Topic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]: Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1945-2000) Section B: Essay Writing Theme III Chapter 4: Intra-State Conflicts [Congo Crisis, 1960-1965]
Learn more about the role of the ONUC and understand its contributions to conflict management during the Congo Crisis [Video by the United Nations].
Hammarskjöld’s gauntlet: Introducing the ONUC Barely two weeks after gaining independence, the Congo was beset by political infighting within the central government (based on Leopoldville), ethnic divisions and nation-wide unrest. The Leopoldville government turned to the United Nations (UN) for assistance on 12 July 1960 to restore order and protect civilians.
The UN Secretary-General (UNSC) Dag Hammarskjöld’s invoked Article 99 of the UN Charter for the first time, convening an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council (UNSC). Subsequently, UNSC Resolution (UNSCR) 143 was adopted, calling upon Belgium to withdraw its forces from Congo and authorising the formation of the UN Operation in the Congo (ONUC).
The UN Operation in the Congo (ONUC) was initially sent under the authority of the Security Council at the request of the government of the Congo in July 1960, to provide assistance to that government until the Congolese security forces could fulfil their tasks following the breakdown of order on Belgian decolonisation.
By the time ONUC arrived it was in a precarious position, with fighting continuing in the Congo, rival governments being established, and attempted secession of the Katanga region of the country with the active assistance of Belgian troops and mercenaries.
Volatile and uncertain: Lumumba’s death and its implications on the UN However, the ONUC was faced with a volatile situation in the Congo. Unlike the straightforward peacekeeping (i.e. United Nations Emergency Force, UNEF I) undertaking in response to the Suez Canal Crisis in 1956, the ONUC was ill-equipped to prevent the collapse of a newly-independent Congo.
In August 1960, South Kasai declared its autonomy from the central government, intensifying the civil unrest. Furthermore, the political infighting within the central government resulted in a constitutional crisis that concluded with a coup by General Mobutu and the downfall of Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba.
In essence, the Prime Minister’s demise was linked to the UN’s mismanagement, thereby alienating the pro-Soviet and Afro-Asian blocs. The ONUC was implicated by this intra-UN disunity, seen in terms of the withdrawal of national contingents from the UN operation by Third World member nations like Morocco and Sudan.
Renewed UN mandates for the ONUC: 161 and 169 Nonetheless, there was renewed vigor within the UN as UNSC 161 was adopted in February 1961, authorising the ONUC to use force “if necessary, in the last resort” to prevent the outbreak of a civil war.
Between August and September 1961, the ONUC launched two operations – “Rum Punch” and “Morthor” – that targeted the Katanga province. Yet, these operations were hampered by hostile Katangese forces. During the Siege of Jadotville, 155 Irish UN troops were attacked by Tshombe’s forces, such that Operation Morthor concluded with the death of 13 UN troops and 200 Katangese civilians and troops.
The UNSC went further by expanding the ONUC’s mandate in November 1961, as seen by UNSCR 169 to authorise the use of peace enforcement to maintain the territorial integrity and political independence of the Congo. More importantly, the ONUC was empowered to assist the Leopoldville government to secure the “immediate withdrawal and evaluation from the Congo of all foreign military” and mercenaries.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Congo Crisis under the theme of Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC General Paper Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 8929 2422to find out more.
https://www.jchistorytuition.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/JC-History-Tuition-What-happened-when-the-UN-went-into-the-Congo-Congo-Crisis-Notes.jpg8531280Justinhttps://www.jchistorytuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/JC-History-Tuition-Logo-300x86.pngJustin2026-04-20 17:12:512026-04-20 17:13:12What happened when the UN went into the Congo?
Topic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]: Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1945-2000) Section B: Essay Writing Theme III Chapter 4: Intra-State Conflicts [Congo Crisis, 1960-1965]
Learn more about the significance of the secession by Katanga that shaped the Congo Crisis [Video by Prof James Ker-Lindsay].
Historical context: The secession On 11 July 1960, the leader of Confédération des associations tribales du Katanga (CONAKAT) Moïse Tshombe proclaimed the secession of Katanga, threatening the territorial integrity of a newly-independent Congo.
This southernmost province of the Congo was declared the “State of Katanga” with Élisabethville as its capital. The secession became a part of the ongoing Congo Crisis (1960-1965).
An economically-valuable Katanga: Economic motivationsof CONAKAT & UMHK From the economic standpoint, the secession was motivated by Tshombe’s desire to retain control of Katanga’s vast resources, limiting its diversion to the central government.
In 1960, Katanga was estimated to hold 10% of the world’s copper reserves and 34% of its cobalt reserves. However, Katanga had to contribute to 50% of Congo’s national budget and 25% of the country’s foreign exchange earnings.
Further complications exacerbated the “Katanga” problem for the central government as the Belgian company Union Minière du Haut-Katanga (UMHK) financed Tshombe’s secession. About 1,250 million Belgian frans were given to Tshombe’s government in 1960, enabling the CONAKAT to hire foreign mercenaries and buy advanced weaponry to defend the province against the central government.
The UMHK feared that Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba pursued radical policies to nationalise Katanga’s resources, which included 75% of the Congo’s total mining production. Katanga itself produced almost 30% of the entire Belgian Congo’s revenue from copper sales.
As such, the UMHK functioned as a “state within a state“, exercising quasi-governmental powers by supporting the secession of Katanga.
Katanga was generally regarded as a “company province”. Moreover, YMKH influenced the Congolese political parties of the late 1950s. The white community (which in Katanga meant Union Minière) dominated Tshombe’s CONAKAT Party. […] The Belgians thus created the political basis of the Katangese secession.
Notably, the Belgian government never officially recognised Tshombe’s regime. In the public sphere, Belgium opposed the secession.
CONAKAT’s aim: “Katanga for Katangans” Besides, CONAKAT strove to create an “authentic” Katangan identity, primarily representing the Lunda and other southern tribes (Yeke and Bemba). This group viewed themselves as the rightful owners of the land and its mineral wealth.
In contrast, the “strangers” in Katanga were mainly the ethnic Luba people from the neighbouring Kasai province. They have been resettled by the Belgian colonial administration and UMHK for decades because the Belgians viewed them as the more “hardworking” workers.
In essence, Lumumba’s Association Générale des Baluba du Katanga (BALUBAKAT) opposed Tshombe’s CONAKAT as both parties strived to control the Congolese territories and safeguard the interests of specific tribes. Hence, the secession was also a product of domestic politics.
Who were considered the authentic Katangese? According to Sauvy, cited by Tukumbi Lumumba-Kasongo: ‘Authentic Katangese are natives of Katanga or inhabitants who have been settled in Katanga territory for at least two generations. These groups that are often considered to be Katangese are Lunda, Baluba of Katanga, Bayeke, Basanga, Tshokwe, Batabwa and Babenda.’
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Congo Crisis under the theme of Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC General Paper Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 8929 2422to find out more.
https://www.jchistorytuition.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Why-did-Katanga-secede-from-the-Congo-JC-History-Tuition-Congo-Crisis-Notes.jpg8531280Justinhttps://www.jchistorytuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/JC-History-Tuition-Logo-300x86.pngJustin2026-04-15 13:28:212026-04-20 17:12:28Why did Katanga secede from the Congo?
Topic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]: Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1945-2000) Section B: Essay Writing Theme III Chapter 4: Intra-State Conflicts [Congo Crisis, 1960-1965]
Watch this illustrative video to grasp the historical significance of the Congo Crisis [Video by History House Productions]
Historical context: The decolonisation of Congoand the Mutiny On 30 June 1960, Congo was no longer under the control of the former Belgian colonial power, achieving independence on this historic day. Less than a week later, Congolese forces in Force Publique mutinied against their Belgian commanders. The mutiny began in Thysville military base before spreading to the rest of the Congo Republic.
The mutineers made three demands: The removal of the Belgian commander in chief General Emil Janssens, the replacement of all Belgian officers by Congolese and raise in pay and rank.
Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba tried to end the mutiny but to no avail. He conducted a large-scale promotion, advancing every Congolese soldier by one grade.
The racial stratification that marked the pre-independence Congo clearly applied to the Force Publique. Whites controlled and composed the officer corps. The highest rank to which Africans could aspire was that of sergeant-major.
The Belgians, similar to other governing alien minorities, believed their rule best protected by compliant troops schooled in instant obedience, and by culturally homogenous commissioned officers sharing in full the assumptions and views of the dominant group. […]
The precipitating incident was General Emile Janssens’ proclamation to restive troops, “Before Independence = After Independence.”
Over time, violence spread to other parts of the Congo, prompting the departure of the Europeans. In response, the Belgian government deployed its troops to restore order and safeguard the well-being of its Belgian citizens. However, this move antagonised the Congolese central government as its leaders were not being consulted with.
Lumumba sent a plea to the United Nations in hopes of receiving operational support to pressure Belgium to withdraw its forces from the Congo.
On 14 July 1960, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 143, authorising the creation of a peacekeeping force known as Organisations des Nations Unies au Congo (ONUC, or UN Mission in the Congo).
The secession of Katanga In addition to the problem of Belgian presence in the Congo, the nation had to contend with another serious issue: the secession of Katanga and South Kasai. On 11 July 1960, Kantaga declared its independence from the Congo Republic. A month later, the South Kasai province followed suit (9 August 1960).
Map of the Congo Republic during the Congo Crisis in 1960-1963, featuring the provincial states of Katanga and South Kasai that launched secessionist movements [Map by Quickworld Inc.].
The Katanga province was known for its mineral-rich status, featuring minerals like copper, cobalt and uranium. The Belgian mining company Union Minière du Haut-Katanga (UMHK) conducted its mining operations in Katanga, enjoying an annual turnover of about $200 million in USD in 1960.
Even before independence, Katanga experienced growing separatist tendencies. The mutiny incident become a trigger to reverse the opposing stance by the Europeans that saw secession of Katanga as an opportunity to protect Belgian investment.
The province’s president, Moïse Tshombe, sought help from Belgium and other Western states to oppose the spread of communism in central Africa. Also, Belgian troops deployed in Katanga helped to maintain order within the province.
With independence, the Europeans in Elisabethville saw a chance to stem the tide of African independence and supported the secessionist government of Moïse Tshombe. Belgium as well would lend Tshombe’s rebel government unofficial support, as Katanga continued its mission of remaining separate from Congo-Léopoldville.
The Belgians would secretly fund the mercenary army that gave ONUC a run for their money; the possibility of losing control of UMHK and the numerous lucrative mines scattered across the province was an unattractive option for European interests in Katanga.
An excerpt taken from “Congo” by Sean Rorison (2008).
The secession of South Kasai Between 1960 and 1962, the leader of the MNC-K party Albert Kalonji fought to secede South Kasai from the Republic of the Congo. Like Katanga, South Kasai received assistance from Belgium.
More importantly, the secession in South Kasai was influenced by the ethnic tensions between the Baluba community (represented by Kalonji’s MNC-K) and the Bena Lulua.
In this phase, Kalonji became President of the South Kasai province and Joseph Ngalula assumed the role of Prime Minister. Kalonji’s rule was bolstered by the Luba chiefs. He established a strong narrative that the secession was justified because of ethnic persecution and the inability of the Congolese central government to safeguard the interests of the Baluba people.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Congo Crisis under the theme of Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC General Paper Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 8929 2422to find out more.
https://www.jchistorytuition.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Why-did-the-Congo-crisis-happen-JC-History-Tuition-Singapore-Congo-Crisis-Notes-2.jpg8531280Justinhttps://www.jchistorytuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/JC-History-Tuition-Logo-300x86.pngJustin2026-02-23 17:31:472026-04-13 14:33:57Why did the Congo crisis happen?
Topic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]: Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1945-2000) Section B: Essay Writing Theme III Chapter 4: Intra-State Conflicts [Bosnian War, 1992-1995]
Examine the historical significance of the siege to understand its implications on the Bosnian War. [Video by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty]
Historical context: The Liberalisation of BiH In February 1992, a ‘Referendum Weekend’ was scheduled as a requirement to recognise the independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). While the Bosniaks and Croats supported the referendum, the Serbian Democratic Party (SDS) – led by Radovan Karadžić – boycotted said referendum. The SDS rallied the Bosnian Serbs to support its stance.
The SDS was against the referendum because it feared that independence of BiH would turn the Bosnian Serbs into a minority, violating their interests to remain part of Yugoslavia.
Of the three (communities), Bosniacs were the strongest proponents of a sovereign unitary state. While open to Bosnian sovereignty, Croats preferred cantonization. For their part, Serbs preferred for BiH to remain within the FRY; their second-best option revolved around the right of Serb areas to seek secession and rejoin the FRY. Not only did the three communities broadly disagree, Serbs considered the birth of independent BiH illegal because of the fact that the referendum on independence had gone ahead in spite of the boycott of one of the constituent people.
Eventually, BiH declared independence from the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) on 1 March 1992. On that same day, a shooting incident occurred.
The Baščaršijashooting incident During a Bosnian Serb wedding procession in the Baščaršija district of Sarajevo, a Bosnian paramilitary member, Ramiz Delalic, killed the groom’s father and wounded an Orthodox priest. The attack sparked tensions over the display of Serbian national symbols during the wedding.
The Bosnian Serb community was outraged by the shooting, viewing the attack as a deliberate act of ethnic violence, giving rise to mobilisation and the setting up of barricades across Sarajevo. This incident highlighted the emergence of inter-ethnic violence.
According to a report by the CSCE, the blockade of the city ‘turned from spontaneous protests provoked by the wedding incident to an SDS-controlled effort’. Thus the barricades appeared not simply to ‘protect Serbs’ in the wake of the Baščaršija shooting but to demonstrate that the SDS would not accept lightly a declaration of independence in the event of a ‘yes’ vote.
The Siege Bosnian Serb forces seized the capital city of Sarajevo, starting a four year-long brutal campaign that terrorised the citizens within. Sarajevo was under siege on 5 April 1992, trapping inside the city.
From May 1992 onwards, Serb forces attacked civilian areas of the city, resorting to shelling and sniping to wreck havoc on the population. Consequently, casualties mount. Between 1992 and 1995, more than 13,000 people had died, including 5,000 civilians. Much of the infrastructure in Sarajevo was damaged or destroyed, including religious buildings.
In early 1993, the Serb forces attacked the Cerska area in eastern BiH, forcing thousands of Bosniaks to flee to UN-declared ‘Safe Areas’.
A survival map provided by FAMA International that documented the Siege of Sarajevo and the disintegration of Yugoslavia [From David Rumsey Historical Map Collection]
Markale Market massacres On 5 February 1994, the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS) fired a 120mm mortal shell into the Markale marketplace in Sarajevo, killing 68 people and injuring almost 200. On the same day, the Bosnian Serb leadership blamed ‘authorities in Sarajevo’ of planting explosives to influence the international community to blame the Serbs for the atrocities. A UNPROFOR report revealed that about 40 projectiles were fired from Serbian positions around Sarajevo on that day.
On 28 August 1995, five mortar shells hit the Markele market, killing 43 and injuring at least 70. A 1999 report to the UN concluded that the VRS was responsible for the second attack as well.
Conclusion In December 1995, the Dayton Agreement was signed, ending the Bosnian War. On 29 February 1996, the Bosnian government declared the end of the siege.
A map that illustrates the front lies around Sarajevo, highlighting areas controlled by the United Nations as well as the Serbs. [Map by BBC]
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Bosnian War under the theme of Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC General Paper Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 8929 2422to find out more.
https://www.jchistorytuition.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/JC-History-Tuition-What-Happened-in-the-Siege-of-Sarajevo-Bosnian-War-Notes.jpg8531280Justinhttps://www.jchistorytuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/JC-History-Tuition-Logo-300x86.pngJustin2026-02-10 12:58:172026-05-18 14:12:32What Happened in the Siege of Sarajevo?
Topic of Study [For H2 History Students, 9174]: Paper 1: The Development of the Global Economy (1945-2000) Section B: Essay Writing Theme II Chapter 1: Challenges in the Global Economy
The first oil shock of 1973 During the Yom Kippur War, Arab members of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) imposed an oil embargo to protest nations that backed Israel, particularly the United States (USA). This was in response to the US government’s attempt to resupply the Israeli military (see ‘Operation Nickel Grass‘).
The embargo banned petroleum exports to the affected nations, destabilising the pricing system and straining oil-reliant economies. As a result of OPEC’s decision, crude oil price rose from $3 per barrel to $12 per barrel by 1974.
Real crude oil prices between the 1800s and early 2020s. Source: The Economist
In addition, the first oil shock coincided with the disastrous collapse of the Bretton Woods System, which saw the end of a gold-dollar fixed exchange rate system. The devaluation of the US dollar further exacerbated the adverse impacts of the energy crisis, plunging the USA and other Western industrialised nations into a recession.
The major oil firms, as well as their home governments, were not merely unprepared for the oil shock. They had become so accustomed to business as usual that they disregarded warning signs that the world was about to change, or change a lot faster than they realised. […] The combined effects of the embargo, oil price increases and the collapse of the concession system abruptly ended the post-World War II petroleum order.
The second oil shock of 1979 The 1978 Iranian Revolution concluded with the end of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s rule, ushering the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini’s Islamic Republic. As a result of said revolution, Iranian oil production fell by 4.8 million barrels per day, which occupied 7 percent of the global oil production by January 1979.
The political turmoil in Iran triggered widespread panic as oil-reliant nations began to hoard oil. The second oil crisis saw a surge of the price of global West Texas Intermediate (WTI) [benchmark for global oil price] from US$15 per barrel in September 1978 to US$40 per barrel in April 1980.
Fluctuations in global growth and inflation rates as a result of the twin oil shocks of the 1970s. Source: Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS)
The 1979 oil crisis had a profound impact on the global economy. It amplified the already existing inflationary pressures, a carryover from the monetary policies and commodity price shocks of the early to mid-1970s. The rising cost of energy rippled through the economy, increasing the price of everything from transportation and manufacturing to food production and heading. This led to stagflation – a combination of high inflation and slow economic growth – which plagued many Western economies during this period.
Extracted from “Inflation Surge Explained” by Gideon Fairchild (2025).
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Global Economy. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
Call 8929 2422 to find out more.
https://www.jchistorytuition.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/JC-History-Tuition-Singapore-Global-Economy-Why-did-the-oil-crisis-happen.jpg8511280Justinhttps://www.jchistorytuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/JC-History-Tuition-Logo-300x86.pngJustin2026-01-05 18:08:462026-02-19 13:18:52Why did the oil crisis happen?
Topic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]: Paper 1: The Development of the Global Economy (1945-2000) Section B: Essay Writing Theme II Chapter 2: Transformation of East Asian Economies (Japan, 1947-1991)
Johnson’s developmental state In his study of Japan’s industrial policy, the American political scientist Chalmers Johnson explained that the state played a central role to conduct of inudstrialisation policies to achieve economic goals.
Between 1952 and 1971, Japan’s real Gross National Product (GNP) grew at an average rate of 9.6 percent per year, indicating a remarkable phase of rapid expansion.
According to Johnson, in Japan (and by extension in other East Asian developmental states) the role of the state conforms neither to the liberal Anglo-American tradition, under which the legitimate functions of governments are in theory restricted to administering and policing the overall legal framework within which individuals freely compete with one another, nor to the ideologically-based practice of planned socialist economies, in which state ownership and management of the means of production are seen as desirable ends in themselves. […]
In the wake of the neo-classical’ revival in economics, the policy prescriptions of the development establishment through the 1980s continued to encourage developing-country governments to withdraw from direct interference with market forces in their economies and to concentrate on ‘getting the basics right’ at the macroeconomic and infrastructural levels.
Causes of the economic transformation of Japan According to a study by Brookings Institution, there were four key factors identified as the cause of Japan’s phenomenal growth:
Capital accumulation
Knowledge advancement
Economies of scale
Labour supply expansion
In the case of capital accumulation, substantial investment was made that boosted Japan’s GNP. Gross private rose steadily from about 17 percent of GNP in the early 1950s to about 30 percent of GNP by the early 1970s. This private investment was financed by the high savings rate. Unlike the USA, in which private saving was a mere 15 percent of GNP in the 1960s, Japan’s savings rate was almost twice that of the USA.
In addition, the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) was established to oversee the industrial development of Japan. It replaced the role of its predecessor, the Ministry of Commerce, to involve past leading administrators to harness their knowledge and expertise to achieve growth targets.
Among industrial countries, Japan’s saving rate is unusually high and this has facilitated exceptionally large investment rates during the period of rapid economic growth as well as large current account surpluses.
[…] According to MITI’s inaugural minister, Inagaki Heitaro, its chief objective was to transform Japan into a leading world exporter. To accomplish this, it was first necessary to attain a substantial increase in industrial output, the rationalization of enterprise and an upgrading of technical standards.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.
https://www.jchistorytuition.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/JC-History-Tuition-Singapore-Why-did-Japan-develop-so-quickly-Japan-Economic-Miracle.jpg8531280Justinhttps://www.jchistorytuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/JC-History-Tuition-Logo-300x86.pngJustin2025-04-15 17:21:142026-03-23 13:20:48Why did Japan develop so quickly?
Topic of Study [For H2 History Students]: Paper 2: Regional Conflicts and Co-operation Source Based Case Study Theme III Chapter 2: ASEAN (Growth and Development of ASEAN: Building regional peace and security – relations between ASEAN and external powers)
Learn more about the South China Sea dispute that engulfed the region in geopolitical instability. [Video by TRT World].
Significance of the South China Sea dispute: Resource-rich or strategic crossroads? Countries have contested the legal ownership of numerous small islands, atolls and reefs. For China, the ‘nine-dash line’ was used as the basis to assert territorial claims, giving rise to opposition by other nations, like Vietnam and the Philippines.
In a protest note following a joint submission by Vietnam and Malaysia in 2009 to the UN body tasked with examining outer continental shelf claims, China declared it had “indisputable sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and the adjacent waters, and enjoys sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the relevant waters as well as the seabed and subsoil thereof”. Attached to the protest note was a map showing the nine-dash line, the first time China had officially lodged it with an international organisation.
[…] In 2013, for instance Gao Zhiguo, China’s judge on the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) – the dispute resolution mechanism established under UNCLOS – and Bing Bing Jia argued in an American law journal that the nine-dash line was “synonymous with a claim of sovereignty over the island groups that always belonged to China and with an additional Chinese claim of historical rights of fishing, navigation, and other marine activities (including the exploitation of resources, mineral or otherwise) on the islands and in the adjacent waters”.
Notably, there is a general misperception that the South China Sea (SCS) is resource rich, guiding claimants to contest the disputed territories. Yet, estimates revealed that the South China Sea only occupies 10 percent of the global catch. Based on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), most of the Spratly ‘Islands’ should instead be classified as ‘rocks’, and thus cannot meet UNCLOS criteria of an island that should generate a 200 nautical miles of Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). An island with EEZ can allow owners to harvest resources, like fish and hydrocarbons.
Beyond the viewpoint of the SCS being viewed as a resource-rich area, its value is also measured by its strategic geographical position. The sea routes that pass through the SCS are the shortest between the Pacific and Indian Oceans, enabling international trade to take place efficiently. As such, disputes that arise in the region could disrupt maritime commerce, undermining the growth of the global economy.
Resolution: Enter ASEAN The likelihood of dispute resolution is low with regards to the SCS, given that none of the claimants have participated in bilateral talks. Even the option of legal arbitration was opposed by some parties, including China. Although the International Court of Justice (ICJ) can form a ruling on the sovereignty of the Spratly and Paracel Islands, not all claimants agreed to give consent for the Court to proceed.
Nonetheless, ASEAN has undertaken steps to manage the SCS dispute to safeguard regional security. In 1992, the Manila Declaration was issued, calling for all parties to resolve maritime disputes amicably and renounce the use of force. Even so, some claimants have expressed reluctance to acknowledge ASEAN’s efforts as seen by the outbreak of clashes like the Mischief Reef incident.
In late 1994, Chinese forces occupied Mischief Reef, an underwater atoll 135 miles off the southern coast of the Philippines’ western island of Palawan. […] Then, President Fidel Ramos quickly condemned the Chinese move and ordered the reinforcement of the Philippine garrison in the Spratlys. […] In 1995, [China] agreed to discuss the South China Sea dispute with the ASEAN in the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). After three years of negotiations, China and the ASEAN member states signed, in 2002, the Declaration of the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, which calls for the claimant states to resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means, and to refrain from occupying presently uninhabited atolls and shoals in the area.
This 2002 Declaration of the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DoC) was an agreement based on the 1992 Manila Declaration as well as the workshops hosted by Indonesia in the 1990s, signaling a breakthrough at dispute management. However, the DoC was non-binding and did not specify which activities contravened the self-restraint clause.
Fortunately, in July 2011, both ASEAN and China agreed on the establishment of guidelines to promote confidence building measures. Two years later, China agreed to commence talks on a binding Code of Conduct to manage the SCS dispute.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about ASEAN. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.
https://www.jchistorytuition.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/JC-History-Tuition-Singapore-Revisited-What-is-the-South-China-Sea-dispute.jpg6891280Justinhttps://www.jchistorytuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/JC-History-Tuition-Logo-300x86.pngJustin2025-04-08 17:20:012026-03-23 13:20:48Revisited: What is the South China Sea dispute?
Topic of Study [For H2 History Students]: Paper 2: Regional Conflicts and Co-operation Source Based Case Study Theme III Chapter 1: Inter-state tensions and co-operation [dispute over Sabah]
Learn more about the historical significance of the Jabidah Massacre on Corregidor Island in the Philippines [Video by Al Jazeera English].
Origins In the late 1960s, the Marcos administration launched a clandestine operation to infiltrate and sabotage Sabah. In summary, the plan was to reclaim the disputed territory of Sabah from Malaysia.
Contesting claims These developments can be traced to the territorial disputes between Malaysia and the Philippines. Sabah was endowed with abundant natural resources, producing billions of dollars worth of timber, platinum and gold.
The Philippine authorities asserted that the Sabah territory belonged to the Sultan of Sulu, who ruled from 1666 to 1946. After the Second World War, the British oversaw the decolonisation of Malaya and the creation of the Malaysian Federation that included Sabah (Borneo Territories).
However, the Philippine government insisted that the British ‘rented’ Sabah from the Sultan of Sulu and thus had no right to transfer land rights to Malaysia.
Though Britain included Sabah in the lands for the Malaysian Federation, the British had only been renting Sabah from the Sultan, and did not own it to give away, just as Spain did not own Sulu to sell it to America in 1898. The Sultan and most Moros felt as if someone were selling a horse that did not belong to them. How could the British give away the Sultan’s land, something he had owned 280 years?
Given that the Sultan of Sulu, Jamalul Kiram II, was unable to pressure the British to reclaim Sabah from Malaysia, he turned to the Philippine government for help. The Sultan transferred his rights of the Sabah territory to Manila, in hopes that the latter would retake Sabah.
On 22 January 1962, Manila opposed a British note and insisted that it had rights to North Borneo. Diplomatic solutions were futile as seen by the outcome of the United Nations-supervised Referendum held on 13 September 1963. While a majority of the people in Sabah and Sarawak voted to join the Malaysian Federation, Manila and Jakarta opposed the results. Notably, this gave rise to the Konfrontasi.
Marcos’ Plan: Oplan Merdeka In 1968, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos hatched a plan to reclaim Sabah from Malaysia. He authorised the training of recruits, who were mostly Tausug people. By conspiring with their kin in Sabah, Marcos was certain that a civil unrest would ensue.
When that happens, the Sabah people would either secede from Malaysia or Manila would assume full control of the disputed territory.
The secret mission was codenamed ‘Operation Merdeka’ (‘Freedom’). These Muslim recruits were promised to be paid and be a part of the Philippine Armed Forces (AFP). As they were trained in an abandoned hospital, the recruits did not receive the payment as promised.
Eventually, the recruits realised that they were sent to invade Sabah and had to take the lives of their Muslim brethren in Malaysia. Horrified by this revelation, they submitted a petition to Marcos, seeking to expose the ill-treatment and deception by their superiors. Yet, their petition did not reach Marcos.
On 18 March 1968, more than 28 Muslim trainees were killed on Corregidor Island by soldiers of the AFP, sparking the rise of Muslim separatism that destabilised the Philippines ever since.
However, when members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines massacred more than 28 Moro Muslim recruits on March 18, 1968, on the Philippine island of Corregidor (called the Jabidah massacre), the sentiments of the Muslims in the Philippines led to the mobilization of the Muslim population, subsequently leading to the formation of the MNLF, led by the University of the Philippines professor Nur Misuari, that was able to challenge the Philippine state in terms of arms.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about Inter-state Tensions. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.
https://www.jchistorytuition.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Why-did-the-Jabidah-Massacre-occur-Sabah-Notes-Interstate-Conflicts-JC-History-Tuition-Singapore.jpg7201280Justinhttps://www.jchistorytuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/JC-History-Tuition-Logo-300x86.pngJustin2024-11-12 12:00:002026-03-23 13:20:48Why did the Jabidah massacre occur?
Topic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]: Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1945-2000) Section B: Essay Writing Theme III Chapter 4: Intra-State Conflicts [Bosnian War, 1992-1995]
Historical context: Slovenian Independence In the wake of Josip Broz Tito‘s death on 4 May 1980 as well as the decline of Communism in Eastern Europe in 1989, the political stability of Yugoslavia was at risk. In addition, the 1974 Yugoslav Constitution and its provisions posed a strong impetus for the decentralisation of power to the republics.
On 25 June 1991, Slovenia declared independence from Yugoslavia, triggering the start of the Ten-Day War.
In the 1980s, Slovenians demanded the same things Americans asked for in the 1770s: free speech, right to assembly, democracy, and more control over the taxing and spending. They made two mistakes on their way to independence. First, in November 1989, Slovenia prohibited Serbs and Montenegrins from coming to Ljubljana to protest against Slovenia’s constitutional changes. This hypocritically contradicted their demand for free speech and free assembly. […]
Their second mistake was firing a gun. In 1991, Slovenia’s declaration of independence led to a ten-day civil war with Yugoslavia. […] Here’s the Ten-Day War summary: you’re carrying a grenade launcher and you’re fighting a seven-year-old Slovenian boy with a water pistol: “Bang! Bang! You’re dead!” the boy screams. You fall to the ground, pretending to be dead, and the boy declares victory.
The military confrontation and the eventual cessation of hostilities The Yugoslav government rejected Slovenia’s unilateral declaration of independence as seen by its deployment of the Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA) a day later. The JNA surrounded Slovenia, cutting the latter from the outside world. In retaliation, the Slovenian police and Territorial Defense set up barricades by using large transport vehicles. Yet, such efforts were futile as the JNA drove armoured vehicles.
Fortunately, the conflict came to an end with the signing of the Brioni Agreement on 7 July 1991. The European Community (EC) oversaw the peace process that involved representatives of Slovenia, Yugoslavia and Croatia.
Notably, the Agreement called for a ceasefire and the withdrawal of JNA forces from Slovenia. Negotiations on the future of Yugoslavia were to commence on 1 August 1991 and that the Yugoslav people were to determine their future.
The Brioni Agreement was significant in that it guaranteed the continued engagement of the EC in the Yugoslav situation through the legal establishment of the European Community Monitor Mission (ECMM). Furthermore, although it effectively suspended Slovenia’s bid for independence for three months, the Brioni Agreement paved the way for Slovenia’s full independence from Yugoslavia by extending a set of EC-issued prerequisites. After the Brioni Agreement was signed, the JNA withdrew its forces from Slovenia but repositioned them in Croatia, where violence continued until 1995.
A short-lived peace in Croatia and the Start of the Bosnian War Even after the Brioni Agreement was signed, the international community’s efforts to forestall a Yugoslav war were inadequate. For instance, the United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 713 on 25 September 1991 was to impose an arms embargo on all former Yugoslav territories. Yet, the Serb forces used the military equipment of the JNA and the Croat and Bosniak forces gathered their military supplies via Croatia.
In late September 1991, the JNA advanced its forces into the capital of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), Mostar, drawing strong protests by the local government. In response, the Bosniaks and Croats clashed with the JNA. By then, the Bosnian War had begun.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Bosnian War under the theme of Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.
https://www.jchistorytuition.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Why-did-the-Ten-Day-War-Happen-Bosnian-War-Notes-Intrastate-Conflicts.jpg8481280Justinhttps://www.jchistorytuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/JC-History-Tuition-Logo-300x86.pngJustin2024-11-05 12:00:002026-03-23 13:20:49Why did the Ten Day War Happen?
Topic of Study [For H2 History Students]: Paper 1: Understanding the Cold War (1945-1991) Section A: Source-based Case Study Theme I Chapter 2: A World Divided by the Cold War – Manifestations of the global Cold War: Vietnam War (1959-75)
Topic of Study [For H1 History Students]: Essay Questions Theme III Chapter 1: The Cold War and Southeast Asia (1945-1991): Factors shaping the Second Indochina War (1959–1975)
Examine the historical significance of the Tet Offensive in 1968 that shaped the developments of the Second Indochina War [Video by History]
Historical Context: Ho Chi Minh’s Plan On 30-31 January 1968, the North Vietnamese forces and the Viet Cong launched a coordinated military campaign in South Vietnam. It coincided with the Vietnamese New Year, known as the Tet, in which many South Vietnamese soldiers were preoccupied with this celebration.
To sow discord between the United States and South Vietnamese forces.
To cause an internal collapse of authority within South Vietnam and spark unrest to oppose the Saigon regime.
During the Battle of Hue, the Viet Cong overran the city and took control of Hue, claiming the lives of thousands of inhabitants within. The Allied troops had to take nearly a month to regain control of Hue. In doing so, the USA had incurred rising casualties, which was a problem concealed by the government.
The Viet Cong fighters piled into a truck and a taxicab and drove to their target. Just before 3 A.M., as they drove past the night gate, the Viet Cong opened fire on the two American guards stationed there. […] Shortly after 9 A.M., the embassy was officially declared clear of all enemy fighters. General William Westmoreland, commander of all U.S. forces in Vietnam, strode onto the embassy grounds in clean, pressed uniform. Westmoreland told reporters that the attack on the embassy had been part of a wider Viet Cong assault across Vietnam. He complained that the Viet Cong had broken a holiday truce to stage these attacks.
Although the campaign targeted more than 100 cities and towns, including the southern capital Saigon, it was a catastrophic military disaster for the communists. As many as 50,000 communist troops died in their attempt to gain control of South Vietnam.
Map illustration of the Tet Offensive during the Vietnam War. Illustration provided by West Point, US Military Academy.
Unintended Consequences: The Quagmire Nonetheless, the repercussions of the Tet Offensive on the United States were serious. As the Johnson administration had repeatedly reassured the American public that a swift and decisive victory was possible in Vietnam, the Tet Offensive had raised doubts on this promise.
The American journalist Walter Cronkite had exposed the deception of the Johnson administration in a provoking broadcast. This revelation was made after his personal trip to Hue in Vietnam, in which the most intense urban warfare took place during the war.
We have been too often disappointed by the optimism of the American leaders, both in Vietnam and Washington, to have faith any longer in the silver linings they find in the darkest clouds. […]
To say that we are closer to victory today is to believe, in the face of the evidence, the optimists who have been wrong in the past. To suggest we are on the edge of defeat is to yield to unreasonable pessimism. To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the only realistic, yet unsatisfactory, conclusion. On the off chance that military and political analysts are right, in the next few months we must test the enemy’s intentions, in case this is indeed his last big gasp before negotiations. But it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could.
An excerpt taken from Walter Cronkite’s “We are mired in stalemate” broadcast, 27 February 1968.
As a result, public sentiments became to shift in favour of US withdrawal from Vietnam, given that the people realised that a victory in Vietnam was unlikely, as outlined by Cronkite’s broadcast. Faced with mounting popular pressure, Johnson announced on 31 March 1968 that he would not seek a second term as president of the United States. His successor, Richard Nixon, then proceed with the policy of “Vietnamisation“, which led to a new phase of the US role in the Second Indochina War.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.
https://www.jchistorytuition.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/JC-History-Tuition-Singapore-What-was-the-Tet-Offensive-Vietnam-War-Notes.jpg8531280Justinhttps://www.jchistorytuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/JC-History-Tuition-Logo-300x86.pngJustin2024-06-19 12:00:002026-03-23 13:20:48What was the Tet Offensive?
What happened when the UN went into the Congo?
/in Conflict and Cooperation, History Essays/by JustinTopic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]:
Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1945-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 4: Intra-State Conflicts [Congo Crisis, 1960-1965]
Hammarskjöld’s gauntlet: Introducing the ONUC
Barely two weeks after gaining independence, the Congo was beset by political infighting within the central government (based on Leopoldville), ethnic divisions and nation-wide unrest. The Leopoldville government turned to the United Nations (UN) for assistance on 12 July 1960 to restore order and protect civilians.
The UN Secretary-General (UNSC) Dag Hammarskjöld’s invoked Article 99 of the UN Charter for the first time, convening an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council (UNSC). Subsequently, UNSC Resolution (UNSCR) 143 was adopted, calling upon Belgium to withdraw its forces from Congo and authorising the formation of the UN Operation in the Congo (ONUC).
Volatile and uncertain: Lumumba’s death and its implications on the UN
However, the ONUC was faced with a volatile situation in the Congo. Unlike the straightforward peacekeeping (i.e. United Nations Emergency Force, UNEF I) undertaking in response to the Suez Canal Crisis in 1956, the ONUC was ill-equipped to prevent the collapse of a newly-independent Congo.
In August 1960, South Kasai declared its autonomy from the central government, intensifying the civil unrest. Furthermore, the political infighting within the central government resulted in a constitutional crisis that concluded with a coup by General Mobutu and the downfall of Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba.
In essence, the Prime Minister’s demise was linked to the UN’s mismanagement, thereby alienating the pro-Soviet and Afro-Asian blocs. The ONUC was implicated by this intra-UN disunity, seen in terms of the withdrawal of national contingents from the UN operation by Third World member nations like Morocco and Sudan.
Renewed UN mandates for the ONUC: 161 and 169
Nonetheless, there was renewed vigor within the UN as UNSC 161 was adopted in February 1961, authorising the ONUC to use force “if necessary, in the last resort” to prevent the outbreak of a civil war.
Between August and September 1961, the ONUC launched two operations – “Rum Punch” and “Morthor” – that targeted the Katanga province. Yet, these operations were hampered by hostile Katangese forces. During the Siege of Jadotville, 155 Irish UN troops were attacked by Tshombe’s forces, such that Operation Morthor concluded with the death of 13 UN troops and 200 Katangese civilians and troops.
The UNSC went further by expanding the ONUC’s mandate in November 1961, as seen by UNSCR 169 to authorise the use of peace enforcement to maintain the territorial integrity and political independence of the Congo. More importantly, the ONUC was empowered to assist the Leopoldville government to secure the “immediate withdrawal and evaluation from the Congo of all foreign military” and mercenaries.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Congo Crisis under the theme of Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC General Paper Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 8929 2422 to find out more.
Why did Katanga secede from the Congo?
/in Conflict and Cooperation, History Essays/by JustinTopic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]:
Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1945-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 4: Intra-State Conflicts [Congo Crisis, 1960-1965]
Historical context: The secession
On 11 July 1960, the leader of Confédération des associations tribales du Katanga (CONAKAT) Moïse Tshombe proclaimed the secession of Katanga, threatening the territorial integrity of a newly-independent Congo.
This southernmost province of the Congo was declared the “State of Katanga” with Élisabethville as its capital. The secession became a part of the ongoing Congo Crisis (1960-1965).
An economically-valuable Katanga: Economic motivations of CONAKAT & UMHK
From the economic standpoint, the secession was motivated by Tshombe’s desire to retain control of Katanga’s vast resources, limiting its diversion to the central government.
In 1960, Katanga was estimated to hold 10% of the world’s copper reserves and 34% of its cobalt reserves. However, Katanga had to contribute to 50% of Congo’s national budget and 25% of the country’s foreign exchange earnings.
Further complications exacerbated the “Katanga” problem for the central government as the Belgian company Union Minière du Haut-Katanga (UMHK) financed Tshombe’s secession. About 1,250 million Belgian frans were given to Tshombe’s government in 1960, enabling the CONAKAT to hire foreign mercenaries and buy advanced weaponry to defend the province against the central government.
The UMHK feared that Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba pursued radical policies to nationalise Katanga’s resources, which included 75% of the Congo’s total mining production. Katanga itself produced almost 30% of the entire Belgian Congo’s revenue from copper sales.
As such, the UMHK functioned as a “state within a state“, exercising quasi-governmental powers by supporting the secession of Katanga.
Notably, the Belgian government never officially recognised Tshombe’s regime. In the public sphere, Belgium opposed the secession.
CONAKAT’s aim: “Katanga for Katangans”
Besides, CONAKAT strove to create an “authentic” Katangan identity, primarily representing the Lunda and other southern tribes (Yeke and Bemba). This group viewed themselves as the rightful owners of the land and its mineral wealth.
In contrast, the “strangers” in Katanga were mainly the ethnic Luba people from the neighbouring Kasai province. They have been resettled by the Belgian colonial administration and UMHK for decades because the Belgians viewed them as the more “hardworking” workers.
In essence, Lumumba’s Association Générale des Baluba du Katanga (BALUBAKAT) opposed Tshombe’s CONAKAT as both parties strived to control the Congolese territories and safeguard the interests of specific tribes. Hence, the secession was also a product of domestic politics.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Congo Crisis under the theme of Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC General Paper Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 8929 2422 to find out more.
Why did the Congo crisis happen?
/in Conflict and Cooperation, History Essays/by JustinTopic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]:
Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1945-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 4: Intra-State Conflicts [Congo Crisis, 1960-1965]
Historical context: The decolonisation of Congo and the Mutiny
On 30 June 1960, Congo was no longer under the control of the former Belgian colonial power, achieving independence on this historic day. Less than a week later, Congolese forces in Force Publique mutinied against their Belgian commanders. The mutiny began in Thysville military base before spreading to the rest of the Congo Republic.
The mutineers made three demands: The removal of the Belgian commander in chief General Emil Janssens, the replacement of all Belgian officers by Congolese and raise in pay and rank.
Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba tried to end the mutiny but to no avail. He conducted a large-scale promotion, advancing every Congolese soldier by one grade.
Over time, violence spread to other parts of the Congo, prompting the departure of the Europeans. In response, the Belgian government deployed its troops to restore order and safeguard the well-being of its Belgian citizens. However, this move antagonised the Congolese central government as its leaders were not being consulted with.
Lumumba sent a plea to the United Nations in hopes of receiving operational support to pressure Belgium to withdraw its forces from the Congo.
On 14 July 1960, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 143, authorising the creation of a peacekeeping force known as Organisations des Nations Unies au Congo (ONUC, or UN Mission in the Congo).
The secession of Katanga
In addition to the problem of Belgian presence in the Congo, the nation had to contend with another serious issue: the secession of Katanga and South Kasai. On 11 July 1960, Kantaga declared its independence from the Congo Republic. A month later, the South Kasai province followed suit (9 August 1960).
The Katanga province was known for its mineral-rich status, featuring minerals like copper, cobalt and uranium. The Belgian mining company Union Minière du Haut-Katanga (UMHK) conducted its mining operations in Katanga, enjoying an annual turnover of about $200 million in USD in 1960.
Even before independence, Katanga experienced growing separatist tendencies. The mutiny incident become a trigger to reverse the opposing stance by the Europeans that saw secession of Katanga as an opportunity to protect Belgian investment.
The province’s president, Moïse Tshombe, sought help from Belgium and other Western states to oppose the spread of communism in central Africa. Also, Belgian troops deployed in Katanga helped to maintain order within the province.
The secession of South Kasai
Between 1960 and 1962, the leader of the MNC-K party Albert Kalonji fought to secede South Kasai from the Republic of the Congo. Like Katanga, South Kasai received assistance from Belgium.
More importantly, the secession in South Kasai was influenced by the ethnic tensions between the Baluba community (represented by Kalonji’s MNC-K) and the Bena Lulua.
In this phase, Kalonji became President of the South Kasai province and Joseph Ngalula assumed the role of Prime Minister. Kalonji’s rule was bolstered by the Luba chiefs. He established a strong narrative that the secession was justified because of ethnic persecution and the inability of the Congolese central government to safeguard the interests of the Baluba people.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Congo Crisis under the theme of Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC General Paper Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 8929 2422 to find out more.
What Happened in the Siege of Sarajevo?
/in Conflict and Cooperation, History Essays/by JustinTopic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]:
Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1945-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 4: Intra-State Conflicts [Bosnian War, 1992-1995]
Historical context: The Liberalisation of BiH
In February 1992, a ‘Referendum Weekend’ was scheduled as a requirement to recognise the independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). While the Bosniaks and Croats supported the referendum, the Serbian Democratic Party (SDS) – led by Radovan Karadžić – boycotted said referendum. The SDS rallied the Bosnian Serbs to support its stance.
The SDS was against the referendum because it feared that independence of BiH would turn the Bosnian Serbs into a minority, violating their interests to remain part of Yugoslavia.
Eventually, BiH declared independence from the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) on 1 March 1992. On that same day, a shooting incident occurred.
The Baščaršija shooting incident
During a Bosnian Serb wedding procession in the Baščaršija district of Sarajevo, a Bosnian paramilitary member, Ramiz Delalic, killed the groom’s father and wounded an Orthodox priest. The attack sparked tensions over the display of Serbian national symbols during the wedding.
The Bosnian Serb community was outraged by the shooting, viewing the attack as a deliberate act of ethnic violence, giving rise to mobilisation and the setting up of barricades across Sarajevo. This incident highlighted the emergence of inter-ethnic violence.
The Siege
Bosnian Serb forces seized the capital city of Sarajevo, starting a four year-long brutal campaign that terrorised the citizens within. Sarajevo was under siege on 5 April 1992, trapping inside the city.
From May 1992 onwards, Serb forces attacked civilian areas of the city, resorting to shelling and sniping to wreck havoc on the population. Consequently, casualties mount. Between 1992 and 1995, more than 13,000 people had died, including 5,000 civilians. Much of the infrastructure in Sarajevo was damaged or destroyed, including religious buildings.
In early 1993, the Serb forces attacked the Cerska area in eastern BiH, forcing thousands of Bosniaks to flee to UN-declared ‘Safe Areas’.
Markale Market massacres
On 5 February 1994, the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS) fired a 120mm mortal shell into the Markale marketplace in Sarajevo, killing 68 people and injuring almost 200. On the same day, the Bosnian Serb leadership blamed ‘authorities in Sarajevo’ of planting explosives to influence the international community to blame the Serbs for the atrocities. A UNPROFOR report revealed that about 40 projectiles were fired from Serbian positions around Sarajevo on that day.
On 28 August 1995, five mortar shells hit the Markele market, killing 43 and injuring at least 70. A 1999 report to the UN concluded that the VRS was responsible for the second attack as well.
Conclusion
In December 1995, the Dayton Agreement was signed, ending the Bosnian War. On 29 February 1996, the Bosnian government declared the end of the siege.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Bosnian War under the theme of Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC General Paper Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 8929 2422 to find out more.
Why did the oil crisis happen?
/in Global Economy, History Essays/by JustinTopic of Study [For H2 History Students, 9174]:
Paper 1: The Development of the Global Economy (1945-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme II Chapter 1: Challenges in the Global Economy
The first oil shock of 1973
During the Yom Kippur War, Arab members of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) imposed an oil embargo to protest nations that backed Israel, particularly the United States (USA). This was in response to the US government’s attempt to resupply the Israeli military (see ‘Operation Nickel Grass‘).
The embargo banned petroleum exports to the affected nations, destabilising the pricing system and straining oil-reliant economies. As a result of OPEC’s decision, crude oil price rose from $3 per barrel to $12 per barrel by 1974.
Source: The Economist
In addition, the first oil shock coincided with the disastrous collapse of the Bretton Woods System, which saw the end of a gold-dollar fixed exchange rate system. The devaluation of the US dollar further exacerbated the adverse impacts of the energy crisis, plunging the USA and other Western industrialised nations into a recession.
The second oil shock of 1979
The 1978 Iranian Revolution concluded with the end of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s rule, ushering the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini’s Islamic Republic. As a result of said revolution, Iranian oil production fell by 4.8 million barrels per day, which occupied 7 percent of the global oil production by January 1979.
The political turmoil in Iran triggered widespread panic as oil-reliant nations began to hoard oil. The second oil crisis saw a surge of the price of global West Texas Intermediate (WTI) [benchmark for global oil price] from US$15 per barrel in September 1978 to US$40 per barrel in April 1980.
Source: Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS)
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Global Economy. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
Call 8929 2422 to find out more.
Why did Japan develop so quickly?
/in East Asian Economies, History Essays/by JustinTopic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]:
Paper 1: The Development of the Global Economy (1945-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme II Chapter 2: Transformation of East Asian Economies (Japan, 1947-1991)
Johnson’s developmental state
In his study of Japan’s industrial policy, the American political scientist Chalmers Johnson explained that the state played a central role to conduct of inudstrialisation policies to achieve economic goals.
Between 1952 and 1971, Japan’s real Gross National Product (GNP) grew at an average rate of 9.6 percent per year, indicating a remarkable phase of rapid expansion.
Causes of the economic transformation of Japan
According to a study by Brookings Institution, there were four key factors identified as the cause of Japan’s phenomenal growth:
In the case of capital accumulation, substantial investment was made that boosted Japan’s GNP. Gross private rose steadily from about 17 percent of GNP in the early 1950s to about 30 percent of GNP by the early 1970s. This private investment was financed by the high savings rate. Unlike the USA, in which private saving was a mere 15 percent of GNP in the 1960s, Japan’s savings rate was almost twice that of the USA.
In addition, the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) was established to oversee the industrial development of Japan. It replaced the role of its predecessor, the Ministry of Commerce, to involve past leading administrators to harness their knowledge and expertise to achieve growth targets.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the economic transformation of Japan and China under the theme of The Global Economy. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.
Revisited: What is the South China Sea dispute?
/in History SBCS, Regional Conflicts and Cooperation/by JustinTopic of Study [For H2 History Students]:
Paper 2: Regional Conflicts and Co-operation
Source Based Case Study
Theme III Chapter 2: ASEAN (Growth and Development of ASEAN: Building regional peace and security – relations between ASEAN and external powers)
Learn more about the South China Sea dispute that engulfed the region in geopolitical instability. [Video by TRT World].
Significance of the South China Sea dispute: Resource-rich or strategic crossroads?
Countries have contested the legal ownership of numerous small islands, atolls and reefs. For China, the ‘nine-dash line’ was used as the basis to assert territorial claims, giving rise to opposition by other nations, like Vietnam and the Philippines.
Notably, there is a general misperception that the South China Sea (SCS) is resource rich, guiding claimants to contest the disputed territories. Yet, estimates revealed that the South China Sea only occupies 10 percent of the global catch. Based on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), most of the Spratly ‘Islands’ should instead be classified as ‘rocks’, and thus cannot meet UNCLOS criteria of an island that should generate a 200 nautical miles of Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). An island with EEZ can allow owners to harvest resources, like fish and hydrocarbons.
Beyond the viewpoint of the SCS being viewed as a resource-rich area, its value is also measured by its strategic geographical position. The sea routes that pass through the SCS are the shortest between the Pacific and Indian Oceans, enabling international trade to take place efficiently. As such, disputes that arise in the region could disrupt maritime commerce, undermining the growth of the global economy.
Resolution: Enter ASEAN
The likelihood of dispute resolution is low with regards to the SCS, given that none of the claimants have participated in bilateral talks. Even the option of legal arbitration was opposed by some parties, including China. Although the International Court of Justice (ICJ) can form a ruling on the sovereignty of the Spratly and Paracel Islands, not all claimants agreed to give consent for the Court to proceed.
Nonetheless, ASEAN has undertaken steps to manage the SCS dispute to safeguard regional security. In 1992, the Manila Declaration was issued, calling for all parties to resolve maritime disputes amicably and renounce the use of force. Even so, some claimants have expressed reluctance to acknowledge ASEAN’s efforts as seen by the outbreak of clashes like the Mischief Reef incident.
This 2002 Declaration of the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DoC) was an agreement based on the 1992 Manila Declaration as well as the workshops hosted by Indonesia in the 1990s, signaling a breakthrough at dispute management. However, the DoC was non-binding and did not specify which activities contravened the self-restraint clause.
Fortunately, in July 2011, both ASEAN and China agreed on the establishment of guidelines to promote confidence building measures. Two years later, China agreed to commence talks on a binding Code of Conduct to manage the SCS dispute.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about ASEAN. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.
Why did the Jabidah massacre occur?
/in History SBCS, Regional Conflicts and Cooperation/by JustinTopic of Study [For H2 History Students]:
Paper 2: Regional Conflicts and Co-operation
Source Based Case Study
Theme III Chapter 1: Inter-state tensions and co-operation [dispute over Sabah]
Origins
In the late 1960s, the Marcos administration launched a clandestine operation to infiltrate and sabotage Sabah. In summary, the plan was to reclaim the disputed territory of Sabah from Malaysia.
Contesting claims
These developments can be traced to the territorial disputes between Malaysia and the Philippines. Sabah was endowed with abundant natural resources, producing billions of dollars worth of timber, platinum and gold.
The Philippine authorities asserted that the Sabah territory belonged to the Sultan of Sulu, who ruled from 1666 to 1946. After the Second World War, the British oversaw the decolonisation of Malaya and the creation of the Malaysian Federation that included Sabah (Borneo Territories).
However, the Philippine government insisted that the British ‘rented’ Sabah from the Sultan of Sulu and thus had no right to transfer land rights to Malaysia.
Given that the Sultan of Sulu, Jamalul Kiram II, was unable to pressure the British to reclaim Sabah from Malaysia, he turned to the Philippine government for help. The Sultan transferred his rights of the Sabah territory to Manila, in hopes that the latter would retake Sabah.
On 22 January 1962, Manila opposed a British note and insisted that it had rights to North Borneo. Diplomatic solutions were futile as seen by the outcome of the United Nations-supervised Referendum held on 13 September 1963. While a majority of the people in Sabah and Sarawak voted to join the Malaysian Federation, Manila and Jakarta opposed the results. Notably, this gave rise to the Konfrontasi.
Marcos’ Plan: Oplan Merdeka
In 1968, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos hatched a plan to reclaim Sabah from Malaysia. He authorised the training of recruits, who were mostly Tausug people. By conspiring with their kin in Sabah, Marcos was certain that a civil unrest would ensue.
When that happens, the Sabah people would either secede from Malaysia or Manila would assume full control of the disputed territory.
The secret mission was codenamed ‘Operation Merdeka’ (‘Freedom’). These Muslim recruits were promised to be paid and be a part of the Philippine Armed Forces (AFP). As they were trained in an abandoned hospital, the recruits did not receive the payment as promised.
Eventually, the recruits realised that they were sent to invade Sabah and had to take the lives of their Muslim brethren in Malaysia. Horrified by this revelation, they submitted a petition to Marcos, seeking to expose the ill-treatment and deception by their superiors. Yet, their petition did not reach Marcos.
On 18 March 1968, more than 28 Muslim trainees were killed on Corregidor Island by soldiers of the AFP, sparking the rise of Muslim separatism that destabilised the Philippines ever since.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about Inter-state Tensions. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.
Why did the Ten Day War Happen?
/in Conflict and Cooperation, History Essays/by JustinTopic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]:
Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1945-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 4: Intra-State Conflicts [Bosnian War, 1992-1995]
Historical context: Slovenian Independence
In the wake of Josip Broz Tito‘s death on 4 May 1980 as well as the decline of Communism in Eastern Europe in 1989, the political stability of Yugoslavia was at risk. In addition, the 1974 Yugoslav Constitution and its provisions posed a strong impetus for the decentralisation of power to the republics.
As the former satellites under communist rule in Eastern Europe fell apart, Yugoslavia was increasingly influenced by democratic forces. On 8 April 1990, Slovenia held its first multiparty elections since World War Two. The Democratic Opposition of Slovenia (DEMOS) won the majority, forming the government of Slovenia.
On 25 June 1991, Slovenia declared independence from Yugoslavia, triggering the start of the Ten-Day War.
The military confrontation and the eventual cessation of hostilities
The Yugoslav government rejected Slovenia’s unilateral declaration of independence as seen by its deployment of the Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA) a day later. The JNA surrounded Slovenia, cutting the latter from the outside world. In retaliation, the Slovenian police and Territorial Defense set up barricades by using large transport vehicles. Yet, such efforts were futile as the JNA drove armoured vehicles.
Fortunately, the conflict came to an end with the signing of the Brioni Agreement on 7 July 1991. The European Community (EC) oversaw the peace process that involved representatives of Slovenia, Yugoslavia and Croatia.
Notably, the Agreement called for a ceasefire and the withdrawal of JNA forces from Slovenia. Negotiations on the future of Yugoslavia were to commence on 1 August 1991 and that the Yugoslav people were to determine their future.
A short-lived peace in Croatia and the Start of the Bosnian War
Even after the Brioni Agreement was signed, the international community’s efforts to forestall a Yugoslav war were inadequate. For instance, the United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 713 on 25 September 1991 was to impose an arms embargo on all former Yugoslav territories. Yet, the Serb forces used the military equipment of the JNA and the Croat and Bosniak forces gathered their military supplies via Croatia.
In late September 1991, the JNA advanced its forces into the capital of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), Mostar, drawing strong protests by the local government. In response, the Bosniaks and Croats clashed with the JNA. By then, the Bosnian War had begun.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Bosnian War under the theme of Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.
What was the Tet Offensive?
/in Cold War, Cold War and Southeast Asia/by JustinTopic of Study [For H2 History Students]:
Paper 1: Understanding the Cold War (1945-1991)
Section A: Source-based Case Study
Theme I Chapter 2: A World Divided by the Cold War – Manifestations of the global Cold War: Vietnam War (1959-75)
Topic of Study [For H1 History Students]:
Essay Questions
Theme III Chapter 1: The Cold War and Southeast Asia (1945-1991): Factors shaping the Second Indochina War (1959–1975)
Historical Context: Ho Chi Minh’s Plan
On 30-31 January 1968, the North Vietnamese forces and the Viet Cong launched a coordinated military campaign in South Vietnam. It coincided with the Vietnamese New Year, known as the Tet, in which many South Vietnamese soldiers were preoccupied with this celebration.
Ho Chi Minh formulated this plan to carry out the Tet Offensive to achieve two main goals:
During the Battle of Hue, the Viet Cong overran the city and took control of Hue, claiming the lives of thousands of inhabitants within. The Allied troops had to take nearly a month to regain control of Hue. In doing so, the USA had incurred rising casualties, which was a problem concealed by the government.
Although the campaign targeted more than 100 cities and towns, including the southern capital Saigon, it was a catastrophic military disaster for the communists. As many as 50,000 communist troops died in their attempt to gain control of South Vietnam.
Illustration provided by West Point, US Military Academy.
Unintended Consequences: The Quagmire
Nonetheless, the repercussions of the Tet Offensive on the United States were serious. As the Johnson administration had repeatedly reassured the American public that a swift and decisive victory was possible in Vietnam, the Tet Offensive had raised doubts on this promise.
The American journalist Walter Cronkite had exposed the deception of the Johnson administration in a provoking broadcast. This revelation was made after his personal trip to Hue in Vietnam, in which the most intense urban warfare took place during the war.
As a result, public sentiments became to shift in favour of US withdrawal from Vietnam, given that the people realised that a victory in Vietnam was unlikely, as outlined by Cronkite’s broadcast. Faced with mounting popular pressure, Johnson announced on 31 March 1968 that he would not seek a second term as president of the United States. His successor, Richard Nixon, then proceed with the policy of “Vietnamisation“, which led to a new phase of the US role in the Second Indochina War.
Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Vietnam War, Korean War and Cuban Missile Crisis. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.
We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.