IB HISTORY PAPER ONE
Tim White
Disarmament – Washington Naval Conference
1921 – 1922
MARK SCHEME
1.
a) What according to source E was the significance of the Washington Naval
Conference? (3 marks)
 Washington Naval Conference allowed or contributed to ‘spirit of cooperation’
 There were ‘several differences in policy’ between nations but these did
not ‘derail’ negotiations.
 Gave nations the ability to peacefully negotiate issues in Asia and the
balance of power
b) What message is conveyed by source A? (2 marks)
 A naval ‘contest’ existed between the USA and Great Britain, evident in
the banner ‘Beautiful Navy Contest.’
 Neither nation was happy with the size of their navies, evident in the
comments by the British and USA judges ‘might as well be naked’ and
‘it don’t look proper.’
2. Compare and contrast the views expressed about the Washington Naval
Conference in Sources C and D? (6 marks)
Comparison
 Both agree that during the time of the conference the treaty and
negotiations were considered a success
 Both sources agree that the conference had limited long-term effects
Contrast
 Disagree in relation to the effect of the conference, source C states the
conference made Japan ‘supreme in the Far East,’ in contrast Source D
fails to mention the actual impact.
 Source disagree in relation to the effect of disarmament conferences in
general, Source D states ‘post-war disarmament produced limited and
usually short-term results,’ Source D does not refer to the impact of
disarmament conferences
3. With reference to their origins and purpose, assess the value and
limitations of sources B and E for historians studying the Washington Naval
Conference?
(6 marks)
Source B
Origin - extract from Disarmament: Washington Naval Conference by
Historian Kennedy Hickman published in 2011
Purpose - state the terms of the Washington Naval Treaty and the effect it had
on international relations
Value - it is a secondary source and therefore a level of hindsight that allows
more accurate evaluation of the events.
- written by a historian and thus has a level of credibility
unfound in other uncertified historical documents
- addresses both the terms of the treaty as well as the effects of
the treaty, this provides a more complete view of the
Washington Naval Conference.
Limitations - it is a secondary source and so fails to provide an insight into
society’s views and opinions of the time.
Source E
Origin - an extract from The Con-current Conferences: the Washington Naval
Conference and the Far Eastern Affairs Conference of 1922 by Historian
Edward Chusid
Purpose - address the atmosphere of the Washington Naval Conference as well
as the goals of each nation involved.
Value - it is a secondary source and so provides a level of hindsight to the
discussion of the conference that is uncommon in primary sources
- written by a Historian and therefore is more reliable than
other uncertified works
Limitation - fails to provide any facts with the piece predominantly based on
opinion and potentially subjective
- secondary source and therefore does not provide the reader
with information in relation to view and opinions of the time
4. Using the sources and your own knowledge, determine whether the
Washington Naval Conference made significant and long-lasting
improvements to international relations between the period of 1922 – 1936.
Source Material that could be used:
Source A: Suggests that the Washington Naval Treaty did not succeed in
improving international relations with naval tension still existing between
nations even seven years after the Treaty was created.
Source B: Indicates that limitations of the Treaty worsened relations with
France not completely satisfied with the Treaty and the size of her navy. This
worsened French relations with other members of the conference as well as
Italy who it was resentful of for having an equally large navy.
Source C: Historians such as Norman Low also support the view that the
Washington Naval Conference improved relations with him stating ‘the
agreements were regarded as great success and relations between the powers
improved.’ This statement clearly expresses the positive effects of the treaty on
international relations.Source C also refers to the fact that ‘Japan was left
supreme in the Far-East’ and the navies of ‘Great Britain and the USA were
spread more widely.’ This suggests that the Treaty didn’t improve international
relations but rather led to a shift in power from the UK and the USA to
expansionist nations such as Japan
Source D: states that the ‘(Washington Naval Conferences’) successes were
limited and not permanent.’
Source E: ‘the conferences were dominated by a spirit of ‘co-operation
between the attending great powers.’ This suggests that the Conference
contributed to improved international relations.
Own Knowledge that could be used:
Aggressors such as Japan violated the Treaty within ten years of it being
formed. This suggests that in the long-term the Washington Naval Conference
failed to improve international relations.
The Washington Naval Conference deliberately excluded both Germany and
Russia from the disarmament talks. This isolated both nations and worsened
relations between them and other European nations.
One may argue that the Conference and subsequent treaty was formed for the
purpose of appeasing aggressors such as Japan rather than causing a long-term
improvement in international relations.