NATIONAL
SENIOR CERTIFICATE
GRADE 12
JUNE 2021
HISTORY P1
ADDENDUM
(EXEMPLAR)
This addendum consists of 14 pages.
Skip to contentAll 2021 papers 



%20(English)%20June%202014%20Addendum_hlayiso.com_--4aa7434a-8815-410f-a2dd-92249bec2c0a/v1-001011824feeafa27152/card.webp)

View all


%202024%20Question%20Paper%20X05_hlayiso.com_--7b41ec15-3856-4a67-a9db-cedd424e51c5/v1-5ae80cf63fec0975a316/card.webp)

%20Memo_hlayiso.com_--4fe0001f-11e9-414e-be30-45108ea0ae86/v1-2b5a2c0ac74d623b88fe/card.webp)
History Grade 12 Paper 1 EC June 2021 Addendum (English)
Grade 12 History Paper 1 addendum from the EC June 2021 (English), 14 pages. Read online or get the free PDF download.
History · Grade 12 · EC June · 2021 · English. Addendum, 14 pages. Read online or download the PDF.
- Subject
- History
- Grade
- Grade 12
- Language
- English
- Document type
- Addendum
- Year
- 2021
- Exam period
- EC June
- Paper
- 1
- Curriculum
- CAPS
- Pages
- 14
- File size
- 614.5 KB
Free to read online, no sign-up needed
Loading document…
Loading document…
1 of 14
This exam
EC June 2021
Questions in this paper
Document textSearch extracted text and jump to a page.
2 HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2021)
QUESTION 1: HOW AND WHY DID BERLIN BECOME A FOCAL POINT OF THE
COLD WAR AFTER 1945?
SOURCE 1A
The following extract focuses on how the Cold War unfolded in Europe after 1945.
Without Germany’s defeat in 1945 and the subsequent power vacuum in central Europe,
in which the former members of the Grand Coalition confronted each other eyeball to
eyeball, the Cold War would not have occurred in the acute form that it did. At the Yalta
Conference it had been agreed that Germany should be divided into four zones, each
administered by one of the victorious powers. Sovereignty passed collectively to the
Four Powers, who, it was envisaged, would govern Germany through the Control
Commission based in Berlin, which was itself divided into four sectors. Disagreements
intensified, however, and a united Germany became a prize, which neither the USSR
nor the Western Allies could concede to the other.
In any East-West conflict, Germany’s industrial and manpower resources would be
decided. In the Ruhr, the Western Powers already possessed the industrial powerhouse
of Europe and could therefore afford to risk the partition of Germany by pressing ahead
in 1948 with the creation of a semi-independent Western Germany. Without war, the
USSR could not stop this, but, with the Western military presence in Berlin, they did
have a hostage. By bringing pressure to bear on this outpost they could, so they hoped,
wring concessions from London, Washington and Paris.
[From http//www.historytoday.com/david-williamson/berlin-flash-point-cold-war-1948-1989. Accessed on
27 May 2021.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
(EC/JUNE 2021) HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) 3
SOURCE 1B
This article focuses on the imposition of the Berlin blockade by the Soviet Union.
The first heightening of Cold War tensions occurred in 1948 when the Soviets imposed
a partial blockade of Berlin in April, and then a full blockade in June. Understanding the
events that led to the imposition of the blockades is the key to understanding the later
division of Berlin in 1961 by the Berlin Wall, and the division of the German state that
had occurred earlier in 1949 when separate west German (federal Republic of Germany)
and east German (German Democratic Republic) states were established. There are
three key events that led to Soviet blockades of Berlin: the institution of the Marshal Plan
for European recovery, the London Conference in the winter and spring of 1948 and the
resultant London Program, which called for a separate West Germany and currency
reform as a means to reach this end. But the Western powers would not give in. To
demonstrate their resolve, the Americans orchestrated a monumental airlift, which flew
necessities such as coal and food into the Western sectors of Berlin. This airlift lasted
for 324 days, and approximately 13 000 tons of supplies a day were delivered.
In the spring of 1949, it was increasingly clear that the objectives Stalin had in mind
when ordering a blockade were not going to be met. The US was continuing its counter
blockade measures, the separate western government in Germany was about to be
established, and the North Atlantic Treaty was being signed in Washington. Stalin had
the choice of either continuing with the disastrous blockade or admitting defeat and lifting
the blockade. Stalin chose the latter, and in May 1949, at the final meeting of the Council
of Foreign Ministers, the blockade was ended.
[From http//www.coldwar.org/articles/40s/berlin-blockade.asp. Accessed on 28 May 2021.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
4 HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2021)
SOURCE 1C
This extract focuses on the Berlin Airlift.
In time, the aircraft became ever more efficient and the number of aircrafts increased. At
the height of the campaign, one plane landed every 45 seconds at Tempelhof Airport. By
spring 1949, the Berlin Airlift proved successful. The Western Allies showed that they
could sustain the operation indefinitely. At the same time, the allied counter-blockade on
eastern Germany was causing severe shortages, which, Moscow feared, might lead to
political upheaval.
On May 11, 1949, Moscow lifted the blockade of West Berlin. The Berlin Crisis of 1948–
1949 solidified the division of Europe. Shortly before the end of the blockade, the Western
Allies created the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). Two weeks after the end
of the blockade, the state of West Germany was established, soon followed by the
creation of East Germany. The incident solidified the demarcation between East and
West in Europe; it was one of the few places on earth where US and Soviet armed forces
stood face-to-face. It also transformed Berlin, once equated with Prussian militarism and
Nazism, into a symbol of democracy and freedom in the fight against Communism.
[From: http://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/brlin-airlift. Accessed on 25 May 2021.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
(EC/JUNE 2021) HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) 5
SOURCE 1D
An American cartoon by D.R. Fitzpatrick, commenting on Soviet actions in Berlin.
[https://fineartamerica.com/featured/cold-war-berlin-d-r-fitzpatrick.html. Accessed on 25 May 2021.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
6 HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2021)
QUESTION 2: WHY DID FOREIGN POWERS BECOME INVOLVED IN THE ANGOLAN
WAR OF INDEPENDENCE?
SOURCE 2A
This source explains the power struggles that erupted after Angola became
independent in 1974.
Three main military movements had been fighting for Angolan independence since the
1960s. The Popular movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) was a Marxist
organisation centred in the capital, Luanda, and led by Agostinho Neto. The National
Front for the Liberation of Angola (FNLA) led by Holden Roberto, was based in the north
of the country and had strong ties to the US ally (friend), Mobutu Sese Seko, in
neighbouring Zaire. The National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA),
an offshoot of the FNLA, was led by Jonas Savimbi and supported by the country’s
largest ethnic group, the Ovimbundu.
Following the Portuguese coup (revolution), these three revolutionaries met with
representatives of the new Portuguese government in January 1975 and signed the Alvor
Agreement that granted Angolan independence and provided for a three-way power
sharing government. However, trust quickly broke down among the three groups, and
the country descended (fell) into civil war as each vied (competed) for sole (total) power.
The crisis in Angola developed into a Cold War battleground as the superpowers and
their allies delivered military assistance to their preferred clients. The United States
supplied aid and training for both the FNLA and UNITA while troops from Zaire assisted
Holden Roberto and his fighters. China also sent military instructors to train the FNLA.
During the summer of 1975, the Soviet-supported MPLA was able to consolidate power
in Luanda and oust the U.S.-supported FNLA from the capital, but the FNLA continued
to attack.
[From https://history.state.gov/milestones/1969-1976/angola. Accessed on 26 May 2021.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
(EC/JUNE 2021) HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) 7
SOURCE 2B
The source below outlines the reasons for South Africa’s involvement in Angola during
the 1970s.
SA’s first intervention of Angola seems to have resulted from the need to secure and
protect its own interests. The government was severely anti-communist at this time, as
the notion of the ‘total national strategy’ against the ‘total onslaught’ of communism
became the all-encompassing factor that determined foreign policy. SA’s détente politics
toward Africa at this time was pursued rather successfully prior to the Angolan
intervention in order to establish buffer zones, which would hopefully protect SA from
the increasing communist threat. In addition, SA was becoming increasingly worried
about this possible threat as the USSR and Cuba were enlarging their support to the
MPLA after the coup in Portugal in 1974. The concentration of SWAPO insurgents on
the southern Angola border furthermore endangered SA’s interests in SWA, as SWAPO
was one of the MPLA’s biggest African allies. Both the MPLA and SWAPO were seen
as Soviet proxies during the Cold War.
In addition, SA was pressured by some in the international community to get involved in
Angola for the first time. The USA, like SA, was also strongly anti-communist and
supported SA’s initial involvement to some extent. France also had concerns. SA also
saw its limited initial involvement as an opportunity to establish a less hostile
government in Angola, than what was already established in Mozambique. The FNLA,
UNITA and several African and international actors such as Zaire and even Zambia
made similar requests. South Africa decided that it would be in its own as well as the
region’s best interest to intervene in the Angolan conflict.
[From South Africa’s Intervention in Angola: Before Cuito Cuanavale and Thereafter
file:///E:/Angola%202/labuschagne_south_2009.pdf. Accessed on 26 May 2021.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
8 HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2021)
SOURCE 2C
The extract below indicates how the United States of America supported UNITA during
the Angolan Civil War.
The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) made its first major weapons shipment to the
FNLA in July 1975. Thus, like the Russians and Chinese, the United States was giving
aid to one side of Angolan Civil War on a level far greater than it had ever provided
during the struggle against Portuguese colonialism.
The United States was directly involved in the civil war to a marked (noticeable) degree.
In addition to training Angolan combat units, US personnel did considerable flying
between Zaire and Congo carrying out reconnaissance (investigation) and supply
missions, and the CIA spent over a million dollars on an ambitious mercenary (hired
soldiers) programme. Several reports appeared in the US press stating that many
American guerrillas were fighting in Angola against the MPLA from ‘scores’ to ‘300’ and
that many others were recruited and trained in the United States to join them. But John
Stockwell, the head of CIA’s Angola task force, puts the number of American
mercenaries who actually made it to Angola at only 24. The CIA was also directly
financing the arming of British mercenaries (fighting in Angola).
Subsequently (later) the Secretary of the State, Henry Kissinger, informed the Senate
that ‘the CIA is not involved’ in the recruitment of mercenaries for Angola. … Through
recruited journalists representing major news service, the Agency (CIA) was able to
generate international coverage of false reports for Soviet advisers in Angola. One CIA
story, announced to the press by UNITA, was that 20 Russians and 35 Cubans had
been captured. Another fabrication (lie) concerned alleged rapes committed by Cuban
soldiers in Angola; this was elaborated to include their capture, trial and execution …
From http://williamblum.org/chapters/killing-hope/angola. Accessed on 7 March 2020.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
(EC/JUNE 2021) HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) 9
SOURCE 2D
This poster depicts President Agostinho Neto and Fidel Castro after Angolan
independence celebrations.
[From https://mrdivis.wordpress.com/2016/12/02/remembering-fidel-castros-impact-in-southern-africa/.
Accessed on 20 May 2021.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
10 HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2021)
QUESTION 3: HOW DID THE PROCESS OF SCHOOL INTEGRATION UNFOLD AT
CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL IN LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS?
SOURCE 3A
This extract focuses on Daisy Bates’ struggle to bring an end to school segregation in
Little Rock.
Faubus’ alleged reason for calling out the troops was that he had received information
that caravans of automobiles filled with white supremacists were heading toward Little
Rock from all over the state. He therefore declared Central High School off limits to
Negroes. He delivered the infamous words, ‘blood will run in the streets’ if Negro pupils
should attempt to enter Central High School and with these words he made his
contribution to the mass hysteria that was to grip the city of Little Rock for several
months.
The citizens of Little Rock gathered on 3 September to gaze upon the incredible
spectacle of an empty school building surrounded by 250 armed National Guard troops.
At about eight fifteen in the morning, Central High students started passing through the
line of National Guardsmen – all but the nine Negro students.
I had been in touch with their parents throughout the day. They were confused, and they
were frightened. As the parents voiced their fears, they kept repeating Governor Faubus’
words that ‘blood would run in the streets of Little Rock’ should their teenage children
try to attend Central – the school to which they had been assigned by the School Board.
[From http://-spartacus-educational.com/USAlittlerock.htm?menu=USAevents3. Accessed on 31 May
2021.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
(EC/JUNE 2021) HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) 11
SOURCE 3B
The following is an interview with Elizabeth Eckford, one of the nine African American
students who was enrolled at Central High School in 1957.
The night before the Governor had gone on television and announced that he had called
out the Arkansas National Guard, I thought he had done this to ensure the protection of
all students. We did not have a telephone. So inevitably I was not contacted to let me
know that Daisy Bates of the NAACP had arranged for some ministers to accompany the
(nine black) students in a group. And so it was that I arrived alone …
At the corner I tried to pass through the long line of guards around the school so as to
enter the grounds behind them. One of the guards pointed across the street. So, I pointed
in the same direction and asked whether he meant for me to cross the street and walk
down. He nodded ‘yes’. So, I walked across the street, conscious of the crowd that stood
there, but they moved away from me.
For a moment all I could hear was the shuffling of the feet. Then someone shouted, ‘Here
she comes, get ready!’ I moved away from the crowd on the sidewalk and into the street.
If the mob came at me, I could then cross back over so the guards could protect me. The
crowd moved in closer and then began to follow me, calling me names. I still wasn’t afraid,
just a little bit nervous. All the time I kept thinking that the guards would protect me.
When I got in front of the school, I went up to a guard again. But this time he just looked
straight ahead and didn’t move to let me pass him. When I tried to squeeze past him, he
raised his bayonet and then the guards moved in and they raised their bayonets. I turned
around and the crowd came toward me. Somebody started yelling, ‘Lynch her! Lynch
her!’ I tried to see a friendly face somewhere in the mob-scene who maybe would help. I
looked into the face of an old woman and it seemed a kind face, but when I looked at her
again, she spat on me.
[From http://spartacus-educational.com/USAlittlerock.htm?menu=USAevents3. Accessed on 31 May
2021.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
12 HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2021)
SOURCE 3C
This photograph shows a young white woman, Hazel Bryan, shouting at Elizabeth
Eckford while attempting to enter the Central High School yard.
[From www.gettyimages.com/photos/elizabeth-eckford. Accessed on 3 June 2021.]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
(EC/JUNE 2021) HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) 13
SOURCE 3D
The following extract focuses on the reaction of fellow students to school integration
Three young girls, barely into their teens, fell in directly behind Elizabeth. They were
clearly together, and clearly students, two of them, like Elizabeth, carried books. They
wanted to get close to Elizabeth, close enough to let her know that they didn’t want her
in their school. It was easy, everyone, the television reporters, the grown-ups in the
vacant lot across the street, the other kids were either egging (encouraging) them on, or,
like the soldiers and policemen, paying them no mind. No one was telling them not to do
anything. ‘Two, four, six, eight! We don’t want to integrate!’ they chanted.
The girl to Elizabeth’s right, Hazel Bryan, looked livid (furious), her face poisoned with
hate. As Benjamin Fine of the New York Times later described her, ‘she was screaming,
just hysterical, just like one of these Elvis Presley hysterical deals, where these kids are
fainting with hysteria’. Her eyes narrowed, her brow furrowed, her teeth clenched
(tightened) as if about to bite. Hazel then shouted some more: ‘Go home, nigger! Go back
to Africa!’ A photographer captured Hazel Bryan shouting these words at Elizabeth
Eckford and published the photograph on the front page of a local publication called the
Gazette.
[From Elizabeth and Hazel – Two of Little Rock by D Margolick]
Copyright reserved Please turn over
14 HISTORY P1 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2021)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Visual sources and other historical evidence were taken from the following:
http://www.historytoday.com/david-williamson/berli-flash-point-cold-war-1948-1989
http://www.coldwar.org/article/40s/berlin-blockade.asp
http://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/berlin.airlift
https://fineartamerica.com/featured/cold-war-berlin-d-r-fitzpatrick.html
http://spartacus-educational.com/USAlittlerock.htm?menu=USAevents3.
Elizabeth and Hazel – Two Women of little Rock by D Margolick.
www.gettyimages.com/photos/elizabeth-eckford
Journal of Cold War Studies. Summer 2013, Vol. 15 Issue 3, p4–33. 30p
Mazrui, A. 1993. General History of Africa, Vol. VIII: Africa Since 1935 (Heinemann,
University of California)
Waters, M.A. 2013. Cuba & Angola – Fighting for Africa's Freedom and Our Own
(Pathfinder Press, Johannesburg)
https://spartacus-educational.com/USAhamptonF.htm
Copyright reserved Please turn over
Study this subject
Recommended for this subject

Addendum
History Grade 12 Paper 1 EC June 2019 Addendum (English)

Addendum
History Grade 12 Paper 1 EC June 2018 Addendum (English)

Question paper
History Grade 12 P2 EC June 2021 Question Paper (English)

Question paper
History Grade 12 P1 Eastern Cape Mock 2021 QP (Eng)
%20(English)%20June%202014%20Addendum_hlayiso.com_--4aa7434a-8815-410f-a2dd-92249bec2c0a/v1-001011824feeafa27152/card.webp)
Addendum
History Grade 12 Paper 1 NSC June 2014 Addendum (English)

Addendum
History Grade 12 Paper 1 Eastern Cape Mock 2021 Addendum
More from Grade 12 History

Study guide
Workguide Case Study Strategies

Memorandum
History Grade 12 Paper 2 North West Mock 2025 Memo

Memorandum
History Grade 12 Paper 1 NSC June 2025 Memo (English)
%202024%20Question%20Paper%20X05_hlayiso.com_--7b41ec15-3856-4a67-a9db-cedd424e51c5/v1-5ae80cf63fec0975a316/card.webp)
Question paper
History Grade 12 P1 Gauteng Prelim 2024 Question Paper (Eng)

Question paper
History Grade 12 P2 Eastern Cape June 2023 QP (Eng)
%20Memo_hlayiso.com_--4fe0001f-11e9-414e-be30-45108ea0ae86/v1-2b5a2c0ac74d623b88fe/card.webp)
Memorandum