Superpower Relations and the Cold War, 1941-91: The Grand Alliance and the Wartime Conferences, 1941-45 - Worksheets, Questions and Revision

12 original exam-style questions - 4 pages of questions with a full mark scheme - free printable PDF.

Download PDF Jump to mark scheme (page 5)Superpower Relations and the Cold War, 1941-91: The Grand Alliance and the Wartime Conferences, 1941-45 revision guide

This topic is chapter 1 of GCSE History: Superpower Relations and the Cold War, 1941-91 Practice Book.

Next in this strand

4.1 Superpower Relations and the Cold War, 1941-91: The Grand Alliance and the Wartime Conferences, 1941-45

EDEXCEL 1HI0 · about 55 minutes

Total Marks

Name: _______________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______

Answer ALL questions. Write in full sentences for Questions 15, 16 and 17. You are advised to spend about 65 minutes on this pack.

State one issue on which the Allied leaders disagreed at the Potsdam Conference (1945).

(Total for Question 1 is 2 marks)

Give the name of the powerful new weapon that Truman told Stalin about at the Potsdam Conference, which the USA had successfully tested shortly beforehand.

(Total for Question 2 is 1 mark)

State one way in which the Soviet Union's actions in Eastern Europe after 1945 differed from what the Western Allies had understood would happen under the Yalta agreements.

(Total for Question 3 is 2 marks)

Explain two consequences of the Yalta Conference (February 1945).

(Total for Question 4 is 8 marks)

Write a narrative account analysing how relations between the wartime allies changed between the Tehran Conference (November 1943) and the Potsdam Conference (July-August 1945).

You may use the following information in your answer:
- the discussions about Poland's future at the Yalta Conference
- the disagreements over German reparations at the Potsdam Conference

You should also use information of your own.

(Total for Question 5 is 8 marks)

Explain two of the following:
(a) the importance of the Tehran Conference (1943) for Allied wartime strategy
(b) the importance of the Yalta Conference (1945) for the future of Poland
(c) the importance of the Potsdam Conference (1945) for growing distrust between the wartime allies

You must answer on TWO parts.

(Total for Question 6 is 16 marks)

State one reason why mutual suspicion existed between the USA and the USSR even while they were wartime allies.

(Total for Question 7 is 2 marks)

Name the three Allied leaders who met at the Tehran Conference in November 1943.

(Total for Question 8 is 3 marks)

Give the year in which the Yalta Conference took place.

(Total for Question 9 is 1 mark)

State two decisions made at the Yalta Conference about the future of Germany and Europe.

(Total for Question 10 is 2 marks)

Name the international organisation, agreed at Yalta, which the USSR promised to join.

(Total for Question 11 is 1 mark)

Give the year in which the Potsdam Conference took place.

(Total for Question 12 is 1 mark)

Mark scheme · 4.1 Superpower Relations and the Cold War, 1941-91: The Grand Alliance and the Wartime Conferences, 1941-45

Question 1

B1 identifies an area of disagreement, e.g. the amount of reparations Germany should pay
B1 supporting detail, e.g. Stalin wanted large reparations given the USSR's huge wartime losses, while the Western Allies were more cautious, wary of repeating the harsh reparations of the 1919 Treaty of Versailles
Answer: Disagreement over German reparations, with the USSR wanting far larger payments than the Western Allies.

Question 2

B1 the atomic bomb
Answer: The atomic bomb

Question 3

B1 the Yalta Declaration on Liberated Europe had promised free elections in countries liberated from Nazi rule
B1 but the USSR increasingly supported and installed communist-led governments across Eastern European countries it had liberated, which the West saw as a breach of that promise, while the Soviet Union saw friendly governments on its western border as essential to its own future security
Answer: Yalta had promised free elections, but the USSR increasingly installed communist-led governments in Eastern Europe, which it viewed as necessary for its own security.

Question 4

Level 1 (1-2): Identifies one or two general consequences of the Yalta Conference, with little or no supporting detail or explanation.
Level 2 (3-4): Identifies and begins to explain one consequence, supported by accurate detail.
Level 3 (5-6): Explains two consequences of the Yalta Conference, each supported by accurate and relevant detail.
Level 4 (7-8): Explains two consequences in a well-developed, logically structured way, supported throughout by precise and accurate detail, showing how the consequences connect.
Indicative content:
- The agreement to divide Germany (and Berlin) into four occupation zones shaped the post-war map of Europe and, in time, created the conditions for later disputes over Berlin's status, since the city lay deep inside the Soviet zone.
- The Declaration on Liberated Europe's promise of free elections was interpreted very differently by each side afterwards: the West expected genuinely free, multi-party elections, while the USSR increasingly installed communist-led governments it viewed as friendly and necessary for its own security, and this disagreement became a major source of post-war mistrust.
- The USSR's agreement to enter the war against Japan within three months of Germany's surrender, in exchange for territorial gains in the Far East, was honoured (the USSR declared war on Japan in August 1945), showing that some Yalta agreements were kept even as others became disputed.
- Discussions at Yalta about Poland's future government and borders set a precedent for continuing disagreement over Eastern Europe that fed directly into the tension of the following years, as Poland's 1947 elections were widely regarded in the West as failing to meet the standard promised at Yalta.

Question 5

Level 1 (1-2): Simple, generalised statements about the wartime conferences, with little organisation or sense of change over time.
Level 2 (3-4): Some accurate knowledge is deployed, with limited organisation into a sequence; the account may be more a list of events than a developed narrative.
Level 3 (5-6): The account is organised and mostly coherent, and shows some analysis of how relations changed across the conferences, with accurate supporting detail.
Level 4 (7-8): The answer demonstrates a coherent, well-organised narrative that analyses connections between events across the period, showing clearly how cooperation at Tehran gave way to growing disagreement by Potsdam, fully supported by precise and accurate detail.
Indicative content:
- At Tehran (November 1943) the Big Three cooperated closely on immediate military priorities, agreeing to open a second front in France, reflecting a shared urgent goal of defeating Germany.
- At Yalta (February 1945), with victory in Europe close, cooperation continued on practical matters (occupation zones, the United Nations, Soviet entry against Japan) but the Declaration on Liberated Europe's promise of free elections left room for very different later interpretations, planting a seed of future disagreement over Poland and Eastern Europe.
- Between Yalta and Potsdam, Germany surrendered (May 1945) and the immediate shared military goal disappeared, removing the main incentive that had held the alliance together, while the USSR's actions in occupied Eastern Europe began to diverge from Western expectations.
- At Potsdam (July-August 1945) the changed personnel (Truman for Roosevelt, Attlee for Churchill) coincided with sharper, more open disagreement, particularly over German reparations, and Truman's guarded disclosure of the atomic bomb reflected new American caution about sharing information with the USSR.
- Overall, the narrative moves from wartime cooperation focused on defeating a common enemy, through a Yalta agreement whose ambiguities were not yet fully apparent, to open disagreement at Potsdam once the shared military purpose had gone, showing a clear and connected sequence of deteriorating relations.

Question 6

Level 1 (1-4): For each part answered: identifies a general point of importance, with little or no supporting detail or explanation.
Level 2 (5-8): For each part answered: begins to explain importance, supported by some accurate detail.
Level 3 (9-12): For each part answered: explains importance clearly, supported by accurate and relevant detail, with some analysis of consequences.
Level 4 (13-16): For each part answered: explains importance in a well-developed, analytical way, fully supported by precise and accurate detail, showing clearly why the event mattered for the outcome named.
Indicative content:
- (a) Tehran was important for Allied wartime strategy because it secured Stalin's firm commitment that the Western Allies would open a second front in France, which became the D-Day landings of June 1944, directly shaping the final phase of the war in Europe; it also began joint planning for the post-war world, including early discussion of Poland's borders.
- (b) Yalta was important for the future of Poland because the agreement to reorganise Poland's government and hold free elections there was never fully honoured to Western satisfaction, and the divergence between what was agreed and what actually happened (Soviet-backed governments becoming entrenched) made Poland one of the earliest and clearest points of post-war East-West disagreement.
- (c) Potsdam was important for growing distrust because the open disagreement over German reparations, the change of Western leaders partway through, and Truman's guarded handling of the atomic bomb all signalled, more clearly than at the earlier conferences, that the common purpose which had held the Grand Alliance together was breaking down now that Germany had been defeated.
- A strong answer on any two parts explains a clear causal chain from the named conference to its stated importance, using precise dates and named agreements rather than general description, and where relevant notes how each side's understanding of what had been agreed (for example over free elections) differed and helps to explain later Cold War tension.

Question 7

B1 identifies a source of suspicion, e.g. the USA and USSR had very different political and economic systems
B1 supporting detail, e.g. the USA was a capitalist democracy while the USSR was a one-party communist state, so each viewed the other's system as a long-term threat
Answer: The USA and USSR had opposing capitalist and communist systems, so each viewed the other as a long-term ideological threat.

Question 8

B1 Franklin D. Roosevelt (USA)
B1 Winston Churchill (Britain)
B1 Joseph Stalin (USSR)
Answer: Franklin D. Roosevelt, Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin.

Question 9

B1 1945
Answer: 1945

Question 10

B1 Germany (and Berlin) would be divided into four occupation zones, one each for the USA, Britain, the USSR and France
B1 the Declaration on Liberated Europe promised free elections in countries liberated from Nazi occupation
Answer: Germany and Berlin would be divided into four occupation zones, and liberated European countries were promised free elections.

Question 11

B1 the United Nations
Answer: The United Nations

Question 12

B1 1945
Answer: 1945

Superpower Relations and the Cold War, 1941-91: The Grand Alliance and the Wartime Conferences, 1941-45 - Worksheets, Questions and Revision

Next in this strand

Related topics

4.1 Superpower Relations and the Cold War, 1941-91: The Grand Alliance and the Wartime Conferences, 1941-45

Question 1

Question 2

Question 3

Question 4

Question 5

Question 6

Question 7

Question 8

Question 9

Question 10

Question 11

Question 12

Mark your answers

Question 1

Question 2

Question 3

Question 4

Question 5

Question 6

Question 7

Question 8

Question 9

Question 10

Question 11

Question 12