explicitly ban voter discrimination in individual states. Nonetheless, it was a significant step forward in obtaining civil rights for Black Americans.

5 Malcolm X and Black Power

1 Give two things you can infer from Source A about the Black Panther Party. (4)

Mark scheme

You can award four marks for this question, two for each inference. Award one mark for a valid inference, and one mark for accurate supporting detail from the source.

For example:

1. (i)    What I can infer: The Black Panther Party celebrated African heritage.

Details in the source that tell me this: Huey Newton holds a traditional hunting spear and sits on a traditional throne, with traditional hide shields on display.

2. (ii)  What I can infer: The Black Panther Party supported violence.

Details in the source that tell me this: Newton holds a gun and a spear, and traditional shields rest against the wall.

2 Explain why the Black Power movement became popular. (12)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• While the fight for civil rights had focused on the south, Black people in the north also faced many problems. While they could vote, they generally lived in the poorest areas of cities, known as ghettoes. It was difficult for Black people in the north to get a good education and good jobs. Despite the successes of the Civil Rights Movement between 1950 and 1965, prejudices and problems remained.
• Malcolm X was a passionate speaker who disagreed with Martin Luther King’s non-violent approach. He once believed that white people were ‘collectively evil’. He encouraged Black people to be proud of their heritage and to defend themselves ‘by any means necessary’. His funeral was followed by over 15,000 people paying their respects, showing the popularity of his ideas.
• In the 1968 Mexico Olympic Games, two Black American medal-winners enacted the Black Power salute during the American national anthem. For these athletes, the Olympic Games provided a worldwide platform from which to broadcast the Black Power movement. Although boos rang out from the crowd, and both athletes were suspended by the US Olympic team, the power salute became famous worldwide and inspired many young people to join the Black Power movement or adopt its tactics.

6 The Civil Rights Movement, 1965–75

1 How useful are Sources A and B for an enquiry into the importance of Martin Luther King to the campaign for civil rights in the north USA?
Explain your answer, using Sources A and B and your knowledge of the historical context. (8)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Source A shows a key figure in the Civil Rights Movement in the north – Stokely Carmichael – giving a speech to 14,000 people in front of a large banner declaring ‘Black Power’. This suggests that Carmichael thought the Black Power movement was critical to the Civil Rights Movement. This is also suggested by the riots of 1965–68 and the violent reaction to King’s assassination, which are evidence of the increased militancy of the Black Power movement.
• Carmichael was elected Chair of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and was instrumental in launching civil rights campaigns in the northern ghettoes, setting up a political party to represent Black Americans. He played a lead role in the ‘Black Power’ movement and encouraged supporters to join the SNCC. His 1966 speeches encouraged campaigners to adopt the more radical methods of Black Power. He became honorary Prime Minister of the Black Panther Party in 1969.
• The photo (Source A) only shows a snapshot of one moment; we do not know who took the photo or for what purpose it was used. However, it does show that Carmichael was promoting Black Power and it suggests his speeches were drawing large crowds.
• Source B is useful because it directly shows the impact of King’s celebrity status and position within the Civil Rights Movement on local efforts to protest for change. The language used shows how much the movement was struggling in Chicago beforehand, and how King galvanised them.
• King did indeed come to Chicago, as he turned the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) toward working for economic rights for urban Black people, announcing the Chicago Freedom Movement. He was able to reach an agreement with the Mayor of Chicago on housing, but the movement was largely unsuccessful, and the agreement was ignored by the mayor. Rioting further undermined King’s efforts. While planning a Poor People’s Campaign, King was assassinated, sparking riots across the USA. This was rapidly followed by the 1968 Civil Rights Act.
• Source B is an extract from an interview given in 1989, some 20 years after the events in question, so it is possible that Raby is exaggerating to celebrate King or remembering with ‘rose-tinted’ glasses. However, Raby was central to the Chicago movement at the time, so was well placed to comment on King’s impact.

2 Study Interpretations 1 and 2.
They give different views about the importance of Martin Luther King to the campaign for civil rights in the north USA.
What is the main difference between these views?
Explain your answer, using details from both interpretations. (4)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Interpretation 1 argues that King had things in common with Stokely Carmichael and the Black Power movement and was himself becoming increasingly radicalised – not marginalised. Therefore, he remained a key figure.
• Interpretation 2 argues that King’s SCLC and the other major organisations from the early Civil Rights Movement were being eclipsed by the new, militant Black Power movement. It suggests the latter was more in touch with urban Blacks.

3 Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about the importance of Martin Luther King to the campaign for civil rights in the north USA.

You may use Sources A and B to help explain your answer. (4)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• The interpretations emphasise different aspects. For example:
  • Interpretation 1 focuses on King’s ideology and the common ground he shared with the more militant Black Power movement – in other words, top-down leadership.
  • Interpretation 2 focuses on the grassroots of the Civil Rights Movement and the increasing frustrations of urban working-class Black people.

4 How far do you agree with Interpretation 2 about the importance of Martin Luther King to the campaign for civil rights in the north USA?
Explain your answer, using both interpretations and your knowledge of the historical context. (16)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Interpretation 2 focuses on the grassroots of the Civil Rights Movement in the north of the USA. It argues that King’s SCLC and the other major organisations from the early Civil Rights Movement were being eclipsed by the new, militant Black Power movement. It suggests the latter was more in touch with urban Blacks, whose mounting resentment at continuing economic inequalities led to frustrations with the lack of progress of the Civil Rights Movement to 1965.
• From 1964 to 1968, there were over 500 separate riots across US cities, with mounting numbers of deaths and injuries. King’s efforts in the Chicago Freedom Movement were largely unsuccessful, and the marches were met by unprecedented violence and hostility, leading to further rioting. King’s assassination sparked further rioting in 200 towns and cities across the USA, clearly showing the move away from non-violent protest and mounting anger.
• Interpretation 1 argues that King had things in common with Carmichael and the Black Power movement and was himself becoming increasingly radicalised – not marginalised. Therefore, he remained a key figure. It acknowledges the pervasive nature of American racism and King’s opposition to the Vietnam War, which showed the movement was not just about race.
• King remained central to the Chicago Freedom Movement and planned a Poor People’s Campaign to unite poor people of any colour. His assassination denied the Washington march his leadership, which fell into arguments between the SCLC leadership and the protestors. From 1969, the SNCC dropped ‘non-violent’ from its name and lost many of its original membership as a result – showing that King’s influence was still strong.

7 Reasons for US military involvement in Vietnam, 1954–63

1 Give two things you can infer from Source A about Diem’s rule in South Vietnam. (4)

Mark scheme

You can award four marks for this question, two for each inference. Award one mark for a valid inference, and one mark for accurate supporting detail from the source.

For example:

1. (i)   What I can infer: The Buddhist community did not like Diem’s rule.

Details in the source that tell me this: The photo shows many monks gathered to witness Đức’s protest.

2. (ii)   What I can infer: Some Buddhists were willing to die to bring an end to Diem’s tyranny.

Details in the source that tell me this: The protestor, Đức, is about to set himself on fire to raise awareness of Diem’s misgovernment.

2 Explain why the USA was concerned about the future of Vietnam in 1963. (12)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• After the French defeat at Dien Bien Phu, a conference in Geneva tried to resolve the situation with the Geneva Accords. Vietnam was to be divided in two at the 17th parallel: pro-communist North Vietnam under the popular guerrilla leader Ho Chi Minh, and pro-West South Vietnam led by US-supported Ngo Dinh Diem. Diem was a Catholic, but most of Vietnam was Buddhist. Elections were to be held after two years to reunite the country. The USA was concerned that Minh was far more likely to win those elections.
• Diem’s government proved increasingly corrupt and undemocratic, putting the USA in a bad light. The US government supported fixed elections in 1955 to keep Diem in power, and then backed Diem’s refusal to hold the elections promised for 1956. Meanwhile, Diem’s government used US support to brutally persecute opponents and Buddhists, while exploiting US aid to get rich at the expense of the poor. In 1957, 65,000 suspected communists were arrested and 2000 of them were killed.
• The USA was engaged in a Cold War against communism following the Second World War. They saw communism as a dangerous ideology that could spread throughout Asia if unchecked. This was known as the domino theory. Minh was supported by communist China. The US government therefore supported Diem to limit the spread of communism. Appearing ‘tough’ on communism was important for presidents’ popularity back home in the USA.

8 The escalation of the conflict in Vietnam under Johnson

1 How useful are Sources A and B for an enquiry into the bombing campaigns during the Vietnam War?
Explain your answer, using Sources A and B and your knowledge of the historical context. (8)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Source A is useful as an explanation of the arguments for the bombing campaign and its aims. It argues for using any necessary force to bring a swift halt to the war. It also shows a cavalier attitude to the victims of any such campaign by threatening to bomb them ‘back into the Stone Age’ – in other words, to obliterate their civilisation. It calls against the use of ground troops.
• From 2 March 1965 to 2 November 1968, the USA waged Operation Rolling Thunder, a strategic bombing campaign against military and industrial targets in North Vietnam and along the Ho Chi Minh Trail. A total of 643,000 tonnes of bombs were dropped at a cost of $900 million. Johnson initially set the target areas, but the scope gradually widened as resistance continued.
• Source A is written by the head of the US Air Force in 1965, so he was well placed to know what was discussed at the heart of government and what his force would have recommended. However, his book is subtitled My Story, so it may be that he portrays quite a one-sided view.
• Source B is useful as it suggests that the USA did all it could militarily to make North Vietnam surrender. It reveals that two or three times more bombs were dropped on North and South Vietnam than were used by the Allies throughout the six years of the Second World War against all enemies. It also acknowledges that the bombing failed – and perhaps was always destined to fail.
• The US bombing campaign met more resistance than the Americans expected; for example, 900 US aircraft were shot down. It also only caused $300 million in damage – a third of the campaign’s monetary cost. More crucially, the campaign caused 52,000 Vietnamese casualties, 34,000 or more of whom were civilian, which damaged the USA’s status and strengthened Minh’s position. The Ho Chi Minh Trail was constantly repaired and protected by tunnels, so the campaign failed to cut the supply route.
• Source B was recorded over 30 years after the events occurred, so may be influenced by hindsight. McNamara was US Secretary of Defense for the period in question, so is a reliable witness, but may also be trying to distance himself from those events.

2 Study Interpretations 1 and 2.
They give different views about the bombing campaigns during the Vietnam War.
What is the main difference between these views?
Explain your answer, using details from both interpretations. (4)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Interpretation 1 argues that the North Vietnamese effectively defeated the US bombing campaign. It also mentions how they exploited the damage to make the USA look bad.
• Interpretation 2 focuses instead on blaming US failings for the lack of success of the campaign. It suggests that air power was ill-suited to the task to which it was set.

3 Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about the bombing campaigns during the Vietnam War.
You may use Sources A and B to help explain your answer. (4)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• The interpretations emphasise different aspects. For example:
• Interpretation 1 is focused on North Vietnamese strengths and successes rather than the USA.
• Interpretation 2 focuses on the lack of US planning, blaming the government for its failure.

4 How far do you agree with Interpretation 1 about the bombing campaigns during the Vietnam War?
Explain your answer, using both interpretations and your knowledge of the historical context. (16)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Interpretation 1 argues that the North Vietnamese effectively defeated the US bombing campaign. It details their effective defences: using missiles and artillery from their allies to repel the US air raids. It then explains how they protected the Ho Chi Minh Trail and constantly repaired the damage done. It also mentions how the North Vietnamese exploited the damage suffered to make the USA look bad, stirring up resentment amongst its citizens.
• The bombing campaign met more resistance than the USA expected, with 900 US aircraft shot down. It also only caused $300 million in damage – a third of the campaign’s monetary cost. More crucially, the campaign caused 52,000 Vietnamese casualties, 34,000 or more of whom were civilian, which damaged the USA’s status and strengthened Minh’s position. The campaign failed to cut the supply route provided by the Ho Chi Minh Trail, which extended through neighbouring Laos and Cambodia, out of reach of US bombing.
• Interpretation 2 focuses instead on blaming US failings for the lack of success of the campaign. It claims there was no clear-cut objective, no realistic planning, and no concern for the cost to either side. It suggests that US air power was ill-suited to the nature of the threat.
• President Johnson initially set target areas for the bombing, limiting the campaign’s effectiveness for fear of antagonising the nearby Chinese (who provided many of North Vietnam’s war material). The campaign was also not able to target the Ho Chi Minh Trail effectively, because it strayed into the neighbouring countries of Laos and Cambodia. However, 643,000 tonnes of bombs were dropped at a cost of $900 million; this was two or three times more than was used by the Allies against all enemies throughout the six years of the Second World War. The scope of the bombing gradually widened as resistance continued, but it failed to defeat the will of the North Vietnamese.

9 Changes under Nixon, 1969–73

1 Give two things you can infer from Source A about President Johnson’s approach to the Vietnam War. (4)

Mark scheme

You can award four marks for this question, two for each inference. Award one mark for a valid inference, and one mark for accurate supporting detail from the source.

For example:

1. (i)   What I can infer: Johnson’s approach to the Vietnam War caused widespread outrage.

Details in the source that tell me this: There is a huge crowd, some of whom have thrown paint at Johnson’s car.

2. (ii)  What I can infer: The war made the USA look bad internationally.

Details in the source that tell me this: This protest took place in Australia, not the USA.

2 Explain why Nixon took a different approach to the Vietnam War to Johnson. (12)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• By August 1968, Johnson’s approval ratings had fallen to 36% as public sentiment turned against the escalating war. His public appearances were met by crowds of protestors chanting ‘Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?’ Nixon’s election campaign therefore promised to end the unpopular conflict. Johnson withdrew from the presidential race early on because of his lack of support.
• The number of ARVN troops reached over 800,000 by 1968, and the number of ARVN soldiers continued to grow. Nixon wanted the ARVN to take the brunt of the fighting rather than US troops, because US casualties had been mounting (one of the causes of anti-war feeling in the USA): in 1969, the US suffered 11 600 casualties; in 1971, there were 2000 casualties. US forces focused on training the ARVN to be ready to fight the North Vietnamese. Nixon also promised to end the US draft into the army, which meant the ARVN had to be ready to take over.
• Nixon initiated secret talks with North Vietnam in the hope of bringing the conflict to an end. These talks excluded South Vietnam, as the USA began to distance themselves from the conflict. Nixon even encouraged the Vietcong representative at the Paris peace talks to delay the talks until after the US presidential election of 1968. This could suggest that Nixon’s election campaign was more important to him, or that he would then be more open to negotiations.

10 Opposition to, and support for, the Vietnam War

1 How useful are Sources A and B for an enquiry into opposition to the Vietnam War?
Explain your answer, using Sources A and B and your knowledge of the historical context. (8)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Source A is useful as evidence of the reasons for reactions to anti-war protest in the USA. It does not directly state that the men involved in the ‘hard hat’ riot were pro-war, but suggests it was a spontaneous reaction to anti-war violence and a lack of patriotism (spitting on the flag). The language shows the strength of feeling (‘desecrated’), and the source suggests a wealth of support for the actions of the construction workers across the country. It also gives an indication of the strong feelings that must have driven the protestors.
• Fuelled by patriotism and a fear of communism, there was strong support for the Vietnam War in some sections of US society. The US media began to turn against the war after the Tet Offensive, when Walter Cronkite expressed the view that the war was unwinnable; however, Nixon’s ‘silent majority’ supported his policies in Vietnam. Many Americans were highly patriotic, with family in the military, and believed the USA government’s claim that it was fighting for democracy and freedom.
• The author of Source A, Peter Brennan, was president of the Building and Construction Trades Council and so probably directly represented the workers involved and shared their opinions.
• Source B is useful for showing reasons why Black Americans protested the Vietnam War, not just as represented by the SNCC, but also that these reasons crossed the racial divide. It refers to the arbitrary training regime, how far away Vietnam was, and the fact that there was no quarrel between Black Americans and the Vietnamese people. It also mentions opposing the draft, for any American, whatever race or colour.
• Johnson’s decision to employ ground troops in Vietnam led to a growing anti-war movement. Many young Americans feared conscription from the draft, which was also seen as unfair: it seemed to target the poor (which many Black Americans were) whilst the rich could escape it by ‘draft dodging’. Carmichael’s comments were echoed by many other national figures, such as Martin Luther King and Muhammad Ali. The cost of the war continued to grow, both in terms of lives lost and financially, resulting in a tax increase in 1968. Around 68% of the US public were opposed to the Vietnam War by 1971.
• Carmichael, as well as being a leader of the SNCC, was a vocal supporter of Black Power. His words resonated with many urban Black Americans and reflected the frustrations and concerns of the protest movement.

2 Study Interpretations 1 and 2.
They give different views about opposition to the Vietnam War.
What is the main difference between these views?
Explain your answer, using details from both interpretations. (4)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Interpretation 1 argues that the media attention on student protest gives a misleading impression of opposition to the war, and that anti-war sentiment was also strong in urban working classes.
• Interpretation 2 suggests that the movement was driven by militant, radical university students.

3 Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about opposition to the Vietnam War. (4)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• The interpretations emphasise different aspects. For example:
• Interpretation 1 focuses on city elections to show that there was opposition to the war in working-class towns as well as university campuses.
• Interpretation 2 focuses on the conservative view of protestors and the more violent and provocative actions of student protestors.

4 How far do you agree with Interpretation 1 about opposition to the Vietnam War?
Explain your answer, using both interpretations and your knowledge of the historical context. (16)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• Interpretation 1 argues that the media attention on student protest gives a misleading impression of opposition to the Vietnam War, and that anti-war sentiment was also strong among the urban working classes (‘blue-collar workers’). The interpretation focuses on city elections to show that there was opposition to the war in working-class towns as well as university campuses, giving a more widespread support to the anti-war movement.
• The Vietnam War was the first conflict broadcast widely on national TV and the uncensored media coverage shocked many Americans. Johnson’s decision to employ ground troops led to a growing anti-war movement, fuelled by atrocities such as the Mai Lai massacre. Many young Americans feared conscription from the draft, which was also seen as unfair: it seemed to target the poor whilst the rich could escape it by ‘draft dodging’. The cost of the war continued to grow, both in terms of lives lost and financially – resulting in a tax increase in 1968. Around 68% of the US public were opposed to the Vietnam War by 1971.
• Interpretation 2 suggests that the anti-war movement was driven by militant, radical university students. It focuses on the conservative view of protestors and the more violent and provocative actions of student protestors, suggesting that the students deliberately sought to provoke conservative Americans into reacting.
• There certainly was strong opposition to the Vietnam War from US college students, who had the most to fear from the draft of young and fit Americans. There was a growing student counter-culture movement, which included the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), that rejected the values of the previous generation and called for social change. There was also a growing interest in eastern spiritualism through the hippy movement, which challenged traditional values and opposed violence. The events at Kent State University in May 1970 captured media attention and horrified Americans like no previous event.

11 The peace process and the end of the Vietnam War

1 Give two things you can infer from Source A about the end of the war in Vietnam. (4)

Mark scheme

You can award four marks for this question, two for each inference. Award one mark for a valid inference, and one mark for accurate supporting detail from the source.

For example:

1. (i)   What I can infer: The end of the Vietnam War led to panic in Saigon.

Details in the source that tell me this: Evacuees are filling flights to US Navy ships to escape the Vietcong.

2. (ii)  What I can infer: The end of the Vietnam War was not well planned or organised.

Details in the source that tell me this: A crowd of civilians are pushing an expensive helicopter off the edge of the US ship to make space for incoming flights of evacuees.

2 Explain why the North Vietnamese won the Vietnam War. (12)

Mark scheme

Relevant points that could be included

• The Vietcong were familiar with the landscape and climate of Vietnam. However, US troops were not prepared for the harsh conditions of jungle fighting. They struggled to move troops and equipment and were constantly at risk of ambushes and traps. The humid and rainy weather was difficult to fight in.
• The Vietcong had been fighting to liberate Vietnam since the Second World War, first against the Japanese and then the French. They used their experience and local knowledge to carry out guerrilla warfare, which effectively countered the USA’s technological superiority and larger army. US troops lived in constant fear of ambushes and traps, eroding their morale as much as the hostile conditions. The Vietcong were able to vanish into the local populace, making retaliation very hard.
• In contrast, US tactics contributed directly to the USA’s military failure, because US troops failed to win the hearts and minds of the people they supposedly defended. The indiscriminate nature of their bombing campaigns and use of chemical weapons, and their poor treatment of Vietnamese civilians, alienated the South Vietnamese people. Incidents such as the Mai Lai massacre made the Americans look bad internationally, weakening the USA’s position of ‘fighting to preserve democracy’.