Question 1
A Paper 3 essay asks a student to examine why the Paris Peace Treaties as a whole produced lasting instability across Central and Eastern Europe. Which comparison between Trianon and Neuilly best supports this argument?No clue? Show me the answer
Correct answerCorrect!
IncorrectQuestion 2
Which statement most accurately distinguishes the diplomatic circumstances behind the Treaty of Sèvres from those behind the Treaty of Versailles?No clue? Show me the answer
Correct answerCorrect!IncorrectStep-by-step walkthrough
Choose a solution method
Method #1Direct reasoningStep 1: Identify the key distinction
The question asks what made Sèvres diplomatically different from Versailles in terms of enforceability.
Step 2: Apply facts about Sèvres
Sèvres was signed by the weak Ottoman Sultanate, which had little authority beyond Constantinople, not by Kemal's nationalists.
Step 3: Apply facts about enforcement
Turkish nationalist military resistance under Kemal made Sèvres unenforceable, leading to its replacement by Lausanne.
Step 4: Interpret the contrast with Versailles
Versailles, while resented, was signed and largely enforced against a still-functioning German state.
Step 5: Select the correct option
Option B correctly identifies this enforcement gap as the key distinction.
Method #2Process of eliminationStep 1: Eliminate option A
Sèvres was signed by the Sultanate, not Kemal's nationalist government, which rejected it entirely.
Step 2: Eliminate option C
This reverses the facts; Sèvres proposed dismantling Ottoman sovereignty and territory extensively, more drastically than Versailles did to Germany.
Step 3: Eliminate option D
An Ottoman representative did sign Sèvres, and Germany's delegation did sign Versailles despite protest, not outright rejection.
Step 4: Compare remaining option
Option B matches the documented pattern of a weak signatory and subsequent military collapse of the treaty's enforceability.
Step 5: Confirm the answer
Option B is correct.